Posted on 02/16/2002 3:08:38 PM PST by T'wit
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:59 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
At the same time his colleagues are unbelievable in defending this scumbag. I have no problem with him being productive - just let him be productive from behind prison walls.
Not until you're clear of the place! You can jeer them all you wish when you are safely out of their reach. Just reflect on these matters, as you are, and absorb lessons your teachers never intended.
My lesson would be, those who deny G-d end up worshiping whatever they put in His place -- Science, Natural Selection, The Party, sex, drugs, power, canasta. Clearly, we are G-d driven, and surely this was what He intended. No substitute G-d can claim to be good or put a moral dimension into the universe. Therefore, substitutes can neither explain the moral hunger we find within ourselves nor urge us to good behavior. In the end, they explain nothing.
None of them would. None could honestly disapprove either. The thing is, liberals have no fixed standards on which to base approval or disapproval of anything. They judge issues by their feelings. In my experience, the more a thing is pathological, bizarre, hateful to America, socially destructive and/or tax-paid, the more liberals feel good about it.
In 1948 Genet was convicted of burglary for the 10th time and condemned to automatic life imprisonment. However, by 1947 his works had gained attention from such writers as Jean-Paul Sartre, André Gide and Jean Cocteau.
After the sentence, they petitioned the President of the Republic for his release. The request was granted, and he thanked by giving the society a poetical interpretation of the values of the criminals, in which a prison cell can turn into a place of monastic meditations or scene of sexual fantasies.
Didn't soceity luck out!
BTW I refuse to call the gay,and my preferred usage is'miserable'. More to the point I think.
Besides, if you don't think there are any other similarities between the pointy-headed, liberal, intelligentsia of this country and communists then I don't believe you listen or think very clearly either.
Just generalizing. How else talk about a bad breed? I'm perfectly willing to concede that liberals, as individuals, can be nice folks and can even rise above their beliefs -- if they have any left. But when they are being liberals, -- when they act upon their liberal views, -- they are pack hunters and more destructive to America than any foreign enemy. The damage they have done in my own lifetime has been unbelievable; but better we reserve that subject for a new thread.
Suffice, for now, that our pederast's friends at Yale are moral illiterates. Instead of doing their duty to transmit the highest values of our culture to the younger generation, they are teaching depravity.
Please note: I did say that none of them would -- but only because liberal views offer no basis for principled approval or disapproval. There is a vocal pedophilia lobby (NAMBLA, for example) that is active wherever pederasts can prey on boys -- especially the teaching business. In turn, this lobby has the vociferous approval of the whole liberal-left, on the pretense of civil rights. That, of course, is what the war on the Boy Scouts is all about -- trying to force them to accept gay counselors or else lose their funding.
A wonderfully interesting question! Are liberals communists, or merely fellow travelers, too weak in the knees to make the commitment? The Left had a bitter debate about it in the late 1940s: Stalinists versus those who thought an anti-communist left was a viable position.
I'd like to suggest that Sen. Joseph McCarthy unwittingly came to their rescue. He couldn't see any more difference between liberals and Stalinists than the Left itself could. That is why they turned on him with such ferocity -- he poured vinegar on the festering wounds from their own internal debate. But here, at least, was something they could all agree on -- hate McCarthy! In the end, they drove him to his death and are still citing their "McCarthyism" myth to rub it in.
You are absolutely right -- the same thing is playing out again in New Haven. Surely the element in common is that the intellectual supporters of Genet/Lasaga do not believe in right and wrong. They are unbelievers and relativists who have no rational basis to say, "This is wrong. This we must not do. This G-d forbids us to do."
The modernist family of philosophies -- scientism, naturalism, positivism, etc. -- all teach that the world and life are accidental. Liberal professors teach ceaselessly that there is no right and wrong. That always reminds me that the inability to distinguish between right and wrong is a legal definition of criminal insanity.
Personal remarks are not permitted in this forum.
"Breaking rocks in the hot sun,
I fought the law, and the law won...
The prosecutor touches on the fundamental problem facing the Western world with his comments. Reality isn't real anymore. Get ready for much more of the same, Mr. Strollo. Much, much more.
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.