Skip to comments.
Dumbledore gay outing sullies Potter's morality tales
Vivificat! - News, Commentary, Opinions and Reflections from a Personal Catholic Perspective ^
| 25 October 2007
| Teófilo
Posted on 10/25/2007 1:52:28 PM PDT by Teófilo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
To: Unassuaged
“Know” in the sense used there is the same as here:
“Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived...” (Gen 4:1)
Doubt he was simply spying on her!
Regarding Lot, if the men of Sodom were worried about spies, it wouldn’t have made sense for him to offer them his daughters in place of his guests.
To: Unassuaged
A rereading of this story does suggest that maybe the men were spies for the attacking army. ???? I'm not sure HOW you are rereading this story. The men that came to Lot were angels from the Lord. The men of SODOM (from where we get the word "sodomite") wanted to rape these angels. Lot offered his daughters instead.
Gen 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as [is] good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
It is a vast stretch of the imagination to think this was not talking about homosexual activities. Lot offers his daughters instead of the men.
I will add there are degrees to sin that God tolerates before He exact judgment. Homosexuality is just about the final deprivation of man that God allows in scripture.
42
posted on
10/26/2007 8:43:40 AM PDT
by
HarleyD
To: HarleyD
I was talking about Rowlings. Then your comment makes even less sense, given that she had the world before the comment, given the vast wealth and fame the books have afforded her. She was well able to move in whatever circles she wanted to.
43
posted on
10/26/2007 8:48:30 AM PDT
by
dmz
To: Teófilo
Rowling, like many others in the UK feel that being a good person and doing good is what's important than believing in God. ( I'm a good person, I don't need God, etc..)
If you've read some of her comments about her beliefs, she herself admits she struggles with it. She claims to be a Christian but then she calls some of those Christians who believe and practice what the bibles teaches as bigots. I think she cares more about fitting into the "collective thought" of pop culture than being a Christian.
She never defends Christianity only the concept of good -v- evil. And if she's a left, that makes being good everything on the left. Sure, lefties can share a few common ideas with the right but don't be fool because of that. Deep down inside, they see the right as evil.
44
posted on
10/26/2007 8:48:42 AM PDT
by
dragonblustar
(Once abolish the God, and the government becomes the God - G. K. Chesterton)
To: CholeraJoe
Good question. I found the answer to that in Acts 10, 11, and 15. Has to do with what the early church leaders expected of new Gentile believers.
45
posted on
10/26/2007 9:08:37 AM PDT
by
opus86
To: ikka
Nice reasoned leap, from homosexual to pedophile. Unreasoned arguments cloud the issue. By my reasoning I can call John Galt a Communist and it won’t change the story that has already been written. There is no reference to the character’s sexuality in the books. Just because someone decides that the character is gay, even if it is the authoer, it does not change the story that has been written. Ultimately it is a work of fiction that has only the social impact that we give it.
To: HarleyD
Would you agree that the problem was rape and inhospitality as much as homosexuality?
I have no doubt that homo-sex was going on and a sin.
In those times raping a woman was a property crime, raping a man was much worse.
My point is that the story says volumes about idolatry, greed, and lack of charity/hospitality.
My only point is that homosexuality is ONE of the reasons for G-d’s wrath, one of many.
47
posted on
10/26/2007 9:38:49 AM PDT
by
Unassuaged
(I have shocking data relevant to the conversation!)
To: benjamin032; Teófilo
The problem is, you have this character children innocently regarded as a kindly old wizard and role model for Harry Potter (no problem there), and then, all of a sudden, Rowling throws in this moral monkey wrench and decrees that he is a homosexual. The message seems to be that Dumbledore’s “gayness” does not make him a “bad” person, so homosexuality is presented as a morally neutral behavior. However, Rowling’s reckless grandstanding fails to address that our “outed” character may be a pedophile as well, given that he is constantly in the company of impressionable youngsters.
On the other hand, you have the likes of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien who wrote some excellent fantasy and stuck to the good-versus-evil theme without politically-correct shades of gray.
48
posted on
10/26/2007 10:54:41 AM PDT
by
Ebenezer
(Strength and Honor!)
To: Teófilo
"You start off with Harry Potter, who comes across as a likeable wizard, but you end up with the Devil. There is no doubt that the signature of the Prince of Darkness is clearly within these books. By reading Harry Potter a young child will be drawn into magic and from there it is a simple step to Satanism and the Devil."
Fr. Amorth, you are correct, sir. It always amazes me how prescient some of these holy men turn out to be...
49
posted on
10/26/2007 10:57:34 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
To: Teófilo
I hereby withdraw my sympathy and monetary support from the Harry Potter books and movies. I don't want my children exposed to flimsy moral teachings. In the past, I dismissed the witchcraft and sorcery contained in the books as so much fantasy and fairy tale material, giving the books and movies a pass because of their moral contents and fair-to-midland storytelling. But now I can't overlook the fact that Rowling wants to sell us an unchallenged, acceptable view of pro-homosexual "morality" in the guise of a likeable father-figure. That is beyond the pale and I won't stand for it. To me her books are now, to quote Father Amorth anew, the work of the Devil.
Right there with you, Brother.
Here's my own screed on this topic, in case you didn't see it...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1916336/posts
50
posted on
10/26/2007 10:59:10 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
To: Jeff Chandler; SIDENET
“Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”
A tale of bondage.
51
posted on
10/26/2007 11:01:23 AM PDT
by
Ebenezer
(Strength and Honor!)
To: dangus
Hes gay, but celibate. (Cmon, there were only 100 zillion comparisons between Hogwarts and a monastery!)
A monastery where students may be found "snogging" at all hours of the day? Not bloodly likely!
The celibate claim is the last refuge of those still trying to defend the series. I expect Rowling will eventually slip that rug out from under them as well.
52
posted on
10/26/2007 11:04:43 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
To: heartwood
So what we have is a celibate, chaste man who experienced homosexual inclinations. He overcame them as he overcame his lust for power and ruling over others.
Uh, I wouldn't build your house of cards on that pile of sand if I were you...
53
posted on
10/26/2007 11:05:57 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
To: rrstar96
...or politically correct shades of gay.
To: Antoninus; dangus; Teófilo
I hope the only fruitcakes you find in monastaries are the ones monks bake for fundraising.
55
posted on
10/26/2007 11:10:58 AM PDT
by
Ebenezer
(Strength and Honor!)
To: Unassuaged
Would you agree that the problem was rape and inhospitality as much as homosexuality? Of the four sins, what do you think society and Christians are most likely to speak out against?
1) homosexuality
2) rape
3) inhospitality
4) dog fighting
All of these are sins in the eyes of God but I'm sure we would both agree that they vary in severity.
While rape and inhospitality certainly were sins of Sodom, I wouldn't compare homosexuality with inhospitality. There are degrees of sins and some infractions are worst than others. We are sinful people, Christians included, but Christian are here to show how God wants us to live and to simply excuse homosexuality as some sort of disorder is wrong.
Here is an interesting verse in the scriptures:
Isa 3:9 The expression of their faces bears witness against them, And they display their sin like Sodom; They do not even conceal it. Woe to them! For they have brought evil on themselves.
The people of Sodom never even tried to conceal their lustful passions. How many "Gay Rights" parades are there these days? How many laws are enacted for people to be "tolerant"? How many Christians go down that slippy slope of appeasement?
56
posted on
10/26/2007 11:11:39 AM PDT
by
HarleyD
(Ezr 3:13 the people could not distinguish the sound of joy from the sound of weeping)
To: dmz
Then your comment makes even less sense, given that she had the world before the comment, given the vast wealth and fame the books have afforded her. She was well able to move in whatever circles she wanted to. HA!!! Money doesn't buy you status in those clubs.
57
posted on
10/26/2007 11:15:14 AM PDT
by
HarleyD
(Ezr 3:13 the people could not distinguish the sound of joy from the sound of weeping)
To: Unassuaged
Would you agree that the problem was rape and inhospitality as much as homosexuality?
Nice try. That's the standard homo-theology argument for that passage. Not buying, pal.
58
posted on
10/26/2007 11:20:18 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Republicans who support Rudy owe Bill Clinton an apology.)
To: Teófilo
I have to say, until J. K. Rowling made this statement about Dumbledore or whatever the heck his name is, I didn't really think it was a big deal if kids read the Potter books.
Now, I will absolutely refuse to ever purchase one of the books or movies. I don't want my money going to enrich someone who is on the side of the homosexual activists.
59
posted on
10/26/2007 11:21:58 AM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: benjamin032
What impact does a characters sexuality play in a book with no sex?It doesn't, and that's why Rowling should have kept her trap shut.
60
posted on
10/26/2007 11:22:46 AM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson