Pride Before The Fall (Horowitz Sticks it to the Fundies!)

FrontPage Magazine ^ | 5/20/03 | David Horowitz

[Grando Calrissian]

You're not the only one.

[Mark Bahner]

"Many of them understand that homoeroticism is disordered -- that is, that it's end is pleasure, not survival -- and choose to temper their conduct accordingly."

Do you suppose that men with women past menopause should realize that their sex is "disordered"--that is, that it's end is pleasure, not survival--and temper their conduct accordingly?

[colorado tanker]

For the last few posts you've tried to start a flame war. I ain't "in the mood" so I'm exercising my right to say Buh, bye.

[BibChr]

Yeppers, you nailed it.

Dan

[eastsider]

I'm merely trying to figure out the meaning of the following from post #316:

However, I believe that adults have the right to have sex with other adults who are agreeable to it. What bothers me on these threads is that homosexuals are individuals with rights, like the rest of us.

Specifically, I'm asking where the right to homoeroticism come from.

[BibChr]

I've not seen a poll, but I just doubt it. The Horowitz position is, by its nature, irrational. It is unthought-out. So the best representative is, still, on the issue, irrational.

But I don't deny that some on the other side are hateful and purely visceral.

Dan

[breakem]

Don't let sarcasm chase you, I can sometimes be calm. If you're in the mood, please tell me your understanding of the difference between natural rights and human rights and the use of governmental power to outlaw their exercise? If not, I'll catch you latter.

[breakem]

I answered that for you a post or two back. And then I asked you whether or not you think government has the right to outlaw erotic behavior as you defined it and what would be the source of that governmental power. I think it's your turn to answer.

[Chemist_Geek]

Can I get an 'Amen' for political pragmatism?

From me, yes, but not from far too many loudmouths more interested in some sort of purity than in actually winning elections...

[Mark Bahner]

"To a committed Christian, "holding each other accountable" is one of the roles of the church (the community of believers) to which we belong."

Perhaps my question was unclear: I was asking whether you also thought the *state* should be involved in "holding them accountable"?

[eastsider]

Do you suppose that men with women past menopause should realize that their sex is "disordered"--that is, that it's end is pleasure, not survival--and temper their conduct accordingly?

The end of coitus is procreation, whether that end is frustrated -- as in menopause -- or not. The end of coitus should not be conflated with the intent of the actors.

[longtermmemmory]

And there were laws in many states, up to the 1960s, that required blacks in public buses to go to the back of the bus, if a white person wanted their seat in the front of the bus. Does that mean that blacks don't have a civil right to sit anywhere they want on public buses?

+ + + + + + +

Race is an open, and conspicous immutable characteristic. Homosexuality is based on a behavior not a skin pigment. There is no need for black people to have a red shirt on in order for you to identify the race. Black people can not change their pigment by choice. The analogy is incorrect. If you put on an SAT application that you are black or apply for a scholarship reserved for black people you will be rejected when your skin pigment is observed. Homosexual behavior can be claimed or denied at will or whim.

[Clint N. Suhks]

you need to go back to civics 101. Certain rights refers to the ones listed in the bill of rights and then it says should not be meant to deny or disparage other rights.

Right and unenumerated simply protects those not covered in the 10th, if it doesn’t then it’s decided by the judiciary as in Griswold v. Connecticut. Madison’s intent was “by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration.” It’s a simple concept even an eight year old can understand, it’s a right if there’s NO legislative prohibition.

Make a coherent point and I may stay around. Your remediation is tedious.

Show some sign of life beyond you ridiculous assertions and you’ll be able to see you’re wrong.

You cannot use the 10th amendment to say that the constitution was meant to deny human rights.

Why is incest not a “human right”? Oh that’s right you can’t answer that with any degree of logic can you?

Who gave the founders the right to deny sometheing they did not have the power to grant or and thus to deny?

That would be the constitution.

You can repeat your question all you want,

I’ll stop since you don’t have the capacity to answer them.

[breakem]

boys and girls, in the immortal words of poster eastsider, my wife is due home soon and I an hopefull of engaging in some heteroerotic behavior (not sex of course), which I believe has not been outlawed as yet by the state of California or the county of Riverside. In order to maximize my opportunity I must say hasta la vista, baby. Those who care, I'll try to read your replies when I can return.

[Clint N. Suhks]

I hope your slow and haven't answered 391 yet. Your 394 is as bad as my rants.

Still can't answer the questions eh?

[breakem]

As usual you have tied the 10th to the 9th and given the 10th supercession. You give the rights to the states and then the crumbs to the people. This is bassakwards. Since you believe in the rights of government and I the rights of individuals, this is a fortuitous time for me to take a break. Don't confuse an answer with your inability to understand. C-YA on another one or this one later, I'm sure. I'd say "my pleasure" but it may be illegal.

[Mark Bahner]

"The end of coitus is procreation,..."

Such as, from the National Enquirer: "65 Year-Old Grandmother Gives Birth to Triplets!" ;-)

Subheadline: "The Surprising Father: Elvis did it, in my dream!" ;-)

[Dataman]

I've reached my limit of

today. I don't think I can handle one more.

[eastsider]

I answered that for you a post or two back.

So what's the answer? Where does the right to homoeroticism come from? From an unalienable right to the pursuit of pleasure? Just spit it out.

[longtermmemmory]

What bothers me on these threads is that homosexuals are individuals with rights, like the rest of us.
** * * * *

Its not about individuals, its about what we as a society permit in couples. Are certain couplings prohibited? The answer is yes, certain couples are prohibited. The issue here is which ones. Polygamy is prohibited. Incest at any age is prohibited. Beastiality is prohibited. Homosexuality can therefor also be prohibited at law. (its a state issue)

This is also about more than law. It is also about the curriculum of children in school. Children must be discouraged from this lifestyle regardless of the law. No parent wants their child to grow up to be a homosexual. If it can be prevented it should. Parents would easily pay a fortune to prevent homosexuality in their child if it was a immediate danger.

It may be too late for the adult homosexuals who are too addicted to their orgasms, but it is not too late for the next generation of children.