User Tag List

First 2101112131422 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 223

  1. #111
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Dred Scott v Sanford anyone? That was a decision made on fundamental rights that was based on our nation's history and tradition, was it correct? (Though, the supreme court was half right in its ruling of the Missouri Compromise as unconstitutional, but that's an entirely different matter)
    The nice thing is that even if our traditions and history and courts allow something wrong we still have an amendment process. We are not absolutely bound to repeat historical mistakes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    One of them being the freedom to pursue life liberty and happiness. Which, homosexuals have the right to pursue with no more or less hinderance than others.
    While I'm glad that you think the Declaration of Independence is Incorporated into the Constitution I don't think the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness requires you to coerce people into into photographing you when they don't want to.

    Homosexuality isn't really a social construct, as it is a label we use to describe how one is attracted to other individuals. That's getting into unneeded semantics. The idea that it's "created" doesn't devalue it anyway.
    It's more than that.

    ...Michel Foucault, an unexpected ally, details the pedigree of sexual orientation in his History of Sexuality. Whereas “sodomy” had long identified a class of actions, suddenly for the first time, in the second half of the nineteenth century, the term “homosexual” appeared alongside it. This European neologism was used in a way that would have struck previous generations as a plain category mistake, designating not actions, but people—and so also with its counterpart and foil “heterosexual.”

    Psychiatrists and legislators of the mid- to late-1800s, Foucault recounts, rejected the classical convention in which the “perpetrator” of sodomitical acts was “nothing more than the juridical subject of them.” With secular society rendering classical religious beliefs publicly illegitimate, pseudoscience stepped in and replaced religion as the moral foundation for venereal norms. To achieve secular sexual social stability, the medical experts crafted what Foucault describes as “a natural order of disorder.”

    “The nineteenth-century homosexual became a personage,” “a type of life,” “a morphology,” Foucault writes. This perverted psychiatric identity, elevated to the status of a mutant “life form” in order to safeguard polite society against its disgusting depravities, swallowed up the entire character of the afflicted: “Nothing that went into [the homosexual’s] total composition was unaffected by his sexuality. It was everywhere present in him: at the root of all his actions because it was their insidious and indefinitely active principle.”

    The imprudent aristocrats encouraging these medical innovations changed the measure of public morality, substituting religiously colored human nature with the secularly safer option of individual passion. In doing so, they were forced also to trade the robust natural law tradition for the recently constructed standard of “psychiatric normality,” with “heterosexuality” serving as the new normal for human sexuality. Such a vague standard of normality, unsurprisingly, offered far flimsier support for sexual ethics than did the classical natural law tradition.

    But emphasizing this new standard did succeed in cementing these categories of hetero- and homosexuality in the popular imagination. “Homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality,” Foucault writes, “when it was transposed from the practice of sodomy onto a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul. The sodomite had been a temporary aberration; the homosexual was now a species.” Sexual orientation, then, is nothing more than a fragile social construct, and one constructed terribly recently.

    While our popular culture has not caught up— yet—the queer theorists increasingly calling the shots at the elite level already agree with Foucault on this point. Such thinkers echo Gore Vidal’s LGBT-heretical line: “Actually, there is no such thing as a homosexual person, any more than there is such a thing as a heterosexual person.” True, the firm natural division between the two identities has proven useful to the “gay rights” activists on the ground, and not least of all for the civil-rights-era ethos such power dynamics conjure up. But most queer theorists—and, for that matter, most academics throughout the humanities and the social/behavioral disciplines today—will readily concede that such distinctions are fledgling constructs and not much more. Many in this camp aim to expose the counterfeit credentials of sexual orientation and, taking a page from Nietzsche, to genealogically explain it away once and for all.
    http://www.firstthings.com/article/2...eterosexuality

  2. #112
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    I find myself completely torn over this issue. I want individual rights to be preserved so that people can refuse clients and choose not to do something they don't want to, but I also don't want entire groups being discriminated against like the African American population was during segregation.

    @Beorn, I think it might be wiser to hold off on any hasty decision-making before finding the optimal solution; I'd rather a decision be delayed than wrong and harmful.

  3. #113
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    re: beorn article:

    Sounds like what I've been saying. 'Homosexuality' is nothing more than a sex act at the least, and a manifestation of unmet developmental needs by the same sex parent in childhood, at the most.

    In short, you're just being a dysfunctional slut.

    But we already knew that, right?
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  4. #114
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    re: beorn article:

    Sounds like what I've been saying. 'Homosexuality' is nothing more than a sex act at the least, and a manifestation of unmet developmental needs by the same sex parent in childhood, at the most.

    In short, you're just being a dysfunctional slut.
    No. Just no.

  5. #115
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    No. Just no.
    Oh. That is what I got out of it.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  6. #116
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Oh. That is what I got out of it.
    Do you have any redeeming qualities other than your unwavering loyalty to your ideals?

  7. #117

    Default

    This article is just an example of conservatives changing the narrative in order to find some way to deal with the "gay agenda". Some conservatives have come to the conclusion that legislation enforcing the right to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation is doomed to eventually fail because of the similarity to previous battles against civil rights for blacks and women. They are correct. Thus, they've hit upon this kind of appalling tactic of "gay denial" - positing that no one is really gay, some people just have sex with the same gender. This way, they forestall gays becoming a protected class by arguing that there isn't a true class at all, just some people that like to have some kinky sex.

    I'll give it points for novelty. But it would be like saying there's no such thing as a Christian, just a bunch of people who follow Jesus. After all, the only true proof of being either gay or Christian is in the assertion of such. But I doubt those who cobbled together this philosophy would care very much for its logical extension.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  8. #118
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    The nice thing is that even if our traditions and history and courts allow something wrong we still have an amendment process. We are not absolutely bound to repeat historical mistakes.




    While I'm glad that you think the Declaration of Independence is Incorporated into the Constitution I don't think the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness requires you to coerce people into into photographing you when they don't want to.



    It's more than that.



    http://www.firstthings.com/article/2...eterosexuality
    No. Nope. 1000x no. It's not even worth addressing. I think we're best to agree to disagree, a lot.
    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari


  9. #119
    Member maybetmp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    MBTI
    iNtP
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    It would probably need to be incorporated by individuals, churches, and communities first. Then the natural progression of that is to government, as government represents the people.

    Of course, you have freedom on the one hand, and on the other you have government control.

    Ideally, people freely exercise their obedience to God's Law, and everyone is happiest.

    Government control and more man-made laws are usually not the answer. The answer is a shifted heart and mindset that you can really only get when you believe in living like Christ.
    That seems a little optimistic. Besides, if people want a government that conforms to God's Law, then they can vote for those policies in a secular government. This actually works, and is observable in many (mostly negative) ways. What would be a better alternative to this? To do away with republicanism and replace it with a theocracy run by a hierarchy of unelected arbiters who get to pick and choose how the Bible is interpreted and, from there, how laws should be based on those interpretations? What about a court run by God's Law? Are we going to punish people for adultery, blasphemy, sodomy, etc.? Is that really a step forward?

  10. #120
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This article is just an example of conservatives changing the narrative in order to find some way to deal with the "gay agenda". Some conservatives have come to the conclusion that legislation enforcing the right to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation is doomed to eventually fail because of the similarity to previous battles against civil rights for blacks and women. They are correct. Thus, they've hit upon this kind of appalling tactic of "gay denial" - positing that no one is really gay, some people just have sex with the same gender. This way, they forestall gays becoming a protected class by arguing that there isn't a true class at all, just some people that like to have some kinky sex.

    I'll give it points for novelty. But it would be like saying there's no such thing as a Christian, just a bunch of people who follow Jesus. After all, the only true proof of being either gay or Christian is in the assertion of such. But I doubt those who cobbled together this philosophy would care very much for its logical extension.
    The difference is that you don't find elite Conservative Christian Theologians saying that Christians are just a bunch of people following Jesus. You do find liberal queer theorists saying homosexuality is a social construct.

Similar Threads

  1. Yet another Islamist atrocity against religious freedom and free speech...
    By lowtech redneck in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 09:01 PM
  2. Reconciling Evolution to Religious Beliefs
    By Mort Belfry in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-30-2009, 11:41 PM
  3. As if I needed another forum to check every day...
    By Cogwheel in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-15-2008, 07:09 AM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 10:49 PM
  5. Add another INFP to the list...
    By Cindyrella in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-20-2007, 01:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO