| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/28 |
| 2003/11/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:11072 Activity:high |
11/14 About Judge Moore, I'm curious about the anti-Moore people here.
Moore was elected by the people to his office. Do you think it
is ok that some appointed body removed him from office? If so,
did you think it was *not* ok for the people of CA to vote to
remove an official the people of CA elected? If so, how do you
reconcile that double standard and why place an appointed body
above the will of the people in the greater scheme of things?
What was so wrong about the 10 commandments statue that it required
Moore's immediate removal by an appointed body while we were supposed
to wait until the next election to remove Davis in a time of crisis?
It's 8am. I hope that's not too early to try to start a real non-troll
discussion on a hot topic.
\_ it's worth pointing out that the decision to remove him was a
*unanimous* one, made by a group of legal experts from both the
Democrat and Republican party, which included elected officials.
The issue at stake was not the ten commandments statue, it was
an open contempt for the law.
\_ Judge Moore is a complete moron, I don't see how anyone can
defend him hauling his 10 ton commandments monument
INTO THE ROTUNDA OF THE STATE CAPITAL BUILDING. the
mind boggles.
\_ Yeah. The guy keeps saying that he's being forced to "deny god".
What an absolutely refrickindiculous statement. Hey Christians,
do you have giant statues with biblical crap on them in your
workplace? If not you're denying god and will BURN.
\_ this "judge" reffered to homosexuality as a "violation of the laws
of nature and of nature's God upon which this nation and our laws
are predicated." That means that 10 percent of the Alabama
citizens who walk through his courtroom door have already commited
a mortal sin in his eyes before their guilt or innocence
is determined. This man cannot be allowed to be a judge.
I believe this case is severe enought to warrant *any* action
to remove this man from power. Don't forget that majority will
of the people of Alabama was to hold *slaves* until we beat
them in a war, and to have black people live as second class
citizens until we had to send troops down there in the 60's.
If it comes to war again, so be it.
\_ In the 1700s there were more slaves in New York than
all of South. Only a few percent of Southerners, ie.
landed aristocrats, were slave holders.
For 2000 years homosexuality has been considered
unnatural - they can't reproduce! Don't you secular
humanists see the contradiction with evolution?
\_ I want more fags and less lesbos in the world.
That way there's less competition for the women.
\_ And i suppose that all the animals who demonstrate
homosexuality in the wild are just victims of an
evil liberal conspiracy by the Clintons?
\_ Being gay may be an evolutionary disadvantage, but having
some 'gay' behaviors may be an advantage, so the gene
lives on. Sort of like a heterozygus recessive, if
you'll pardon the pun.
\_ So then it would be morally wrong for a guy to just work
all the time and never date? I mean he can't
reproduce!
\_ The question is why some minority group deserves
special protection under the law simply because
of what the do in the bedroom. The irony is
this exact was predicted in a concurring opinion
in Griswald vs. Connecticut.
\_ This is a canard. No one (almost no one, okay)
wants special protection, just equal treatment.
\_ That is not what existing statutes
provide for. So now "equal treatment"
based on how you have sex is a natural
right? As dictated and
regulated by who? How do renconcile
this with freedom of association. Now
the government tells us how we have to
treat people because of what they do in
the bedroom.
\_ No, the government is telling us we
must treat all people equally
_regardless_ of what they do in the
bedroom. How this is not simply
common sense seriously boggles the mind.
\_ So if a congregation believes
homosexuality is a sin the
government has the power to force
it to accept a gay pastor in the
name of being 'fair'. The term 'fair'
when related to sexual choice
is so vague that its invites
gross abuse and the infringement
of freedom of association.
Now bestiality fetishes
and trangenders have the right
to force businesses them to hire
them because its 'fair'. Sorry,
you are a fascist. You should
not have the right to force
your bizarre agenda on other
people. If you want to do
it through 1) referendum
2) the legislature, fine.
However, as you know that will
never succeed.
\_ Bestiality involves non-
consensual sex. It is possible
(and preferable) to make rules
that allow for certain conduct
while continuing to outlaw
other conduct. The Santorum
argument ignores the ability
of people to make moral
distinctions outside of Biblical
proclamations. Stop trying to
throw the baby out with the
bath water.
\_ Never is a long time. People
thought slavery would last
forever, too.
\_ I think it's unnatural to drive a car. Thus, it's
immoral! And airplanes are even more immoral. Fire
too! Let's all go back into our caves.
\_ RIDE BIKE! LIGHT CANDLE! USE LINUX!
\_ Dead wrong. The Catholic Church widely condoned
homosexuality until about the 13th C, and even allowed
gay marriages. -- hetersexual catholic
\_ I think you mean clerical marriage.
John Boswell died of AIDS complications at
age 42 - think he could have had an agenda?
This is called historical revisionism, an art
perfected by the left.
http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002May/may23tru.htm
\_ That's right. And the banner that read
"Mission Accomplished" was mysteriously
hung on the aircraft carrier by leftist
insurgents.
\_ Yawn, redirection with a puerile
display of stupidity.
\_ Yet another classic case of right-wing
of civil disobedience, but if you are at all familiar with the
concept as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
issue dodging. No, seriously, you
don't believe the right engages in
historical revisionism?
\_ I agree. the left does historical revisionism
\_ To a Christian, all men are sinners, and all sins are
mortal. Adultery is sin too, for example. That doesn't
book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
\_ nice.
mean they would advocate criminalizing adultery.
\_ Well, yes and no. Most sins can be forgiven if the sinner
repents or feels remorse and goes to confession. You can be
in a state of grace at least some of the time. Homosexuality
is unrepentant, ongoing sin. Isn't alabama one of the states
that has sodomy laws which are technically still enforced?
the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
amendments.
\_ there are also venal sins. er, venial.
\_ Do you have a source that 10% of people are homosexual?
I don't believe this claim to be true, from personal
experience. -- ilyas
\_ Even if it's one percent or half a percent -- the man is a
JUDGE -- he's supposed to be passing judgement based on the
laws in the LAW books...not the religious ones. The exact
figure is kind of irrelevant.
\_ When has he ever stated that he ignores the law
in favor of the Bible. In the interviews I've
seen he states just the opposite.
\_ The 10% is based on the Kinsey study, which I personally
think overstated it, since they based it on lifetime
behavior not self-identification. But there are many
studies (use google) that indicate that the real percentage
of active GLBT in the general population is at least
4-5% -ausman
\_ I don't know. I lived in San Francisco, Berkeley, and
Los Angeles, not the most sexually repressed places
in the world. The figure of 4-5% still seems quite high.
-- ilyas
\_ My estimate is kind of on the conservative side,
actually. I am only including people who are
sexually active. Look at this study:
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/youth/tremblay/app-a.html
Do you think that 4-5% of SF is gay? You have got
to be kidding me. The real number is more like 15-20%.
\_ I don't think ilya gets out much.
\_ When I was in the co-ops, I'd guess 2% gay,
additional 2% Bi
\_ 2% bi? Heh, not among the girls. Sweet!
\_ Straights have notoriously bad gay-dar.
\_ A judge takes a vow to uphold the law. Moore believed himself to
be above the law and willfully violated it. So yes, I think
he should have been removed. I am well aware of the principle
of civil disobedience, but if you are familiar with the concept
as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
that you accept the punishment that comes from violating the law
as part of the deal. Additionally, they were not judges. I think
by holding himself above the law, he made a mockery of the
whole idea. He was not engaging in civil disobedience in my
book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
\_ nice.
\_ he's preparing for a senate run, or governorship, duh
he's happy to be removed, do you think he's that dumb?
\_ If you support his removal then you must also support impeachment
the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
amendments.
\_ If you think that boolean logic applies to the real world,
you must be a hopeless twink.
\_ If an appreciation of the historical context of the
amendments and their authors designates a twink,
I suppose so.
\_ Nice try, but your twinkness hinges on your inability
to see the shading between black and white, a disability
that will make you a great and courageous crusader, but
a poorly socialized member of society and a twink. |
| 5/28 |
|
| www.qrd.org/qrd/www/youth/tremblay/app-a.html Other studies have also been done, producing a range of estimates for homosexual, gay, bisexual males ranging from 1 to 17. Great problems also exist with respect to identifying, for study purposes, males who are bisexual. Most of these males would be in primary heterosexual relationships and are highly closeted for many reasons. Diamond 1993 noted many of these problems and summarized the available demographic research results. Neither method will produce accurate figures, and the latter method was used in the most recent American demographic study which produced the widely reported 28 estimate for males who are homosexual. The study, Sex in America: A Definitive Study 1994, reported that 27 of males had same-gender sex in the past year, and that 71 had same-gender sex since puberty. The great caveat related to this study, however, was noted by one of its authors, Stuart Michaels, in Time magazines cover story about the study. There is probably a lot more homosexual activity going on than we could get people to talk about. In Canada, homosexual activity is not a crime, provided the ones engaged in homosexual activity do so in private, are of the legal age, and are not in authority over one of the individuals, if such a person is 14- to 17-years-old. Nonetheless, a significant number of homosexually active male Canadians would not want to reveal the homosexual part of their lives to most people. Included are individuals requesting such information as part of a random telephone survey, and those requesting the same information in face-to-face interviews. After the computer was set up, and instructions given, it was emphasized that, after the subject began answering questions, help could not be offered. The reason given for this was that everyone involved with the study had to remain blind to all answers given. As a result of this, the subjects knew they would only be giving the requested information to a machine, with a highly convincing assurance that their anonymity was guaranteed. Requesting such highly taboo sexual information from adult males by telephone, or in face-to-face interviews, would probably yield the non-existence of such men. Yet, given that about 15 of adult males and females report having been sexually abused as children, mostly by men, a significant number of men are sexually involved with children. An analysis of the information has yielded the estimate that about 2 of adult males have been are active pedophiles, and another 3 who would act accordingly if certain conditions were met. For the first time in North America, the magnitude of error in these percentages commonly reported in the media, often on front pages of newspapers or as cover stories in magazines can also be estimated. Random dialling telephone surveys, and random sampling surveys using face-to-face inter views, will produce male homosexuality underestimates ranging from about one-third to one-tenth of what actually exists, and such errors are scientifically unacceptable. |
| www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002May/may23tru.htm Yet the agenda Boswell puts forth gives tolerance to the type of abherent behavior that is causing grave scandal today. In all his revised interpretations, Boswell unfairly keeps silent about the fact that according to the early and medieval Church, homosexual activity was scandalous and considered an abomination. Augustine called sodomy and similar vices sins against nature, which are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed. John Crysostom said there is nothing, absolutely nothing, more mad or damaging than this perversity. Thomas Aquinas condemned homosexual acts as obscene, addictive and against nature. O ne of the most disturbing trends in academia today is the wholesale practice of historical revisionism, or what has been described as advocacy scholarship, that is, scholarship in the service of a social and political agenda. Basically, historical revisionism is the kind of history you get when no one any longer admits such thing as reality, principle, or truth. What we have is quite simply the pleasure principle adopted by historians, 1 that is to say, history at the pleasure of the historians. Thus, there are now feminist histories, history re-written from a feminist perspective; These absurd methods of re-reading history are not only being tolerated, but accepted and praised in mainstream academia. Since we have been supposedly liberated from the coercive idea of truth and reality, why shouldnt feminists, homosexuals, and every kind of revisionist with an agenda seize the moment to exploit their interests? The past Chairman of Yales history department was gay and a convert to Catholicism. He resided in New Haven with his long-time companion, and died not too long ago 1994 at age 42 of an AIDS-related illness. Now, in history according to Boswell, homosexuality was tolerated in the first centuries of Christianity and homosexual marriages were celebrated liturgically in the Middle Ages. If you have a child enrolled in a Medieval History class at a university, you might check out the reading list-there is a good chance he will be exposed to Boswells scholarship. His 1980 book Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality has become the standard reference for those who want the Church to reverse its traditional teaching against homosexual unions and activities. This book, which Boswell admitted was written to prove there was acceptance of homosexuality in the Western Catholic tradition from the beginning of the Christian era until the 14th Century, won the American Book Award for History in 1981. His 1994 book, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe , raised the question of whether certain Greek or Byzantine Church medieval rituals that Boswell terms same-sex marriages were ecclesiastical blessings of homosexual unions. Despite Boswells claim to an objective interpretation of the facts, his views and scholastic labors were obviously shaped by his personal lifestyle and convictions. Bullough , a professor emeritus of History at Buffalo Sate University of New York. In Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe , Boswell based his claim that the Church was blessing same-sex marriages on the subjective reading of some 80 manuscripts that he found during 12 years of summer research in the libraries of Italy, France, England, and Greece. In fact, the adelphopoiesis ceremonies, from the Greek words adelphos brother and poiesis making, cited in Boswells book which are no longer in the Greek liturgy were a part of the history of blessings in the Church. What Boswell came upon were probably so-called sealing ceremonies swearing loyal brotherhood between men and presided over by a priest of the Eastern Catholic or Schismatic rites. It is quite obvious to any reader of the texts that there is nothing either explicit or implicit regarding same-sex marriages connected with the blessings. By publishing translations of several heterosexual marriage ceremonies alongside the same-sex blessings, Boswell sought to highlight similarities. Even a casual reading of the texts reveals integral differences: the normal marriage ceremonies bless a physical union of a man and a woman, celebrating the cause for which Matrimony was ordained . Of course, for Boswell, interpretation of the texts can turn on the meaning of few words. Here is one of the texts from the ceremonies, translated from 11th Century Greek: That these Thy servants names be sanctified with Thy spiritual benediction, we beseech Thee, O Lord. That their love abide without offense or scandal all the days of their lives, we beseech Thee, O Lord. That they be granted all things needed for salvation and godly enjoyment of life everlasting, we beseech Thee, O Lord. This liturgical ceremony, like all the others, specifically states that the blessing extends to a union whose love should be without offense or scandal. Boswell, however, didnt like the translation scandal, and replaced it with envy. The author utilized meticulous footnotes and all the scholarly apparatus to gain credibility for his theories. However, his scholarship was completely subjective and relativist. He felt free to create a new vision of the past according to his own judgment of the present. Like bogus Marxist, feminist and black histories, homosexual histories such as Boswells are intent on politics, and these scholastic works have become instruments in the struggle for influence and right of citizenship. What they are intent upon toppling, however, is the whole code of ethics and morality of Christian Civilization. The veritable media blitz today in favor of homosexuality is an attempt to wear down all opposition, all barriers of healthy horror and rejection to what Boswell derisively terms the unmentionable sin. In the name of tolerance, legislation is being introduced to permit homosexual marriages, symbolic of a cultural and spiritual transformation of the country, and an end of culture and civilization as we know it. Sheen pointed out in 1931, what the world is suffering from today is not intolerance, but tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Todays philosophical nonchalance, which has been interpreted as broad-mindedness, has ended on the multi-cultural battleground, where the facts of the past are at the mercy of any cultural or intellectual movement that distorts history in order to reinterpret it. Boswells work represents the victory of tolerance as understood by Msgr. Any objective medieval historian cannot be oblivious to the serious flaws in Boswells work. But because of the politically correct tyranny of the gay rights movement on campuses, the Yale professors work is barely challenged. Books like Boswells are just plain bad history, in every sense of the word. And the practice of bad history is even more dangerous than the practice of bad medicine, because its poison seeps into the very soul of Christian Civilization. |