Here’s a unique duo: Esteemed theologian R.C. Sproul interviewing Ben Stein regarding the Expelled! movie.
—
Obama – typical Democrat non-charity-giving hypocrite - he has BIG plans on how to spend your money, but donates a pittance himself. Friendly reminder: True charity is when you give away your money, not when you take it by threat of force from others to fund your pet projects.
—
Between Smirks and Silence: Ignoring the Epidemic of Prison Rape – prison sentences are to incarcerate people for a period of time, not to expose them to high risks of sexual assault.
—
Why does God allow natural disasters?
—
Male Prison rape is such a joke in our culture.
TV Comedians and Hollywood movies make fun of this problem all the time. And most of it is directed to male rape.
“bubba is going to get you in there…”
Women rape is still taboo but I’m sure, in this tolerant and sophisticated culture of us, that will come to pass.
Edgar.
Well, we have nothing to thank but our pervasive homophobia for this problem. The reason our society thinks it’s “funny” for men to get raped in prison is entirely because of our homophobic culture.
Hi Mike,
First, alternative viewpoints are welcomed here provided there is some semblance of fact or logic behind them. But homophobia is a foolish pejorative designed to put anyone who dares question the Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender-Other Perversions lobby on the defensive. It is a transparently childish put-down, even though it actually works to silence many people. Please don’t use that word here.
If anyone deserves the homophobe label it is those who fear the GLBTX lobby so much that they cater to all the movement’s demands. They are the ones with the irrational, paralyzing fear of doing or saying something politically incorrect. You see it in political, educational, media and church leaders who will do and say almost anything to appease. It is really quite pathetic.
Those of us who are comfortable discussing the relative merits of secular and Biblical arguments on GLBTX issues aren’t afraid. I get along fine with straights and gays.
Second, even if that word actually meant something, your argument doesn’t work. Saying that “people have an irrational fear of men having anal sex with each other so they think it is funny for men to rape other men” makes no sense.
You obviously have a little agenda going. Feel free to work it in where it makes sense, but so far you’re forcing it. Just be patient.
OK, let me use “anti-gay” instead. We have this horrible prison rape problem because of our “anti-gay” culture. Is that better?
“Saying that “people have an irrational fear of men having anal sex with each other so they think it is funny for men to rape other men” makes no sense.”
Yes, yes it does. Homophobia, oops I mean “anti-gay”, and sexism are deeply connected in our culture. The basis for “anti-gay”ness is largely due to our patriarchal culture which takes a phallocentric perspective on sexuality. Men are seen as subjects based on their ability to treat others as objects by their phallus. This has the effect of denying women much of their sexuality and making gay men appear to be hypersexual (look at how “lesbian” sex is viewed by heterosexual men for evidence). That is why lesbian sex is seen as not really sex, and gay male sex as supremely emasculating. There are issues are intimately connected.
No, that is an equally bad and an equally faulty conclusion.
I realize it is in your interest to demonize those with a conservative and/or Biblical worldview as haters, but I reject silly ad hominem attacks like that. Sure, some people fall in that category, but stereotypes aren’t terribly productive.
I wish the best for gay people. I can’t speak for everyone, but my position is that homosexual behavior is physically, spiritually and emotionally destructive and the loving thing to do is to discourage people from participating in it. They are welcome to live together or whatever they like. I just don’t like them shoving their agenda down my throat. I have huge issues with the GLBTX agenda leaders and how they are poisoning children with their perversions – e.g., http://www.massresistance.com/
P.S. Are you pro-life?
“I realize it is in your interest to demonize those with a conservative and/or Biblical worldview as haters,”
That is nonsense. How did I argue that?
Neil said: Foolish terms like homophobia and anti-gay. Saying we have an irrational, paralyzing fear of guys is as stupid as it is incorrect.
It is far more than the Bible which is responsible for this in our country. Sexism and “anti-gay”ness are foundational in our Western culture and they are not derived alone from Christian history. It is the same cultural heritage which denies women equal opportunity which denigrates those who fall outside the gender binary.
Regarding an agenda, I wish the same for both groups. I wish gays and lesbians could be left alone and able to form legal contracts and enjoy their civil liberties in peace.
Neil said: They can enjoy their civil liberties. They can vote, etc. Of course they can’t marry, because, by definition, marriage is a union of a man and a woman. I am sympathetic to their needs for hospital visitation and such, but those can be addressed without changing the definition of marriage.
And yet, Christians continue to seek to deprive them of those opportunities. They protest gay pride parades, defame their community organizations, and try to make their lives harder in terms of employee benefits, health insurance, pension, etc., etc.
Neil said: Gay pride parades are freak shows. Any heterosexual people who did many of those things on a normal street corner would be arrested. One of my all time favorite critiques of gay pride parade pervisity came from a lesbian mother. She commented – correctly, of course – that the S&M types didn’t belong by the “family” section. But she missed the irony – who the heck was she to criticize someone else’s sexual expressions??!! If she didn’t want her kids next to them, perhaps we didn’t want our kids subjected to them, either! She was demanding affirmation for her lifestyle – not just tolerance – yet wanted to draw the line right where she stood.
It is VERY revealing that you posted a link to MassResistance, a known-hate group now listed as such at the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Neil said: Hate group. Heh. Just read their site, everybody. That’s all I can ask.
And yes, I am VERY pro-life. I believe in life and equal protection for all — including the poor, disabled, oppressed, elderly, etc.
Neil said: Just to confirm – you oppose legalized abortion except to save the life of the mother? Not trying to nitpick, I’m just after clarity.
“Saying we have an irrational, paralyzing fear of guys is as stupid as it is incorrect.”
Oh, so you aren’t “anti-gay”? Well, that is good to learn. I would have thought otherwise given your posts.
Neil said: It is illuminating that you keep trying to work in the anti-gay ad hom. Most of the people I criticize are the straights who bow down to the GLBTX movement, not the gays themselves. They have my deepest sympathies.
“She was demanding affirmation for her lifestyle – not just tolerance – yet wanted to draw the line right where she stood.”
Interesting that you expect your lifestyle to be approved, and affirmed, by government but “draw the line” when it comes to others who don’t share your religious views.
Neil said: Nice dodge, but the fact of her outrageous hypocrisy remains.
And funny how you snuck in the religious bit. Of course the Bible is crystal clear that homosexual behavior is a sin ( http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2007/07/22/problems-with-pro-gay-theology-5-of-5/ ), but I don’t need the Bible to argue against same-sex unions and didn’t use it above. So how about if you skip the knee-jerk religious bigotry?
If the gov’t decides they don’t want to approve/affirm my married “lifestyle” then that is ok with me. I think the less gov’t intrusion in our lives, the better. I’m actually surprised that gays are so eager to have gov’t endorsement of their behaviors. Seems kinda shallow to me. Of course, we know the real reasons. Civil rights would mean you couldn’t criticize them.
“I am sympathetic to their needs for hospital visitation and such, but those can be addressed without changing the definition of marriage.”
The definition of marriage has changed a number of times in our history. Loving v. Virginia changed the definition of marriage but not nearly as much as the Industrial Revolution changed it from an extended family to a nuclear family. Arguing that the definition of marriage is static is simply inaccurate.
Neil said: That is one of the worst arguments I’ve heard. You want to change the definition from “a union of a man and a woman” to “not a union of a man and a woman.” That’s more than a change. That’s the opposite.
“Hate group. Heh. Just read their site, everybody. That’s all I can ask.”
You can read about them on the Southern Poverty Law Center (the country’s foremost expert on hate groups) here: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp (click on Massachusetts).
Neil said: I meant that people should read the http://www.massresistance.com/ site (thought that was obvious). It is full of documentation of pro-GLBTX perversities and what they are doing to kids as young as kindergarten and below.
Please answer this before commenting further: Just to confirm – you oppose legalized abortion except to save the life of the mother?
No, I’m completely opposed to abortion. In fact, I think what our country needs to do is make abortion a capital offense. I see a lot of pro-life groups petition to have abortion doctors punished but I don’t think this will really change the reality on the ground. What is desperately needed is a few teenage girls who aborted their babies to be executed. Can you imagine the positive effect this would have?
I’ve given you straight answers. As soon you as you are prepared to do the same you are welcome to come back.
What’s the point, Neil? You deride a community and call it immoral, and advocate against their petitioning our common government for relief. And when those in that community speak out you call them “anti-Christian bigots”. What is there to discuss?
I wasn’t kidding. A serious answer, please: Just to confirm – you oppose legalized abortion except to save the life of the mother?
I’m sorry Neil, I’m confused. What the heck does abortion have to do with prison rape? Care to explain?
Virtually every pro-gay person I know (save one) is pro-legalized abortion. I have a follow up question, but first I like to know your views so I don’t assume anything.
Also, you made an odd abortion comment on another page so I’m trying to clarify.
Last chance . . .
No, I’m pro-life. In fact, I’m an active member of PLAGAL
(http://www.plagal.org/). Are you familiar with them?
Hadn’t heard of them. Glad to hear it.
So, what was your question?
More of a statement than a question – you might want to use this reasoning on your pro-legalized abortion friends – http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2007/01/23/an-ethical-dilemma/
“You deride a community and call it immoral, and advocate against their petitioning our common government for relief.”
I said the behavior was immoral. Then again, I think heterosexual adultery is immoral.
And I already addressed your sentence fragment about “relief.” If relief is getting hospital visitation and such, go for it. If it is civil rights for sexual preferences, indoctrination of children, etc. then I oppose that.
“And when those in that community speak out you call them “anti-Christian bigots”.”
You misunderstood. I only pointed out your religious bigotry because you said I didn’t want gov’t help for those who don’t share my religious views. That is simply untrue.
“If it is civil rights for sexual preferences, indoctrination of children, etc. then I oppose that.”
Do you agree that civil rights should be extended to groups based on their discrimination? We do for ethnicity and gender and also for religion (which is clearly a choice). If we pass laws which enhance the penalties for hate crimes against Jews or Catholics how can we not also extend those to gays and lesbians who are likewise frequent victims of hate crimes?
And since you believe all citizens of our government should be treated equally and fairly why can’t you agree that requiring gay and lesbian couples to jump through numerous additional hoops to acquire the same legal rights automatically extended to married couples is in fact a different treatment? Wouldn’t equal treatment be the same cost, time, and effort?
I’ll repeat: Civil rights for sexual preferences are bad public policy.
I don’t support laws for hate crimes laws against, either – http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2007/04/04/hate-speech-hate-crimes/ I’m one of those old fashioned equal protection types.
Unless you are pro-death penalty, then I am also on record for advocating stronger penalties for the murder of gays than you are.
While we’re at it, I’m anti-bullying of gays. Then again, I’m anti-bullying of everybody, and I’m not stupid enough to believe the gay sex student clubs in schools are really about anti-bullying. They are a transparent 21st century Trojan Horse.
You aren’t listening very closely, either. I already told you I’d be glad to support hospital visitation rights and such. I said it twice. But you seem so mired in your prejudices that you can’t see that. I’m inclined to think that is because you, like the rest of the movement, won’t rest until everyone affirms you. Tolerance? No problem. Affirmation? Not here. I like you too much to encourage you in such destructive behavior.
And I like innocent school kids way too much to subject them to the perversions the GLBTX movement is trying – and succeeding at – in many areas.
And I like free speech and religious freedom way too much to let the thin-skinned GLBTX movement take it away.
“Wouldn’t equal treatment be the same cost, time, and effort?”
But you have equal treatment. Marry someone of the opposite sex and you get the benefits that are afforded those relationships. You want special treatment, not equal treatment. You get the exact same treatment as anyone else not married to someone of the opposite sex.
This has gotten off track. I’ve said plenty on this before, so feel free to peruse the categories to the left or to join something on-topic in another thread.
“No, I’m completely opposed to abortion. In fact, I think what our country needs to do is make abortion a capital offense. I see a lot of pro-life groups petition to have abortion doctors punished but I don’t think this will really change the reality on the ground. What is desperately needed is a few teenage girls who aborted their babies to be executed. Can you imagine the positive effect this would have?”
Good Grief! That’s a sick view.
So, killing another CHILD is a way of stopping the killing of other CHILDREN?
A teen-aged girl getting pregnant AND then having an abortion is the responsibility and fault of her parents and those of the parents of the boy who got her pregnant. It is a parenting issue… or a lot of cases- a poor parenting problem.
Teaching and instilling the value of life, based on being created in the image of God is the way to stop this awful practice. It will also help stop the other ways that men and women misuse and defile their bodies and the bodies of others. When that happens, changing a law will be a mere side note, and a wonderfully moot point.
Repugnant laws, like those that legalized abortion and those that seek to re-define marriage, is just a side-effect of a bastardized view of God-made, God-given life.
Kristine,
Neil was doing such a good job handling this issue, I didn’t want to get involved. But your comment about parents being responsible for their teen’ behavior warranted my attention.
Fortunately, I have not been in ths situation you entioned, but I have had other poblems with my teens. In no way do I believe I was resposible for their misbehasvior.
I don’t want to take away from the focus of this thread, but please say that you didn’t mean it that way. Do you have children? Do they always do what you taught them?
I don’t think that though someone supports capital punishment for abortion, that the supporter believes that should be extended to children as well. We often have different ways of holding children, that is, those who’ve not achieved the legal age, accountable for crimes adults also commit; generally, lesser penalties.
I think Mike was just being mischievous with his comment about teenaged girls being executed for having abortions. At least I hope he was . . . it is hard to tell.
Randy,
I see what you mean. His comment horrified me. My anger probably flared. I’ve seen so many bad parents… that it is their fault…. but that’s not an excuse for such an indictment in such a grey area. I apologize for my judgmental comment on parents.
The question that must be asked is when do our children stop being children and when do they begin making adult decisions for themselves? When have we taught them all that we can and then it’s up to them? We can’t just leave a blanket age, for they all are so very different. When are we no longer responsible for them and the sins and mistakes they commit?
Then, when is it just to blame the parents for the mistakes teenagers make on the misteachings and/or neglect of the parents? (Especially when there is such a serious action taken as aborting a child.)
Nasty grey area.
I guess what I am predominantly wondering is that have the parents taught them that premarital sex is ok and that abortion is an acceptable remedy for an unwanted pregnancy/ another form of birth control, and a way out of an economic hardship caused by a new baby- A de-valuing of the sanctity of life, a thought so prevalent in our society today? Abortion seems to be such a final and tragic outcome more serious than simply the act of rebellion, teenaged angst, love and/or lust that created the little baby to begin with.
I just don’t know.