Posted on 02/08/2011 9:47:44 PM PST by pissant
I hope you read Sowell’s book.
It pretty much sums up what is wrong with our country right now. We promote ideas that are false.
“those who are routinely swayed by defective ideas need to read this book”....
Political Correctness that exists in our schools and society today is directly from Marcuse and the cultural Marxists who used Freudian Ideology in a twisted manner....to release all sexual restraint, which even Freud said could not be done if you are to retain a civil society where healthy family life could exist.
PC makes intellectual debate of ideas impossible. Our universities and schools drip with this cultural Marxism and now our military. It is to silence free speech—because Truth has a way of disproving Marxism and giving the true vision of the ugly culture it always spawns and always will. It is easy to prove that human nature has never changed in thousands of years through history also, but that is one thing Marxism doesn’t allow—knowledge of history.....If they allow history, it is always Zinn’s rendition, so as to tear down a civil society which is what Marxism is all about so they can rebuild and reshape the human being into their godless utopia.
My advise is don’t limit your reading to Erikson. Read those who dispute his theories. But your basis should be classical philosophy so that you can actually use logic and reason in your analysis.
Homosexuality is a demeaning, nihilistic act that is never life-affirming. It is a selfish, lustful act. It is never about anything other than pleasure for oneself. That is why homosexuals are much more likely to be pedophiles and harm many more children than heterosexuals. It is why they practice beastiality at much higher rates.
It is the slippery slope. When you demean your body, you actually hate yourself. You hate God because he says you are doing evil. You know it is disordered in your soul. All nature proves it daily. When the soul is filled with hate, it is easy to transfer the hate to other humans and all of humanity. That is why they are much more violent than the heterosexual male. Most homosexual crimes are done by the jealous homosexual and they are so promiscuous because it is all about lust and never love and sacrifice.
Most of the SA Brownshirts were homosexuals. Hitler, although as a young man he lived in the homosexual areas of Munich or Berlin, was what the Hidden Hitler refers to as a probable coprophiliac although he can’t say he wasn’t homosexual. All his closest friends and chauffeurs were homosexual and he placed known pederasts as head of the Hitler Youth. They brought boys from the high schools to be used by the SA officers.
Homosexuals prefer the young boy....it is when they were initiated into the lifestyle and it is the idolatry of the male body which is so “perfect” right before puberty. It is a learned behavior. The Spartans initiated boys into sex at around seven. The Afghanis do the same thing only they train them to dress like females and wear make-up and be pimps.
You never answered why a culture like the homosexual Afghanistan one, has boys who want to grow up to have their own stable of boys to use as sexual playthings. They are thrilled about their future. Is that hereditary? or is it learned? Homosexual cultures always hate and exclude women—although the Greeks left their noses on, they were considered second class citizens and slaves and only good for breeding.
Weimar Republic in 1919 had the most vulgar and promiscuous society in Europe. Their National Vice (homosexuality) was a joke with all the other European countries that had diplomatic relations with them. They had all sorts of jokes about watching your back. Germany had given up God and released Eros in the late 1800’s because they were the seat of the Frankfurt ideology cesspool coming out of all the elite Postmodern thinkers at the time.
In this case I believe it is more accurate to say that you hate God because you are told that he hates you and has no place for you. It is not our place to make such judgments nor is it it our place to close the doors of salvation on anyone. That is a slippery slope if you ask me.
You never answered why a culture like the homosexual Afghanistan one, has boys who want to grow up to have their own stable of boys to use as sexual playthings.
you never asked such a question. The original point you made was that sodomized children grow up to be sodomizing adults. I really don't think that conflicts with any point that I have made. Monkey see, monkey do. Furthermore, Afghanistan is far from unique in the behaviors you have described. also, you have failed to address numerous logical points that I have made. For example, you ignored this: "Most serial killers appear to be sexually perverse as well yet most sexually perverse do not appear to be serial killers. I think perhaps this (your) argument is a logical fallacy then". To then imply that I am not using logic and/or reason in my analysis seems hypocritical as well as insulting.
I'm really not even sure what your point is to be honest; however, my point is clear, that the erosion of taboo prohibitions by eliminating the consequences for violating taboo prohibitions incites the ambivalent mind to act upon his/her conflicting desires. To extend this further, it is this conflict that likely underlies psychotic behaviors to a significant extent.
my advice to you would be to unify your thoughts into a single concise theory and present it as I am disinclined to spend anymore time chasing your scattered thoughts around.
This is like if you claimed that Palin is an attractive candidate so socialists will support her (if she didnt speak out against specific Obama socialist policies), but at the same time claiming that she hasnt changed her ‘views’ on it. No one would have bought that.
Its been 30-35 years since I had any coursework in psychology or sociology, but yes, I think individuals make a conscious choice about behavior. Every society has norms concerning concepts of “right” and “wrong”. I believe the fact that there is such a concept implies a moral absolute outside ourselves. Sociologists would tell us that we conform to norms because we are social and recognize some behavior is better for the social group. Sanctions, formal or informal, serve to deter aberrant behavior.
From a strictly secular social viewpoint, a group of humans would recognize that survival of the group over time requires procreation. “Nature” would select quickly against groups that don’t reinforce this concept, to throw some Darwinism in. Homosexuality would seem, then to be against “Nature”, hence social sanctions.
One could choose “right” to avoid sanctions in the social model. In the moral absolute model, one chooses right in order to please God or avoid his punishment.
This is becoming a ramble, but to try to close the circle- sheer Darwinism, or sheer instinct(lust, hunger, etc.) would lead one to be quite selfish, greedy and disrespectful of others. We would take from the weak, young or old or disabled for our own need. But, if something inside tells us this is wrong, we do just the opposite- a choice.
I believe in the free will of the individual, and that the concept right and wrong comes from God.
I think that it is a bigger issue as well for the present. I have a friend going to CPAC as media and I told him more buzz seems to be about the muslim group presentation, than the sponsorship of GOProud.
The devil works in many ways, from the inside and the outside.
He created his own religions, and he joined the Church at the same time, so that he could work to destroy it from the inside.
Politics is a little different deal; to save the country I’m happy to have the votes of those I disagree with on religious grounds. To a point.
That is so bogus to say God hates YOU instead of the sin. God loves everyone and has died for them. Everyone is a sinner. It is the human condition. He never condones sin and will send people to hell for sin if they don’t repent and refuse to abide by His laws.
To state that we aren’t suppose to “judge” what sin is, is ludicrous. The whole purpose of religion is to create a moral framework and live by it.
You are stating that people have no control over their behavior. They are helpless to Satan’s calls. Are you saying we have no Free Will? Are you saying that if you have an urge to do something, you MUST act to be TRUE to yourself? So, by your logic, men with a sexual orientation for baby boys should be allowed to be how “God designed him”.
My point is that something causes dysfunction. You may not be able to pinpoint it but most honest psychologists know what causes homosexuality and it is all tied into relationships with the mother and father.
Trauma and physical abuse are also evident in 70 percent of male homosexuals. It could be way more than that since many lie to cover up the child abuse that occurred to make them the way they are.
That’s my point. It is learned behavior and it is caused by child abuse. Just like in all dominate homosexual cultures, pederasty is common. (Dominant homosexual cultures like Ancient Greek and Rome (before Christianity), Japanese culture (Samurai), Afghanistan, Thailand, Nazi Germany to name a few).
It is kindof like abusing animals.....those that do as children go on to mutilate and kill humans. It is the dignity of animals and humans that is destroyed by homosexual acts. The Pope’s encyclical on Love really explains the psychology a lot better than I ever can.
All societies implode when they become pornographic, vulgar, and demeaning because it removes dignity and worth from human beings. Now don’t tell me that there is any dignity to homosexual acts which cause disease and damage to the body. It is so nihilistic and demeaning to the design and purpose even of nature, if you want to ignore God’s design. It is so vile and disgusting, you wouldn’t even be able to post about the different practices they indulge in.
“What impresses me is that TPaw is the only one so far I’m aware of that wants to re-institute DADT and overturn the “queers in the military” Obama wet dream”
Yes, I’m disturbed that Palin, Huckabee, et. Al. were strangly silent in December when their voices raised against repeal could have made a difference. Why are they all so afraid to take a stand on a morale issue?
I spent the day thinking about your posts. I think you're mostly wrong. Your wrongness all stems from your assumption that the homosexual can choose to be heterosexual. I do not believe that homosexuality is a choice. You may choose to repress your orientation but you can not change your orientation. The only person who would consider it a choice is a person who was actually a homosexual in denial.
By asserting otherwise you are creating the ambivalence that leads to the destructive thought processes and actions in the minds of conflicted homosexuals. What's worse, much worse, is that you have taken a person who is incapable of changing and told him/her that the doors to God's mercy, forgiveness and salvation are closed to them forever. That's the ultimate sin IMO. Your starting, in the name of God, an unwinnable war against God. Nothing constructive will come from that, quite the opposite.
Ultimately, I think I was much closer to the truth than you when I discussed the various aspects of taboo prohibitions, violations, and consequences. This is what has lead to the increased incidence of homosexuality in western society which is, really, nothing more than humans seeking simple sexual gratification (which is what we are biologically inclined to do) and no longer fearing any divine consequences. You can fight it but you can't stop it and, the harder you resist it, the more destructive it will become to society.
This all goes back to another Freud text, "the Future of an Illusion" where Freud discusses what will happen (psychosocially) when it becomes increasingly apparent to mankind that there are no divine consequences, IOW, what happens when the fear of God disappears. According to Freud, God is an "external" coercive force. Once this force disappears, only a strong internal rationalization for repressing the Id will prevent the kind of psychosocial deviations that are becoming increasingly prevalent throughout societies. according to Freud, it was absolutely inevitable that the external coercive influence of God would wane and man would be woefully unprepared to deal with it. You might call this, the dawning of the age of Aquarius.
You are in denial. The bonded attached parent (which should be a nursing mother) has incredible power to orient and teach that child about his world and will give him the ability to love himself or hate himself or anything in-between. She even affects the ability of that child to be capable of loving another person. That is fact. Children who have been neglected have whole areas of the brain that are not mapped. They are devoid of the ability to empathize and have any meaningful relationships. So yes, the ability to love is learned and the object of that love is also directed by the parents and culture.
If I had wanted to (I had four boys and one girl), I could have made them into homosexuals by denigrating their sex and making them feel inadequate as a boy or girl. I could have denied male and female role models for them so they would have no idea how to act with members of their own sex or the opposite sex. I could have oriented the boys into non-traditional roles so that they questioned their male-ness and where they would seem odd to their peers and be rejected by them—all would damage their sexual identity. What this really does is make them hate themselves and then they act out....they either are angry and hurt others or they direct the anger at themselves and hurt their own bodies.
Children can not handle rejection at young ages and our society is telling parents it is fine to let strangers take care of their children in the formative years which was thought evil—like the idea of orphanages—until massive indoctrination by media renaming daycares into “pre-schools” It is a con. Children learn best from one on one interaction and with adults to model themselves after in the real world—like the boys on a farm with the father—like the Wright Bros. and Edison who were never separated from their parents until seven.
I suppose you never heard of the serial killer who was dressed as a girl for the first seven years of life. He became a homosexual and the first person he killed was his mother when he was around 18. His rage for going against nature was, of course, severe, but when a child has no real loving parents they become very abnormal as all animal studies show. Neglected infants practice all sorts of anti-social behavior including killing and homosexuality and not being able to reproduce. By the way, the survival instinct is greater than the sexual instinct...that Freud got wrong.
Children who are denied proper environment in the first three years of age can be destroyed in many ways. Children put in closets and the Romanian orphans are not normal, nor natural, around other human beings even after 40 years....yet, it was their first three years when the damage was done to the formation of the brain. Areas of the brain were not mapped. All neuron mapping development takes place in the first three years of life. You are up sh*t creek if you are abused, neglected or highly stressed—all will do damage to the mapping. Trauma is the most damaging. Most male homosexuals are abused physically by older males—who was that congressman caught cheating on his “wife” with a male intern? He claimed he was molested by a 12 year old when he was six and had this uncontrollable urge for sex with boys. It is like the Afghani boys. Sex with men is never a “good”. It is always selfish, idolatry and for one’s lust.
Your definition of “love” is flawed so your premise is flawed. When you truly love someone you sacrifice for them. Male/female relationships always involve sacrifice because they are so different in nature—it takes work to spend time together but sex was the design to keep men available to protect them while they care and raise children. Women are designed by nature to raise children....for survival they need male protection and role models especially for the boys. But girls become abnormal if they have no male role model also.
Children do not thrive to their highest potential when they are products of divorce and single parenthood. All studies prove they are damaged. Stress is known to reduce IQ and emotional health in children. Homosexual cultures are exclusive and sexist and tear apart societies. They are always places of inhuman acts such as child sacrifice, beastiality, orgies...etc. whether we are talking about Weimar Republic, Ancient Greece and Rome, ancient Japan or Thailand. Those cultures foster inequality of the sexes and no worth for children except as sex objects.
Today children are suffering tremendously because of lack of two parent families and fathers. We are seeing all sorts of abnormal and destructive behavior in younger and younger kids. There is a strong need in children to be accepted and loved unconditionally by at least one person in the world. It is much better if it is two and extended grandparents to help. We are putting kids in institutions at young ages-an extremely inhumane thing to take a child away from their security before the age of reason. Lenin is the one who developed the idea of day care to get children away from the “harmful” effects of the ideology of their parents. He wanted to “mold” the “plastic” little minds...and of course, he did make them into useful idiots.
The cultural Marxism that is so prevalent today is destroying the family and Christianity. The homosexuals are used by the communists for that end. Postmodern philosophy is not based on Natural Law Theory which is logic and reason. Ayn Rand condemned the irrational thinking of the Postmoderns and Marx is a big part of that.
There is natural law. All philosophy after Marx and Freud and the Irrational thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries had a visceral hatred of Christianity...It made them “feel” dirty, I guess. They wanted no control over sex, although even Freud said, you have to have sexual restraints or you will not have a civil society. That is where the cultural Marxists come in—they want to cause a revolution and knew that the only way to do it is to destroy the two pillars that made Western Civilization great: The family and Christianity because both aligned with Natural Law Theory — reason and logic.
I feel sorry for homosexuals, always have—I do not hate them. I dislike their ignorant parents because they had no idea of what they were doing while raising their children. I have ran into extremely ignorant parents...even two parent ones.
The ones that I have known and worked with seemed shallow with no meaning to their life... (one went to San Quentin for molesting some boys he was coaching). The lesbian was in the hospital because her “girlfriend” tried to run her over with a truck or some vehicle. Then I knew others that were not breaking the law but the males were extremely narcissistic, into how they looked and clothes. A female I sat next to was one of these lesbians who adopted a boy.....She hated men so go figure—was she going to torture him or turn him into a girl——the hatred dripped whenever she mentioned men... so I always felt extremely sad for her “son”.
It is the children who suffer and they were designed to have a nursing mother and a father who allowed her the time to nurture them and make them feel secure in a very frightening world.... and give them the nurture and ability that they need to overcome the struggles of life.
As far as the mommy/daddy issues go, of course extreme sensory deprivation and acts of physical/psychological torture will result in abnormal development. Duh. The error in your logic here is that of the non sequitur: all psychos are homosexuals and have mommy/daddy issues; therefore, all homosexuals have mommy/daddy issues because all homosexuals are psychos. It does not follow for a number of reasons. I'll leave you to sort them out. Incidentally, pretty much everyone has mommy/daddy issues of some kind.
Once again, I have to point out that, ultimately, it is unresolved inner conflict that leads to unhealthy, destructive, society wrecking behaviors and this particular conflict remains unresolved because various members of society keep it unresolved by maintaining the discriminatory positions that you have put forth.
Now, I do not disagree with your position entirely mind you. You may be on target but you aren't hitting the bulls eye IMO. You are excessively focused on mommy/daddy issues as the sole etiology of homosexuality. Homosexuality is, undeniably, complicated and nothing that complicated is ever explained that simply.
You are telling me man has no choice in life—no Free Will. I fundamentally disagree and know we all make choices—it is what life is all about—good and bad choices and everything in-between. Some are extremely hard choices, but choices just the same.
How can I refute your main point that homosexuals can not change their orientation, when even Kinsey (the deviant that he was) said that homosexuality is fluid. He is the guru of most homosexuals, isn’t he? Also, you dismiss all the homosexuals who do change, as denying their “nature” and although they “pretend” to be heterosexual now, they are not.
You think “love” is being able to place a body organ somewhere—anywhere. How logical is that? That is an “urge”. Bathhouses with holes in the walls does not seem sane to me—or even human, yet that and anonymous sex is “love”? How absurd is that.
Like I say...history shows orientation to be learned....Afghanistan is a present day example. The boys who are raped have fantasies of having their “stable of boys” when they grow up. Read the articles....just type in Afghanistan and Sodomy. Is that “natural” or is it perversion?
You really need to read Aristotle...the Father of Logic and especially his explanation of habituation. We know that when a person does something “over and over” again it changes the formation of the brain and becomes habit. People who indulge in music will have larger mapped areas of the spacial part of the brain.
Psychologists have said that orientation has a lot to do with the initiation into the sexual act...if it is molestation by a male or female will determine the orientation to a large extent. (Male homosexuals molest boys at a rate of 128 boys to heterosexual men’s 8 girls.) The elicitation of pleasure that comes naturally with any stimulation of the sex organs in the body determines the “craving” and the desire. It is learned.
You also never address NAMBLA’s motto...What is that “idea” about, if not the reorientation of a child’s natural sex drive? People who want to pervert a child’s nature is truly evil....they think it is all about “love”....but nature shows us the results of that type of thinking....Afghanistan with little boys being painted and dancing for the lust of men and their women being covered from head to toe—worthless creatures with no noses who are only good for producing more beautiful little boys for their lust and entertainment. That society is worthless and evil by all human standards.
It is the “Culture of Death” that the Pope so eloquently writes and warns about.
You're telling me that you have chosen to be heterosexual? No offense to you, but that suggests sexual ambivalence to me. You are what you are. Do you believe a schizophrenic chooses to be schizophrenic? Does a depressed person choose to be depressed? Does a black man choose to be black?
You think “love” is being able to place a body organ somewhere
careful now. We're not exchanging insults here, we're just exchanging ideas in order to better understand reality. I love my girlfriend. Enough said.
How can I refute your main point that homosexuals can not change their orientation, when even Kinsey (the deviant that he was) said that homosexuality is fluid.
If you accept the Kinsey scale than you must accept that true homosexual identity is immutable. I personally do not 100% accept the Kinsey scale. I contend that there are not degrees of homosexuality but, rather, degrees of homosexual repression.
Also, you dismiss all the homosexuals who do change, as denying their “nature” and although they “pretend” to be heterosexual now, they are not.
There is no conclusive, unbiased, scientific body of evidence to suggest that conversion therapy is effective, real, healthy, or ethical. What's more, stories of successful conversion ignore the fact that social stigma creates a strong impulse in the homosexual's mind to believe he/she has changed or can change. There are numerous stories of homosexuals who claimed to have successfully converted only to later recant.
Like I say...history shows orientation to be learned...The boys who are raped have fantasies...
and like I said, physical/psychological torture will certainly explain abnormal psychosocial/psychosexual development in the adolescent.
You really need to read Aristotle...the Father of Logic
you have peddled your fair share of logical fallacies and anecdotal evidence here as well. Considering that there isn't any conclusive scientific evidence one way or the other, it is forgivable.
Psychologists have said that orientation has a lot to do with the initiation into the sexual act.
Right, this is absolutely consistent with what I have been saying all along-once the taboo idol has been touched without consequence, the desire to touch the taboo idol again grows; however, the question is, does the violation of the taboo prohibition merely stimulate an already ambivalent mind into acting? Freud says yes, that taboo violations are human constructions created to inhibit human proclivities.
You also never address NAMBLA’s motto...
and why would I? I have already conceded that corruptive acts will corrupt development, especially in children who are known to be sexually ambivalent in the first place. This supports my position that the perceived violation of social taboos without divine consequence by sexually ambivalent subjects breaks down the inhibitory wall that prevented the subject from acting on his/her desirable yet undesirable impulses. I hypothesize that pornography is a far deeper root cause of homosexuality than child molestation at least in western society. Having said that, once the die is cast, there's no going back but that is my opinion which is based on the complete lack of evidence to suggest otherwise. Having said that, It seems unethical and immoral to punish such an individual for being who he or she is. I think the only reason it is done is to punish the taboo violator in order to strengthen the taboo prohibition in order to deny one's own ambivalence. this is why the loudest voices in opposition to homosexuality are frequently found to be closet homosexuals themselves, they are clearly compensating. Look at Larry Craig for instance. His voting record was loudly anti-homosexual but his behavior was quite the opposite. There is no shortage of similar incidents.
Your continued idolization of Freud’s viewpoint is troubling. Not only has his theory been proven to be fraudulent...he is said to have been abused as a child.
We seem to be saying something similar, though. Culture (taboos, etc.) form the thinking and the actions of people and the ideas of right and wrong in the society. Take away the taboos and you take away incentive to do the good thing. Human nature is selfish, unlike Rousseau would claim, so, there is a need to put moral restraint on actions....or you would have Darwin’s world—survival of the fittest. Lord of the Flies defines the world with no rules pretty well. Even Freud acknowledged the need for restraint of the powerful sex drive.
You are telling me that nature goes against nature and creates homosexuals “naturally”. I say that is nonsense. There is no logic to it. It is humanly constructed by child abuse...either emotional or/and physical. There are no “normal” children born with a desire to copulate with dogs, babies, men, cadavers, etc. They are abnormal desires that are elicited by the environment.
Normal development does orient one to the opposite sex, unless interfered with by abuse, etc. There are no animals in nature that are homosexual—only in environments which were interfered or/and contaminated by man. One result of severe deprivation from maternal care is homosexuality which also exhibits many other antisocial acts.
I guess you are telling me that YES, homosexuality can be caused in someone who would have normally been heterosexual...That, of course, is obvious by all the males that were sexually abused as boys. You think that they were “born” with that orientation maybe anyhow??? Right. And a person is born with the orientation for babies or other orifices. Give me a break. That is so irrational to think that people are designed to use their bodies in destructive ways. I say NO. Never! You are deluded. It goes against Natural Law Theory and Aquinas! By your logic a rooster can be born to copulate with another rooster. Right...nature would really do that? Hmmmm, maybe it is environmentally caused...or learned. Pavlov could have made the rooster do unnatural acts, I am sure. Then that is a fact....you can condition people also.
True, when children have their sexual identity perverted, it is extremely difficult to combat. I agree with that but I disagree that orientation can’t be changed. It has and has been successful in thousands of cases. Of course, it is not 100% successful. Nothing really ever is and human nature is weak.
That a society has to have restraints on sexual acts...is a given if there is to be a civil society where people have the freedom to raise a healthy family.
Homosexuality should never be endorsed by a society because it destroys all sexual morality. Slippery Slope, you know. If you can say nothing is “wrong” with a homosexual act, then there is no sexual act which can be classified as “evil”. You take us off of the moral understanding of Natural Law Theory which always presupposed a Supreme Being and designer. You give us a Marxist man-creating value system, no longer based on truth. Laws that are just based on the whim who has the power...another nasty slippery slope.
It is very arrogant of you to think your “thinking” on homosexuality is so much more profound and correct, than the thousands of years of Theology and Psychology, and some of the most profound thinkers in history. You really should read the Pope’s encyclical on Love and Marriage. It goes much deeper than physical acts anyway—it unites the body and soul. Homosexual acts ignores the soul, and destroys the body. That is ok for an atheist society, I guess. But you only get totalitarianism in atheist countries and all sorts of inhumanity because there is no moral order.
Anyway....I don’t have any more time to post so I guess this is it. Good luck with you reading.
people that don't understand Freud's theories are always the first to attack him. The man revolutionized psychology and was a genius by anyone's standard. His theories of the subconscious were/are...revolutionary. I agree with the theories of Erikson and Piaget as well. I find no conflict in any of their theories they all work very well to together. IMO. I feel that Piaget explains normal development well but Freud explains abnormal development better. Erikson was a student of Freud and his theories reflect that in that they explain abnormal development quite well also.
there is a need to put moral restraint on actions....or you would have Darwin’s world—survival of the fittest.
we do live in a "survival of the fittest" world. Fitness, to Darwin meant the creature that most successfully passed its DNA onto offspring for whatever reason. A human that produces 4 children is more fit than a human that produces 3 children for example.
You are telling me that nature goes against nature and creates homosexuals “naturally”.
I'm saying that homosexuality is not as unnatural as you would like to believe especially in children. It is the existence of social taboos that directs the sexual development one way or the other. Violating those taboos can and does change the direction
There are no “normal” children born with a desire to copulate with dogs, babies, men, cadavers, etc.
again with your non-sequitur logical fallacies. homosexuality is not equivalent to pedophilia, bestiality, and/or necrophilia? That being said, I guarantee that, biologically speaking, humans (females primarily) are programmed to copulate well before the legal age of consent. pedophilia is just the taboo name we ascribe to a natural state. I realize that is offensive to consider but it is a well known fact that legal age of consent does not coincide with the biological age of consent.
That is so irrational to think that people are designed to use their bodies in destructive ways.
humans are naturally "designed" to be sexual. Society designs them to be less so.
I disagree that orientation can’t be changed. It has and has been successful in thousands of cases
Not according to the APA. They, like Freud, are disreputable to you I'm sure.
Homosexuality should never be endorsed by a society because it destroys all sexual morality.
You think we would be a moral society if we just discriminated against homosexuals a little harder huh? hmmmm...I don't think so.
You really should read the Pope’s encyclical on Love and Marriage
The pope huh? I'm not even going there.
but you only get totalitarianism in atheist countries and all sorts of inhumanity because there is no moral order.
the Taliban has a fairly strict moral order. they're pretty totalitarian too. Perhaps you should move to Afghanistan. It sounds like you'll fit right in actually.
We are a nation of Laws which presuppose a Higher Power. We are a nation under God, not man. Nuremberg Trials repeated that.
You deny our Founding principles—that of laws of nature and God’s law.
You claim there is no God and designer. Men have no design—nature has no design. That is false. Biology proves it. You think “orientation” is genetic when it is not. It is a learned behavior— natures directs the sexual drive towards the opposite sex unless there is interference in the natural development. It could be emotional or physical. That is proven. Homosexual societies always consist of pederasty because it is a learned behavior and why homosexual promoting cultures always lower the age of consent laws so they can legally have boys who are 12 at least. In ancient homosexual civilizations, and afghanistan it is a lot younger.
You claim there are no moral absolutes (human nature can evolve (Marx/irrational). The Founders threw that idea out....they believe in immutable laws and unchanging nature of man.
Our Founders rejected atheism directly and firmly. They knew if we were not a nation under God, we would be left to popular fads and whims of man, like France. They predicted Napoleon.
Nietzsche predicted Stalin Mao, Lenin, Hitler and Pot because he understood that there would be no values under Postmodern German philosophy. That void would create a vacuum and it was the first time man was arrogant enough to actually believe a society could be designed by man. Man was god, so to say, and could make up anything based on nihilism.
Natural Law Theory is the basis of our laws. Homosexuality goes against Natural Law Theory.
If you throw out Natural Law Theory...then there is no logic to your thinking. It is irrational, just like the Postmodern German philosophy. Like I say, remove Natural Law so you can justify homosexual acts and you remove the Supreme Being inherent in Natural Law, but then that is the object of PM—to remove God because you believe by saying something is “good” makes it so-(godless society)-particularly if repeated enough times and taught to children.
America is the most successful government for a free people of all races in the history of the world. Nothing has come close to the outstanding nature of the Capitalism underlined by Christian philosophy.
You want to throw out the best philosophy in government and society (that of Adam Smith, Locke, Montesquieu, to create another Weimar Republic, Soviet Union, Communist China and Cambodia. It’s been done. It didn’t work very well for humanity or freedom of people. It was devastating to the humanity of man.
You actually think our world is Darwinism when we support the unproductive and the single mom’s and allow them to procreate by forcing the producers to fund their degeneracy. That would never happen in the animal kingdom...the weak and unproductive and leaches would die. The strong could take, rape and kill at will.
The philosophies of the people you replace God with, are deeply flawed. Their ideology has created incredibly sick, dependent, dysfunction people. Their philosophy removes all responsibility for one’s actions....particularly Freud’s. I worked with children for decades and have seen the result of their sick nihilism. It makes life meaningless and destructive and as such is exactly as the Pope calls it...the Culture of Death. .
no it doesn't. It presupposes a constitution.
You deny our Founding principles—that of laws of nature and God’s law.
Freedom, justice, and equality are our primary founding principles.
You claim there is no God and designer.
No I didn't. I claimed that you have no authority to deny God's salvation or the constitution's privileges and immunities to someone who has harmed no one.
You think “orientation” is genetic when it is not.
I have not put that forth as the single etiological factor in determining one's orientation. I think human children are inherently sexually polymorphous until they are firmly aware of the social taboos that frown on perversions.
You claim there are no moral absolutes (human nature can evolve (Marx/irrational). The Founders threw that idea out....they believe in immutable laws and unchanging nature of man.
some acts are absolutely evil, some aren't. I think we can agree that that which does harm to another is evil. Homosexuality harms no one anymore than heterosexuality. The crusade against homosexuality is what causes the harm by inciting division, hatred, confusion, intolerance, violence, and conflict. I also think it seeks to deny equality to American citizens who are doing no harm to anyone. Furthermore, I think the most vocal anti-gay voices belong to the gayest people. The founders did believe in change incidentally, that's why they incorporated an amendment process in the constitution.
Our Founders rejected atheism directly and firmly.
Our forefathers held a wide variety of beliefs. Thomas Paine was just short of an atheist for example. Benjamin Franklin was a member of the Hellfire Club whose motto was "do what thou will". We should also keep in mind that our forefathers codified slavery into the constitution and justified it through scripture. Just sayin'.
Natural Law Theory is the basis of our laws. Homosexuality goes against Natural Law Theory.
Do unto others as you would have done unto you is the ultimate natural law. Would you like to be denied equal protection under the law? Would you like to be condemned for something you have no control over? Would you like to routinely be discriminated against? Attacked? murdered for being different? Natural law is ambiguous. Constitutional law is not. Murder is always evil, right? Unless it is carried out in the name of some higher authority which protects the murderer against consequences.
Your ignorance of Natural Law is not worth responding to—as all your assertions mimic the words of Herbert Marcuse, an absolutely evil, disgusting mind—right up there with Ginsberg who glorified sex with boys.
So “Do unto others” is a moral Law. That moral law is the one you are trying to eliminate—Your philosophy allows no God—NO revelation.. Singer the atheist, would say....then there is no meaning to life and it doesn’t matter what you do...or who you kill in the end.
I repeat, your worldview is Postmodern German Philosophy....I loathe it. I am a Modern and that is where my worldview comes from. Yours is Atheism—no God—you decide what is right and wrong with what “feels” right. You are quoting all atheists. Of course, you have to kill off God to make homosexuality a good, don’t you.
I let Revelation combined with Natural Law Theory decide what is right and wrong as did the Founding Fathers. Our CONSTITUTION grants us “God”-given rights which the cultural Marxist Post Moderns are trying to destroy.
Saying Heterosexuality is as destructive to the body as Homosexuality is quite a lie and laugh. Of course, if you are an immoral heterosexual....yes, you will have a very destructive lifestyle, also.
The sexual act in homosexuality is destructive—always is when you put something somewhere where it is never designed to go....It actually is quite disgusting and many of the Founding Fathers refused to talk about it.
They considered is extremely evil and instituted severe laws to discourage the behavior. Isn’t it interesting how culture glorifies people in media and schools who are aberrant and then—surprise—it is normalized like it was in pagan Greece and Rome. Postmoderns use Skinner and Pavlov for the conditioning of children’s minds. That in itself is so immoral and evil and we need to abolished the forced government school indoctrination centers. The Prussian design is right out of German philosophy to conform children to “group-think”.
I would never allow my children in public schools today because the homosexual radicals control the content and the brainwashing into their godless abyss where nothing matters but their pleasure above what is good for the future of society.
The Founders understood the slippery slope and they understood that morality in a society was the glue that would make it work. Moral homosexual is an oxymoron unless they refuse to practice in the nihilistic acts. You turning words and meanings upside down or “rationalizing” the behaviors does not change the fact that it goes agaisnt Natural Law and God’s Law. That is the Foundation of the USA—or used to be....the cultural Marxists are working on eliminating God from our Founding Documents and being our master. Disgusting philosophy that has killed millions and millions of people. Watch out, because you are promoting the most vile philosophy in the history of man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.