Posted on 01/29/2002 5:13:49 AM PST by simicyber
Incidentally, I understand that such practices still occur in underdeveloped countries, where children are put out to beg.
Once in Nepal, I watched, for a while, a woman begger (a rather young and healthy looking woman) who had a little boy asleep on her shoulder. It was a good sympathy-inducer--in me as well as everyone else. After a while, I realized that the child was drugged. I wondered if it was even her child. Someone told me that a few days earlier, a suspicious but charitable American woman gave her milk and food for the child. As soon as the American was out of sight, the beggar returned the milk and food to the store and got the money.
Owing to the huge population, and dearth of women, I would imagine that, like a ship at sea or a prison, it's not very safe to bend over for the soap in China right now.
Ministries like Kerusso Ministries and Exodus, International have help thousands leave that lifestyle, yet the liberal media refuses to report on this.
I've always thought this particular charge against homosexuals is hilarious. It implies that IF homosexuals could "reproduce," then they would do so, and then have sex with the children. But it also implies that heterosexuals, who CAN "reproduce," do so in order to have children with whom they can then have sex.
I support this Idea.
You propose to help them by putting them in prison camps?
Don't mention it. Just a little juvenile toilet humor between freepers. And, yes, population density will have to get very bad before I succumb to the advances of Bubba or his brethren. I'm sure he's heartbroken, but hey. Now, if he were to employ cheekless chaps in the seduction of helmsman, then maybe...er, no, probably not.
There is no easy way. We need to challenge the SAD propaganda at every opportunity. Too often they are given a pass. We should challenge them to prove what they say. Normally they can't. We should press that advantage. Then we should follow a two pronged strategy. 1) SAD can be treated and often cured, just like Alcoholism. Those who want to admit they have a problem and seek help must be able to count on an unlimited wellspring of compassion. We should do everything in our power to encourage them in seeking help and helping them through whatever trials come along. 2) Those who don't want help should not be given special treatment. Like the alcoholic or the schizophrenic or the person with multiple-personality disorder, they should be treated like people with disorders until they come to grips with what is wrong and seek help. Please note, treating someone with SAD as if they ahve a problem doesn't require being rude or obnoxious unless they become rude or obnoxious. And there is no excuse for violence of any kind unless you are endangered. The social non-acceptance that such a disorder should enjoin ought to be enough.
I haven't decided yet on your suggestion that they all be incarcerated.
How does that sound?
Shalom
Then I would suggest its time for your annual sense of humor checkup.
So therefore if we discuss heterosexuality, it too is no longer a private matter between consenting adults, and government would be justified in restricting it?
I'm sorry, I just don't follow the logic.
Gee, that's mighty nice of you.
Be sure and let us all know when you decide whether or not to imprison them.
Heterosexual behavior isn't disadvantageous. In fact, within marriage it is advantageous and should be encouraged. SAD is disadvantageous and should be discouraged.
Shalom.
I hate to bring it up, but anal sex is said to be very prevalent among hetrosexuals. It's another thing I don't hear much about among people who rail about anal sex. (I'm not implying that you do)
I think we agree on that. But to expect such actions to come from those currently holding office is not reasonable. People whose viewpoints conform to the viewpoints of those who put our Constitution in place must be elected to office. But expecting voters who have no understanding of the concepts of "liberty" or "equal rights" (as is evidenced on this thread) to elect the right kind of legislators, judges or law enforcement office holders is also not reasonable.
The first step is to re-educate the voters as to what it means to be a free people. It seems, however, based on the contents of this thread, that there are many voters out there that are extremely education-resistant and who prefer the socialist, nanny-state condition of affairs to continue, while claiming to be lovers of liberty. Until the voters are capable of recognizing the difference between liberty and slavery, things will never change.
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.