I subscribe to Publishers Weekly online, and when yesterday I found a link to reviews of former Monty Python performer, National Lampoon writer, and author Tony Hendra's new fiction offering, I made the following comment.
Talk Back Tuesday: Tony Hendra's Past Scandals
-- 4/4/2006
Talkback » Reader Comments
Submitted by:
Roseanne Sullivan (roseannesullivan@sbcglobal.net)
4/4/2006 8:24:35 PM PT
Location:
San Jose CA
Occupation:
writer
You can find out about the accusations, substantiated by psychiatrists and Hendra's first wife by following links at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Hendra.
After Tony's daughter said he abused her as a child, an article surfaced that Tony had written about that time (1971) or the National Lampoon called "How to Cook Your Daughter." It was all about a daughter as a tasty dish. It had pornographic precision about it that no one who hadn't deep thoughts about sex with a beautiful compliant little girl would not have been able to write. It is horrifying that he wrote it, and horrifying that it was published. But those were the days.
I remember in the 60s the obscene Mr. Natural comics showing Mr. Natural pursuing little girls with his tongue hanging out.
Hendra’s article, which you can still find by googling a little is damning. I had a link here, but I took it out. I don't want to point anyone to such rot. [Hendra’s daughter wrote a book with the same title, so the first 3 or 4 pages of search output give you links to discussions about her book.]
Before I found out about the allegations, I chanced upon Hendra's Father Joe book at the library. I loved it at first, because I love conversion stories, but gradually Father Joe's watered down "feel good" affirming method of spiritual direction palled with continued reading. Father Joe also counseled Princess Diana. If he had pointed out to her that sex outside of marriage was a sin, she might still be living and maybe even with her husband Charles.
Hendra at the time he was being counseled by Father Joe was living a wild life using lots of women. Father Joe had nothing to say except reassurances that sexual sin wasn't really important. The problem with sex outside of its God-ordained place in a committed, faithful, and fruitful marriage is that sex for its own sake leads to the seeking of more sex for its own sake. And why stop with women? Why not anyone or anything that turns you on?
Unfortunately Tony Hendra didn't stop for anything, even incest. Even child porn about his daughter.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Monsignor John Sweeny Eulogized in Santa Clara CA
- Monsignor John Sweeny Eulogized in Santa Clara CA
- Appeared on Mother Angelica Live
- Humbly But Firmly Stood For Orthodox Catholic Beliefs and Practices
Our Lady of Peace Church, which was built in the 1960s in the middle of what used to be pear orchards
In spite of differences between the chancery and Monsignor Sweeny in the past, diocesan officials and the editor of the diocesan newspaper, who don't often use such terms, had no choice but to repeatedly use the word "saintly" when talking about Monsignor Sweeny during interviews with local reporters for his obituary. [Links are at the end of this email.]
Sweeny initially encountered diocesan opposition to his plans to erect a stainless steel statue of Our Lady at the shrine. The 32 foot height of the statue that he eventually got diocesan approval to build after negotiations was quite a bit smaller than he originally wanted it to be, but he partly made up the height difference by installing the statue on a 12 foot mound in front of the Church, where it prominently overlooks Highway 101.
The statue was dedicated on October 7, 1983 on the Feast of the Holy Rosary. It still stands as a tribute to traditional Catholicism in an area now solidly built up with hotels and Silicon Valley office buildings. From its vantage point, the statue portrays Our Lady as extending a motherly gaze and open arms to commuters and other passersby.
Yahoo headquarters are behind the statue.
Monsignor Sweeny once appeared on Mother Angelica Live, probably chosen for his life as a humble but determined devotee of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and of 24 hour Eucharistic adoration.
Starting under his pastorate, the church began to keep its doors open all the time, and 24 hour Eucharistic adoration (except for during Mass times) has continued for decades.
Church attendees who light candles in front of, bring flowers to, and embrace the church's many statues include a large proportion of ethnic minorities from the Philippines, Central and South America, and India, mixed in with many others from all socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds who are seeking a place where Catholicism as they once knew it is still practiced.
Under his pastoral leadership, the parish began to offer (and still offers) a Tridentine Latin Mass every first Saturday and on on other Saturdays offers the Novus Ordo Latin Mass (all with Gregorian chant at 7:30PM). The Ten Commandments are displayed directly to the right of the church door.
Monsignor Sweeny also offered a courageous witness when he encouraged and often led worshippers to pray the rosary weekly against abortion at nearby abortion mills. Bucking a diocesan trend downplaying the Sacrament, Our Lady of Peace parish priests began to provide the Sacrament of Penance before every Mass along with four hours on Saturday afternoons and evening. People from other parishes numbering 50 or more line up at the confessionals before every Mass.
Our Lady of Peace bucked yet another trend with its policy that only priests are allowed to dispense Communion to recipients, who kneel at the church's altar rail! Altar boys with gold patens attentively make sure that no particles of the Blessed Sacrament fall to the floor.
Photo of 82 year old mother of 10, Jean Foord, in the church parking lot, with her pro-life-bumper-sticker-bedecked car and one of the posters she carries to weekly anti-abortion rosary sessions at a local abortion mill.
And Monsignor Sweeny maintained all these practices in an era when these aspects of the Catholic faith were a very hard sell in the diocese.
Father Sweeny became pastor of Our Lady of Peace Church in 1969 and built the church and Shrine in what were formerly pear orchards. According to the shrine's website, the Shrine at Our Lady of Peace Church is the only major Marian Shrine on the West Coast between Our Lady of Sorrows Shrine in Portland, Oregon and the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico City.
Monsignor Sweeny not only had a soft spot for people seeking to confess their sins. He also had a soft spot for homeless people. After Bishop McGrath asked him to retire at 75, to parishioners' dismay, two homeless women have told me how they miss him because he was kind and generous to them. Another of his soft spots was for homeless statues, evidenced by the fact that the Church and even the rectory parlor became home for many statues that were discarded from other parishes in the renovations after Vatican II.
Bishop McGrath made Father Sweeny a Monsignor at the same time he awarded the honor to several others, including Father Alexander Larkin, who was removed last year from his pastorate at Sacred Heart parish in Saratoga due to sexual abuse allegations.
Monsignor Sweeny was laid to rest today at Gate of Heaven cemetery in Los Altos, CA.
Sources:
Wall Street Journal article
San Jose Mercury News news article
Another EWTN connection:
As the attached guest book entry says, Monsignor Sweeny traveled to Birmingham to witness the perpetual profession and ordination of Father Miguel Marie MFVE on June 4, 2004 and concelebrated Fr. Miguel's first Mass with him on June 6, 2004.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/obituaries/14065337.htm
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1009500544982042600.htm
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Recipes for Chicken Broth and Hot and Sour Soup
Chicken Broth and Steamed Chicken
This recipe gives you homemade chicken broth plus a tender steamed chicken (which you can use in a salad or other recipe that calls for cooked chicken).
Ingredients
1 whole chicken
salt and pepper to taste
Optional: onion stuck with 3 or 4 cloves, 1 bay leaf, celery leaves and stems, and 1 carrot
Directions
1. Remove chicken parts from the inside of the chicken.
2. Wash the chicken parts and the chicken inside and out with cool water.
3. Put a steamer basket in a big pan filled to the bottom of the steamer basket with water. Salt and pepper the chicken . For more flavor you can add a bay leaf, an onion (unpeeled) stuck with 3 or 4 cloves, and a carrot.
4. Put the chicken and spare parts in the basket and cover the pan.
5. Bring the water to a boil, and then turn it the heat down to simmer for about an hour until the chicken is done.
6. Save the broth and the chicken for other recipes. Strain the broth if you added vegetables.
7. Cool the broth and discard the hardened fat that rises to the surface before you use it.
Hot and Sour Soup
I made this soup for my friend Marian Fahey, who was dying with cancer last year, because it has hot pepper in it. I found out during my own bout with tonsil cancer the year before that cancer patients often get back their appetites when they eat foods with hot pepper. Marian loved it and told me it was a “world class soup”! She saved it in little containers and froze it and ate it a little bit at a time, until the sad day came that she was not able to keep anything down anymore.
Others besides my poor dying friend have loved this soup too. I typed this up today to give to a Ukrainian couple who liked it when I served it a Sunday dinner at my house. It seems to have cross-cultural appeal, since not only the Ukrainian couple but the Japan couple who were also my guests liked it too. (I work with the men at Cyclades Corp., which was started by Brazilians, and was just sold to Avocent, an Alabama company, but that's another blog.) The recipe is adapted from Myra Waldo’s Chinese Cookbook. Courier Books: New York; 1968. I double or triple the recipe and freeze leftovers.
Ingredients
4 dried elephant ears (Chinese mushrooms) or more if they are small, washed, soaked in
1 cup water for 30 minutes, drained (save the water). and cut into matchstick-like strips
1 chicken breast (raw or cooked) cut into narrow strips
2 T vegetable oil
4 cups chicken broth
2 T. cornstarch mixed with 2 T saki or dry sherry and with 2 T rice vinegar or white vinegar
1 lb. Tofu cut in 1/4” squares
1 t. salt
1 t. soy sauce
1/8 t. cayenne pepper or ground dried red pepper
1 egg beaten (optional--I never use it because the soup is so rich already)
1 T sesame-seed oil
1 green onion, sliced thinly on the diagonal
Directions
1. If the chicken is raw, heat the vegetable oil in the pan and saute the chicken in it for 5 min. If the chicken is already cooked, add it with the vegetable oil in the next step.
2. Put the broth, mushrooms, and mushroom water in the pan with the chicken and oil.
3. Bring to a boil and turn down to simmer for 10 min.
4. Stir the cornstarch mixture into the soup until thickened..
5. Stir in the optional egg and the tofu, sesame-seed oil, and green onion.
6. Taste and adjust seasonings. (I always add more vinegar and red pepper, sometimes more salt.)
This recipe gives you homemade chicken broth plus a tender steamed chicken (which you can use in a salad or other recipe that calls for cooked chicken).
Ingredients
1 whole chicken
salt and pepper to taste
Optional: onion stuck with 3 or 4 cloves, 1 bay leaf, celery leaves and stems, and 1 carrot
Directions
1. Remove chicken parts from the inside of the chicken.
2. Wash the chicken parts and the chicken inside and out with cool water.
3. Put a steamer basket in a big pan filled to the bottom of the steamer basket with water. Salt and pepper the chicken . For more flavor you can add a bay leaf, an onion (unpeeled) stuck with 3 or 4 cloves, and a carrot.
4. Put the chicken and spare parts in the basket and cover the pan.
5. Bring the water to a boil, and then turn it the heat down to simmer for about an hour until the chicken is done.
6. Save the broth and the chicken for other recipes. Strain the broth if you added vegetables.
7. Cool the broth and discard the hardened fat that rises to the surface before you use it.
Hot and Sour Soup
I made this soup for my friend Marian Fahey, who was dying with cancer last year, because it has hot pepper in it. I found out during my own bout with tonsil cancer the year before that cancer patients often get back their appetites when they eat foods with hot pepper. Marian loved it and told me it was a “world class soup”! She saved it in little containers and froze it and ate it a little bit at a time, until the sad day came that she was not able to keep anything down anymore.
Others besides my poor dying friend have loved this soup too. I typed this up today to give to a Ukrainian couple who liked it when I served it a Sunday dinner at my house. It seems to have cross-cultural appeal, since not only the Ukrainian couple but the Japan couple who were also my guests liked it too. (I work with the men at Cyclades Corp., which was started by Brazilians, and was just sold to Avocent, an Alabama company, but that's another blog.) The recipe is adapted from Myra Waldo’s Chinese Cookbook. Courier Books: New York; 1968. I double or triple the recipe and freeze leftovers.
Ingredients
4 dried elephant ears (Chinese mushrooms) or more if they are small, washed, soaked in
1 cup water for 30 minutes, drained (save the water). and cut into matchstick-like strips
1 chicken breast (raw or cooked) cut into narrow strips
2 T vegetable oil
4 cups chicken broth
2 T. cornstarch mixed with 2 T saki or dry sherry and with 2 T rice vinegar or white vinegar
1 lb. Tofu cut in 1/4” squares
1 t. salt
1 t. soy sauce
1/8 t. cayenne pepper or ground dried red pepper
1 egg beaten (optional--I never use it because the soup is so rich already)
1 T sesame-seed oil
1 green onion, sliced thinly on the diagonal
Directions
1. If the chicken is raw, heat the vegetable oil in the pan and saute the chicken in it for 5 min. If the chicken is already cooked, add it with the vegetable oil in the next step.
2. Put the broth, mushrooms, and mushroom water in the pan with the chicken and oil.
3. Bring to a boil and turn down to simmer for 10 min.
4. Stir the cornstarch mixture into the soup until thickened..
5. Stir in the optional egg and the tofu, sesame-seed oil, and green onion.
6. Taste and adjust seasonings. (I always add more vinegar and red pepper, sometimes more salt.)
Saturday, February 11, 2006
For God's Sake, be a Dodo!
Catholics who leave the Church are called lapsed Catholics, so I call myself a relapsed Catholic. In the almost 30 years since I relapsed, I’ve been trying to find and build community with other Catholics who still believe the faith that was handed down from the apostles. I had a devil of a time finding them, until just recently. For two years now, I've been a member of a small group of lay Carmelites that meets in a monastery in Santa Clara, CA, and I have found that I don't have to keep my guard up in that group, because our spiritual assistant (who is the abbot of Mount St. Joseph Carmelite monastery in San Jose), and our formation leaders teach sound doctrine. And when I went to Israel on pilgrimage under the spiritual guidance of another good holy Carmelite monk, I found another small remnant that seemingly shares my views. For years I was shored up by knowing that in Pope John Paul II I had a fellow spirit. After JPII’s death, Cardinal Ratzinger’s election as Pope Benedict XVI calmed my fears and comforted me because I realized then that Christ would not leave us orphans. And now in Mother Angelica’s book I have found another hero.
I bought Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles at the EWTN 25th Anniversary Family Conference in San Francisco on January 28, 2006. Raymond Arroyo signed my book there, and he added below his signature, “May you find strength and inspiration herein.” I have found both strength and inspiration therein. It’s a great story. Raymond Arroyo’s book is one of those books that can change your life.
I left the Catholic Church in 1963 and returned in 1978. Upon my return I found what Mother Angelica is quoted as calling “the electric church,” because “Every time you go you get a shock” p. 230. It really was a shock for me to find that the doctrines I learned in my childhood and came back to believing were not being taught any more.
It was and still is unthinkable to me that Catholic believers could accept being told that doctrine and morality were changing without reacting as I did with dismay at the illogic of it all.
How could anyone who sincerely is seeking the Truth want to belong to the Catholic Church if that person really believes that the Church has been dead wrong about most things for nineteen hundred and sixty odd years, until Vatican II happened? In the aftermath of the Vatican II council, a bunch of 60s era theologians, priests, nuns, sisters, brothers, and laypeople began quoting the council documents, almost always erroneously, to justify an anticlerical, anti-hierarchical, anti-transubstantation, anti-gospel, pro-contraception, pro-divorce, pro-sexual-license agenda, and the principles they derived from their selective readings of the council documents are being institutionalized in parishes around the world even to this day.
What I have discovered by reading this book is that EWTN is a shining witness to the ability of the Church’s true doctrine to triumph in the middle of a time when in many cases even the Church’s bishops had been misled and heresy had seemingly taken over. Mother Angelica’s book is a reaffirmation of the truth that if God wants a work to be done, He gives the ones He calls the power they need to accomplish His work.
“God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something, so that no human being might boast before God” 1 Corinthians 1:27.
Mother Angelica is not the only cloistered nun who was called to do great things for His Church. Raymond Arroyo aptly compares her at one point to the great doctor of the Chuch St. Teresa of Avila. In both cases, these cloistered women (in what Mother Angelica called “the wrong state in life”) were able to found religious orders and lead people to holiness in the middle of times of darkness and moral laxity.
Raymond Arroyo's talk on the book at the EWTN 25th anniversary conference simply exorts us to live 1 Corinthians 1:27:
"Pope Benedict XVI recently wrote the first encyclical about the nature of love. . . . It’s the primordial creative power that moves the universe.. . . . Mother Angelica harnessed some of that energy. . . . . Mother Angelica said, “I am convinced God is looking for dodoes. He found one: me! There are a lot of smart people out there who know it can’t be done, so they don’t do it. But a dodo doesn’t know it can’t be done. God uses dodoes.” . . . . Every major thing that God wanted her to do was preceded by suffering. . . . . When she started the network, she was 58 years old. She had diabetes. A twisted spine. . . . . You pay the cost to be the boss. . . . . She was following inspiration and the dictates of her spouse.. . . . The struggle. The cross. That’s her real story. Her life has become a parable. She wanted to reach people.. . . . She did what she did for love of souls, It was never about TV. For God’s sake, be a dodo!"
This is a longer version of a review I posted today at amazon.com about Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles.
I bought Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles at the EWTN 25th Anniversary Family Conference in San Francisco on January 28, 2006. Raymond Arroyo signed my book there, and he added below his signature, “May you find strength and inspiration herein.” I have found both strength and inspiration therein. It’s a great story. Raymond Arroyo’s book is one of those books that can change your life.
I left the Catholic Church in 1963 and returned in 1978. Upon my return I found what Mother Angelica is quoted as calling “the electric church,” because “Every time you go you get a shock” p. 230. It really was a shock for me to find that the doctrines I learned in my childhood and came back to believing were not being taught any more.
It was and still is unthinkable to me that Catholic believers could accept being told that doctrine and morality were changing without reacting as I did with dismay at the illogic of it all.
How could anyone who sincerely is seeking the Truth want to belong to the Catholic Church if that person really believes that the Church has been dead wrong about most things for nineteen hundred and sixty odd years, until Vatican II happened? In the aftermath of the Vatican II council, a bunch of 60s era theologians, priests, nuns, sisters, brothers, and laypeople began quoting the council documents, almost always erroneously, to justify an anticlerical, anti-hierarchical, anti-transubstantation, anti-gospel, pro-contraception, pro-divorce, pro-sexual-license agenda, and the principles they derived from their selective readings of the council documents are being institutionalized in parishes around the world even to this day.
What I have discovered by reading this book is that EWTN is a shining witness to the ability of the Church’s true doctrine to triumph in the middle of a time when in many cases even the Church’s bishops had been misled and heresy had seemingly taken over. Mother Angelica’s book is a reaffirmation of the truth that if God wants a work to be done, He gives the ones He calls the power they need to accomplish His work.
“God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something, so that no human being might boast before God” 1 Corinthians 1:27.
Mother Angelica is not the only cloistered nun who was called to do great things for His Church. Raymond Arroyo aptly compares her at one point to the great doctor of the Chuch St. Teresa of Avila. In both cases, these cloistered women (in what Mother Angelica called “the wrong state in life”) were able to found religious orders and lead people to holiness in the middle of times of darkness and moral laxity.
Raymond Arroyo's talk on the book at the EWTN 25th anniversary conference simply exorts us to live 1 Corinthians 1:27:
"Pope Benedict XVI recently wrote the first encyclical about the nature of love. . . . It’s the primordial creative power that moves the universe.. . . . Mother Angelica harnessed some of that energy. . . . . Mother Angelica said, “I am convinced God is looking for dodoes. He found one: me! There are a lot of smart people out there who know it can’t be done, so they don’t do it. But a dodo doesn’t know it can’t be done. God uses dodoes.” . . . . Every major thing that God wanted her to do was preceded by suffering. . . . . When she started the network, she was 58 years old. She had diabetes. A twisted spine. . . . . You pay the cost to be the boss. . . . . She was following inspiration and the dictates of her spouse.. . . . The struggle. The cross. That’s her real story. Her life has become a parable. She wanted to reach people.. . . . She did what she did for love of souls, It was never about TV. For God’s sake, be a dodo!"
This is a longer version of a review I posted today at amazon.com about Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Comments on my comments on a Pro-Abortion blog site
I checked out the comments I posted here on 1/26, and here are
the string of comments that came back. I like "Roseanne, you rock."
I don't like some of the other comments!
8
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
12:50 AM
Roseanne:
You say:
"The posts that scoff about the futility of expecting people not to go to bed outside of marriage are denying the reality that for ages it was understood in the majority of cultures that sleeping with another person is reserved for marriage(except for the occasional disfunctional cultures dug up by anthropologists looking for justifications for their own sexual immorality)"
I am not an expert on this by any means, but I am certain that even in cultures which officially condoned monogamy and marriage, people still did engage in extramarital sex. In some ages and in some cultures, it was simply done more circumspectly. And yes, in my parent's generation the divorce rate was much lower. But extramarital and premarital sex did take place.
I am actually with you on a lot of what you say. My personal experience was that in college I had a series of short term relationships and felt cheapened and cheated ultimately because the men did not feel as I did about commitment. But I considered it one of the lessons of growing up, and before graduation I met a man I would stay with for twenty years, though we never married or had children.
And yes, I do think that the sexual revolution was in some ways a disservice to women. I do think that sex for sex's sake can lead to heartbreak and alienation and despair for some--and that women as a rule are more vulnerable to this.
However, I still think it is a woman's choice. If she chooses to sleep with a guy on the first date, or the tenth date, or wait until marriage, that is her choice. She will, to use a tired cliche, make her own bed and have to sleep in it.
But again, there are women who wait til marriage, have children, a beautiful home, and at the age of 30 or 40 or 50 discover that their beloved husband has been having an affair and wants a divorce. It is simply a sad fact that people do not always mate for life. Personally, I am a romantic and think it very sad when children have to endure the upheaval of divorce. But this is something that noone here has addressed as yet.
Those commenters here who are young and idealistic have never experienced what a long term relationship is. They idealize sex as a spiritual bond, and in the first flush of young passion this is certainly the case. But for many couples, this romantic phase soon passes, and some look for that thrill elsewhere. In fact, millions do. I'm not saying this is "right"--just a fact of life and relationships, at least in our contemporary society.
There are and have been some societies also where a man may have multiple wives, or harems, or mistresses and this is considered the norm. Sad? Unfair? Perhaps--but it is reality, even if it is not always pretty.
Nevertheless, your points are well taken. Young women in particular often go through agony trying to please a man sexually only to be taken advantage of and dumped unceremoniously. However, it is up to each individual to decide for themselves how they will deal with this dilemma. They can choose to wait for marriage if they feel that is best for them. Again, I think this is admirable--just not the way for everyone.
#419
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
12:59 AM
KYS:
Thanks--who knew? (lol).
I value your comments here as the eloquent voice of reason.
T.A. Dodger:
Well put.
JR:
Touche!
Roseanne:
I guess you and I were writing our comments at the same time, and your second one came out before my first one did--or something (lol). I'll read your second one and probably add my two cents again.
#420
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
01:08 AM
Roseanne:
I understand why you believe what you do, but it is not illegal to have sex outside of marriage, and you are not the sex police.
I do not believe that people must have children or even marry if they choose not to. As I said, I never wanted children and had a committed 20 year relationship, with no cheating on either side, through good times and bad. Many people go through three marriages and multiple children in that time. A piece of paper does not a lifetime commitment make, and people break their marriage vows every day.
The implications of what you say are frankly a bit alarming to me. Would you outlaw extramarital sex? That may be acceptable in some other cultures--but not in ours, and I thank heaven for that.
Live your life as you see fit--enjoy--even advocate for what you believe in. But this is not a fascist dictatorship, and you have no right to figuratively stand by my bedside and dictate who and when and why and with whom I choose to have sex. You may not like it, but that's just the way it is.
#421
Mark
January 27, 2006
01:33 PM
Roseanne, you rock. I appreciate you eloquence and your ability to stay on point, I tend to tangent. I just hope you feel good knowing that you did your best and placed the truth out there in front of them in a very plain and accessible fashion. Choice is an interesting thing, it seems as though these days people would rather allow the possibility of making the wrong choice over and over instead of ensuring themselves the chance to make the right choice every time. Freedom means making decisions right? (small tangent here for those using the rights clause of the constitution when the founders wrote "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" life means LITERALLY, your life, meaning they cant kill you *coughbabiescough*, liberty means PHYSICAL freedom, meaning they cant take away your ability to move freely without just cause and the pursuit of happiness is NOT a catchall.) When people choose something they are trying to get to what they think is good. But we know man is fallible and thats why sometimes when we choose something we think is good it turns out not to be. However, if we can identify the all-good i.e. God, then since He is always good and nothing can ever be seen as better than Him then we still have the ability to make a choice but since we are going to go with what we identify as the greatest good then we are always going to choose God, so we really are in a sense both not-free and totally-free at the same time. take a breath.
#422
Katie
January 27, 2006
04:38 PM
I LOVE YOU! I agree with you enough said!
#423
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
09:36 PM
Roseanne said:
"In the same way, by nature intercourse is designed for a purpose and harm comes when the purpose is denied. There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. Sure I want to tell you how to live your life, because it is for your health and happiness. But if you want to keep driving 85 miles an hour without a seat belt four sheets to the wind, don't say I didn't warn you. And if I can, I will try to get your license taken away before you kill yourself or someone else."
Where are you writing from, Roseanne? I assumed it was from the US, but maybe it's from--say--Saudi Arabia?
Mark said:
"I just hope you feel good knowing that you did your best and placed the truth out there in front of them in a very plain and accessible fashion."
Who's this "them," Mark? The heathens you must convert the way the Christian soldiers did during the Inquisition? Is that what you mean about placing the truth in front of "them?"
The truth, straight up, for real? You two scare the living shit outta me.
#424
KYS
January 27, 2006
10:10 PM
"There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. "
Can you define these laws, please?
#425
Bennett
January 27, 2006
10:49 PM
If I might cut to the chase about Roseanne's "time honored" and "traditional values throughout history" bit.
You ignore the reality that right up to 100 years ago, marriages happened between teenagers, and that you were an "old maid" if you were single and childless at 20.
We now ask our kids to put off for five to ten years, what used to take place at ~16. While subjecting them to ever increasing amounts of sexual stimulation.
We are actually in complete and insane violation of "time honored".
Please explain how we should deal with this perversion of traditional values?
#426
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
11:37 AM
Bennett and KYS:
To quote Katie (comment 422 above):
"I LOVE YOU! I agree with you enough said!"
Heh heh....
#427
Mark
January 28, 2006
12:07 PM
Elvira, what country do you live in? You seem so outraged by what Roseanne said about wanting to prevent people from harming others by having laws in place that punish people making bad choices. To this you responded that she must be living in Saudi Arabia, which seemed strange to me because here in the US we have hundreds of laws which tell you which choices you can and cant make. Why is it that you think only the middle east has a state where the people are told what they can and cannot do.
As far as the "them" go, I was talking about everyone on this forum in the pro-choice camp, it would have taken too long to list them all and I didnt want to say heathens because some of those people are actually Christian. BTW the Inquisition, which is what the world has come to use as a reference point any time someone stands up for their religious beliefs, has been totally misrepresented in the common mindset. During the Inquisition, only those who were baptized members of the Catholic church were brought in, and they were only brought in if they were actively teaching heresy. The numbers have been blown totally out of proportion as well, during the entirety of the Inquisition only a few hundred, less than five hundred people were actually executed. Those that were executed were given YEARS to come around and to stop teaching in opposition to the Church. They were only executed because it is better to protect the many from being led into sin by eliminating one. But they were given every opportunity to recant. I love how pissed off this is going to make you. You dont scare me....you make me sad.
#428
Mark
January 28, 2006
12:16 PM
Why dont people ever reference the Muslims who swept across northern africa and even pushed east and into Europe converting truely by the sword who killed literally hundreds of thousands of people. I'm tired of people only identifying Catholics as being the only religion to use execution to protect the integrity of their beliefs. However, while in Catholicism it was a sad period of religious corruption, in the Muslim religion it is one of the central tenets of their religon.
#429
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
01:55 PM
Mark:
Why is it that 20-something virgins (HOT or not) and priests (celibate or not) think they know enough about the sex act and what it entails to tell the rest of the world how, why, when and if to engage in it?
" I didnt want to say heathens because some of those people are actually Christian."
AHA! Gotcha! Well, I'm a heathen then I guess--being a Jew and all. Do you wanna see my horns too?
"Why dont people ever reference the Muslims..."
Who do you think I was referring to when I mentioned Saudi Arabia?
"You seem so outraged by what Roseanne said about wanting to prevent people from harming others by having laws in place that punish people making bad choices."
So sex is a "crime" for which people must be "punished" for their "bad choices"--by your rules at least? Ever hear of separation of church and state? If you're talking abortion , that's at least debatable--if Roe v. Wade is overturned then we're talking actual law.
I'd like to know specifically what kind of punishment you have in mind and for what offenses--having sex outside of wedlock? If so, how would you propose to punish these people? Can you spell fascism?
"BTW the Inquisition, which is what the world has come to use as a reference point any time someone stands up for their religious beliefs, has been totally misrepresented in the common mindset. During the Inquisition, only those who were baptized members of the Catholic church were brought in, and they were only brought in if they were actively teaching heresy."
Methinks you are rewriting history, and even if you're not, there's plenty of other examples of religious terrorism by Christians. The Crusades, the pogroms in Eastern Europe, etc etc. etc etc etc........
As a Jew, I do not tell others how to worship. However, I am beset by "Christians" of all stripes who want to tell me that they know the light and the way. Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews for Jesus, people banging on my boyfriend's door as if the apartment is on fire to "talk about the bible" with me, and on and on and on. It's a total, total turnoff, but we do have free speech in this country, thank goodness. But make no mistake: this is not a "Christian" country, despite the fact that the majority of its citizens may be Christian (and there are myriad different branches, most of whom do not see eye to eye on all matters of faith). Exactly what would you propose be done with a Jewgirl heathen such as me?
"You dont scare me....you make me sad."
You not only scare me and make me sad, but you make me mad as hell to boot.
As far as rules, I like the Golden Rule, myself. Covers a lot of ground.
Oh Ruvy in Jerusalem, where are you when I need you?
#430
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
01:58 PM
Mark:
Do you have any idea how maniacal you sound when you try to get all "medieval" on my Jewish ass?
#431
Ruvy in Jerusalem
URL
January 28, 2006
05:38 PM
Elvira, I may disappoint you, just a bit.
Roseanne Sullivan has taken up many of my cudgels - and Bennett has given a pointed response to them. I'll leave it there.
Mark is right about the Inquisition. Baptized Catholics were brought before it to be purified - and to be tortured to rat on others who were not practicing according to the politically or religiously corrrect mantras of the day in Spain, Italy, Mexico, Brasil, and everywhere else that the Catholic church had official status.
What Mark omits is that the people brought before the Inquisition were Jews who were forcibly baptized. Slick, eh? Then there are all those expuslions by Christian rulers of Jews after squeezing every last mark or louis d'or out of them. Mark doesn't mention that, though you can bet that the boys with the cassocks were pressuring the princes and kings to do the expelling and supplying them with data so as to make the exulsions as painful and as hurtful as possible.
The expulsions of Jews from England, Spain and France all were timed to take place on one day - Tish'á b'Av, the day the Temple had been destroyed in Jerusalem. Do you think this was coincidental? I have some beautiful acres of Arizona seacoast to sell you if you do.
By contrast, the Moslems were much less brutal and genocidal - for a long time, anyway. But in the end, when their own empires were swallowing their own vomit, they were as bad as the Christians.
Having lived with Christians hustling their religions down everybody's throat and having learned the assorted ways of giving all these fools the middle finger they deserved, I fully understand how you feel.
But Elvira, you need to realize that we Jews have our own task - to teach the Seven Commandments of Noah. And we've been slacking off on the job for two millennia.
Christianity and Islam in particular, have mostly been interim solutions until we Jews get our own act together to do what OUR job is.
Something for you to ponder.
#432
Mark
January 28, 2006
09:07 PM
When did we stop talking about abortion? thats why ive been saying you shouldnt kill people all this time. i dont care if you have sex, get an STD, die and rot in hell. Sorry to disappoint.
#433
KYS
January 28, 2006
09:39 PM
Mark,
On another thread you seem to care deeply about "genital herpes, gonorrhea, AIDS, prostitution, pedophilia, pornography, etc."
I submit that education is the best weapon against unwanted pregnancy and everything else you've mentioned. NOT an abstinence-only agenda.
#434
Elvira Black
URL
January 29, 2006
02:56 AM
Ruvy:
Thank you! I can wholeheartedly agree with nearly all that you said. As far as the mention of teaching the Seven Commandments of Noah--I recall reading a piece you wrote which talked about this, but I need to re-read and/or get more info.
Offhand, it sounded like it might be prosteletyzing to other faiths, which as I said rubs me the wrong way. The only public instances I've ever encountered of Jews trying to actively bring others to the fold is when they approach people around Purim, ask if they're Jewish, and invite them into their vans to pray. But that's just reaching out to their own who have, in their eyes at least, fallen astray.
Thanks again, Ruvy!
#435
Elvira Black
URL
January 29, 2006
03:14 AM
KYS:
Somehow it doesn't exactly shock me to learn that Mark has visited other forums spreading his heartfelt message of tolerance and goodwill far and wide. Good one.
Mark:
"When did we stop talking about abortion? thats why ive been saying you shouldnt kill people all this time."
You have GOT to be kidding. Your own words in the earlier comments you've left--and your frenzied cheerleading of Roseanne and her harsh yet ill defined brand of religious frontier justice--remain here, alive and well, to mock you.
"i dont care if you have sex, get an STD, die and rot in hell. Sorry to disappoint."
Of course you don't care, now that you know I'm Jewish. After all, I'm doomed to rot in hell anyway, aren't I now?
Disappoint? Sicken and disgust is more like it.
Buh bye now. Don't let the comment box hit you in the ass on the way off my post--which is entitled, BTW, "Pro-life or anti-sex?" and not "pro-life or pro-choice?" for good reason.
#436
KYS
January 29, 2006
03:21 AM
Elvira,
LOL! Silly commenters, they think they won't be seen trying to change their spots on other threads!
#437
Mark
January 30, 2006
04:45 PM
Yeah, KYS you need to read words more carefully and sound them out. take your time. c'mon, you can do this. I never said anything about STDs in that other thread, it was some guy named Howard. H-O-W-A-R-D. I know both our names have an A and an R right next to each other, but this is why sight reading is such a dangerous thing for our society to encourage. Hooked on Phonics worked for me.
#438
KYS
January 30, 2006
08:23 PM
Mark,
You are absolutely right, and I owe you an apology! Thanks for the correction.
However, feel free to stuff the sarcasm.
;)
#439
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:25 PM
Mark, in 353 you said it PERFECTLY!!!
I want to add though, that the reason we call ourselves "Pro-Life" is because we believe that abortion is murder, and murder is wrong. I know that that sounds simple to some and to some it sounds confusing. The reason is because we continue to try and make arguments on how abortion is murder, but those people who are not Christians don't truly see the reason why. I will clearly say that without Christ, you will not see the light and the truth. THIS is because otherwise someone could make the argument that Murder is okay. There has will clearly one-day be a large liberal group of people that are anti-christian supporters*(maybe they already exist) and believe that murder and rape and lying and sex outside of marriage is okay. BUT that is where they will go wrong. The reason abortion was illegal at one time is because Christ was in America and Was America. Now we want to take "God" out of our schools, continue to keep him out of Government policy and look where we are going. I think it is possible for someone to say they don't believe in abortion and be a non-christian, but I don't believe they would have any valid whole-hearted argument to back it up if they do not have Christ in their heart.
#440
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:38 PM
Mark AGAIN, Wonderful argument and perfectly stated in #362. I enjoy that fact that your statements are so true and factual. They further encourage my quest to have abortion illegalized as do many other good Christians. I just wanted to say again to all those people who "think" that Pro-lifers are against any choice in the personal matters. The choice is and ALWAYS will be yours in everything you do in life. We are not against the right to choose, we are just against the legal option that doing so has no repercussions. As stated by Mark before, you can kill somoene if you choose to do so, but you will go to jail, and possibly even have a death sentence. That's what we are advocating; putting the law in its place.
#441
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:45 PM
Redtard, #363 is a very good argument again showing how the government already puts the man who took part in creating that baby in his place and makes him take responsibility for his actions. NOW we need to do the same for the women who decide to have sex outside of marriage and tell her it is illegal to have an abortion, so the only reasonable option is to have the child and deal with her actions appropriately by upbringing her child or by putting her baby up for adoption if she or the father or one of her family members cannot properly take care of the baby.
#442
KYS
February 5, 2006
09:03 PM
Scott,
The facts of conception stand within and without the teachings of the bible. So, what is your view of contriception?
the string of comments that came back. I like "Roseanne, you rock."
I don't like some of the other comments!
8
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
12:50 AM
Roseanne:
You say:
"The posts that scoff about the futility of expecting people not to go to bed outside of marriage are denying the reality that for ages it was understood in the majority of cultures that sleeping with another person is reserved for marriage(except for the occasional disfunctional cultures dug up by anthropologists looking for justifications for their own sexual immorality)"
I am not an expert on this by any means, but I am certain that even in cultures which officially condoned monogamy and marriage, people still did engage in extramarital sex. In some ages and in some cultures, it was simply done more circumspectly. And yes, in my parent's generation the divorce rate was much lower. But extramarital and premarital sex did take place.
I am actually with you on a lot of what you say. My personal experience was that in college I had a series of short term relationships and felt cheapened and cheated ultimately because the men did not feel as I did about commitment. But I considered it one of the lessons of growing up, and before graduation I met a man I would stay with for twenty years, though we never married or had children.
And yes, I do think that the sexual revolution was in some ways a disservice to women. I do think that sex for sex's sake can lead to heartbreak and alienation and despair for some--and that women as a rule are more vulnerable to this.
However, I still think it is a woman's choice. If she chooses to sleep with a guy on the first date, or the tenth date, or wait until marriage, that is her choice. She will, to use a tired cliche, make her own bed and have to sleep in it.
But again, there are women who wait til marriage, have children, a beautiful home, and at the age of 30 or 40 or 50 discover that their beloved husband has been having an affair and wants a divorce. It is simply a sad fact that people do not always mate for life. Personally, I am a romantic and think it very sad when children have to endure the upheaval of divorce. But this is something that noone here has addressed as yet.
Those commenters here who are young and idealistic have never experienced what a long term relationship is. They idealize sex as a spiritual bond, and in the first flush of young passion this is certainly the case. But for many couples, this romantic phase soon passes, and some look for that thrill elsewhere. In fact, millions do. I'm not saying this is "right"--just a fact of life and relationships, at least in our contemporary society.
There are and have been some societies also where a man may have multiple wives, or harems, or mistresses and this is considered the norm. Sad? Unfair? Perhaps--but it is reality, even if it is not always pretty.
Nevertheless, your points are well taken. Young women in particular often go through agony trying to please a man sexually only to be taken advantage of and dumped unceremoniously. However, it is up to each individual to decide for themselves how they will deal with this dilemma. They can choose to wait for marriage if they feel that is best for them. Again, I think this is admirable--just not the way for everyone.
#419
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
12:59 AM
KYS:
Thanks--who knew? (lol).
I value your comments here as the eloquent voice of reason.
T.A. Dodger:
Well put.
JR:
Touche!
Roseanne:
I guess you and I were writing our comments at the same time, and your second one came out before my first one did--or something (lol). I'll read your second one and probably add my two cents again.
#420
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
01:08 AM
Roseanne:
I understand why you believe what you do, but it is not illegal to have sex outside of marriage, and you are not the sex police.
I do not believe that people must have children or even marry if they choose not to. As I said, I never wanted children and had a committed 20 year relationship, with no cheating on either side, through good times and bad. Many people go through three marriages and multiple children in that time. A piece of paper does not a lifetime commitment make, and people break their marriage vows every day.
The implications of what you say are frankly a bit alarming to me. Would you outlaw extramarital sex? That may be acceptable in some other cultures--but not in ours, and I thank heaven for that.
Live your life as you see fit--enjoy--even advocate for what you believe in. But this is not a fascist dictatorship, and you have no right to figuratively stand by my bedside and dictate who and when and why and with whom I choose to have sex. You may not like it, but that's just the way it is.
#421
Mark
January 27, 2006
01:33 PM
Roseanne, you rock. I appreciate you eloquence and your ability to stay on point, I tend to tangent. I just hope you feel good knowing that you did your best and placed the truth out there in front of them in a very plain and accessible fashion. Choice is an interesting thing, it seems as though these days people would rather allow the possibility of making the wrong choice over and over instead of ensuring themselves the chance to make the right choice every time. Freedom means making decisions right? (small tangent here for those using the rights clause of the constitution when the founders wrote "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" life means LITERALLY, your life, meaning they cant kill you *coughbabiescough*, liberty means PHYSICAL freedom, meaning they cant take away your ability to move freely without just cause and the pursuit of happiness is NOT a catchall.) When people choose something they are trying to get to what they think is good. But we know man is fallible and thats why sometimes when we choose something we think is good it turns out not to be. However, if we can identify the all-good i.e. God, then since He is always good and nothing can ever be seen as better than Him then we still have the ability to make a choice but since we are going to go with what we identify as the greatest good then we are always going to choose God, so we really are in a sense both not-free and totally-free at the same time. take a breath.
#422
Katie
January 27, 2006
04:38 PM
I LOVE YOU! I agree with you enough said!
#423
Elvira Black
URL
January 27, 2006
09:36 PM
Roseanne said:
"In the same way, by nature intercourse is designed for a purpose and harm comes when the purpose is denied. There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. Sure I want to tell you how to live your life, because it is for your health and happiness. But if you want to keep driving 85 miles an hour without a seat belt four sheets to the wind, don't say I didn't warn you. And if I can, I will try to get your license taken away before you kill yourself or someone else."
Where are you writing from, Roseanne? I assumed it was from the US, but maybe it's from--say--Saudi Arabia?
Mark said:
"I just hope you feel good knowing that you did your best and placed the truth out there in front of them in a very plain and accessible fashion."
Who's this "them," Mark? The heathens you must convert the way the Christian soldiers did during the Inquisition? Is that what you mean about placing the truth in front of "them?"
The truth, straight up, for real? You two scare the living shit outta me.
#424
KYS
January 27, 2006
10:10 PM
"There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. "
Can you define these laws, please?
#425
Bennett
January 27, 2006
10:49 PM
If I might cut to the chase about Roseanne's "time honored" and "traditional values throughout history" bit.
You ignore the reality that right up to 100 years ago, marriages happened between teenagers, and that you were an "old maid" if you were single and childless at 20.
We now ask our kids to put off for five to ten years, what used to take place at ~16. While subjecting them to ever increasing amounts of sexual stimulation.
We are actually in complete and insane violation of "time honored".
Please explain how we should deal with this perversion of traditional values?
#426
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
11:37 AM
Bennett and KYS:
To quote Katie (comment 422 above):
"I LOVE YOU! I agree with you enough said!"
Heh heh....
#427
Mark
January 28, 2006
12:07 PM
Elvira, what country do you live in? You seem so outraged by what Roseanne said about wanting to prevent people from harming others by having laws in place that punish people making bad choices. To this you responded that she must be living in Saudi Arabia, which seemed strange to me because here in the US we have hundreds of laws which tell you which choices you can and cant make. Why is it that you think only the middle east has a state where the people are told what they can and cannot do.
As far as the "them" go, I was talking about everyone on this forum in the pro-choice camp, it would have taken too long to list them all and I didnt want to say heathens because some of those people are actually Christian. BTW the Inquisition, which is what the world has come to use as a reference point any time someone stands up for their religious beliefs, has been totally misrepresented in the common mindset. During the Inquisition, only those who were baptized members of the Catholic church were brought in, and they were only brought in if they were actively teaching heresy. The numbers have been blown totally out of proportion as well, during the entirety of the Inquisition only a few hundred, less than five hundred people were actually executed. Those that were executed were given YEARS to come around and to stop teaching in opposition to the Church. They were only executed because it is better to protect the many from being led into sin by eliminating one. But they were given every opportunity to recant. I love how pissed off this is going to make you. You dont scare me....you make me sad.
#428
Mark
January 28, 2006
12:16 PM
Why dont people ever reference the Muslims who swept across northern africa and even pushed east and into Europe converting truely by the sword who killed literally hundreds of thousands of people. I'm tired of people only identifying Catholics as being the only religion to use execution to protect the integrity of their beliefs. However, while in Catholicism it was a sad period of religious corruption, in the Muslim religion it is one of the central tenets of their religon.
#429
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
01:55 PM
Mark:
Why is it that 20-something virgins (HOT or not) and priests (celibate or not) think they know enough about the sex act and what it entails to tell the rest of the world how, why, when and if to engage in it?
" I didnt want to say heathens because some of those people are actually Christian."
AHA! Gotcha! Well, I'm a heathen then I guess--being a Jew and all. Do you wanna see my horns too?
"Why dont people ever reference the Muslims..."
Who do you think I was referring to when I mentioned Saudi Arabia?
"You seem so outraged by what Roseanne said about wanting to prevent people from harming others by having laws in place that punish people making bad choices."
So sex is a "crime" for which people must be "punished" for their "bad choices"--by your rules at least? Ever hear of separation of church and state? If you're talking abortion , that's at least debatable--if Roe v. Wade is overturned then we're talking actual law.
I'd like to know specifically what kind of punishment you have in mind and for what offenses--having sex outside of wedlock? If so, how would you propose to punish these people? Can you spell fascism?
"BTW the Inquisition, which is what the world has come to use as a reference point any time someone stands up for their religious beliefs, has been totally misrepresented in the common mindset. During the Inquisition, only those who were baptized members of the Catholic church were brought in, and they were only brought in if they were actively teaching heresy."
Methinks you are rewriting history, and even if you're not, there's plenty of other examples of religious terrorism by Christians. The Crusades, the pogroms in Eastern Europe, etc etc. etc etc etc........
As a Jew, I do not tell others how to worship. However, I am beset by "Christians" of all stripes who want to tell me that they know the light and the way. Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews for Jesus, people banging on my boyfriend's door as if the apartment is on fire to "talk about the bible" with me, and on and on and on. It's a total, total turnoff, but we do have free speech in this country, thank goodness. But make no mistake: this is not a "Christian" country, despite the fact that the majority of its citizens may be Christian (and there are myriad different branches, most of whom do not see eye to eye on all matters of faith). Exactly what would you propose be done with a Jewgirl heathen such as me?
"You dont scare me....you make me sad."
You not only scare me and make me sad, but you make me mad as hell to boot.
As far as rules, I like the Golden Rule, myself. Covers a lot of ground.
Oh Ruvy in Jerusalem, where are you when I need you?
#430
Elvira Black
URL
January 28, 2006
01:58 PM
Mark:
Do you have any idea how maniacal you sound when you try to get all "medieval" on my Jewish ass?
#431
Ruvy in Jerusalem
URL
January 28, 2006
05:38 PM
Elvira, I may disappoint you, just a bit.
Roseanne Sullivan has taken up many of my cudgels - and Bennett has given a pointed response to them. I'll leave it there.
Mark is right about the Inquisition. Baptized Catholics were brought before it to be purified - and to be tortured to rat on others who were not practicing according to the politically or religiously corrrect mantras of the day in Spain, Italy, Mexico, Brasil, and everywhere else that the Catholic church had official status.
What Mark omits is that the people brought before the Inquisition were Jews who were forcibly baptized. Slick, eh? Then there are all those expuslions by Christian rulers of Jews after squeezing every last mark or louis d'or out of them. Mark doesn't mention that, though you can bet that the boys with the cassocks were pressuring the princes and kings to do the expelling and supplying them with data so as to make the exulsions as painful and as hurtful as possible.
The expulsions of Jews from England, Spain and France all were timed to take place on one day - Tish'á b'Av, the day the Temple had been destroyed in Jerusalem. Do you think this was coincidental? I have some beautiful acres of Arizona seacoast to sell you if you do.
By contrast, the Moslems were much less brutal and genocidal - for a long time, anyway. But in the end, when their own empires were swallowing their own vomit, they were as bad as the Christians.
Having lived with Christians hustling their religions down everybody's throat and having learned the assorted ways of giving all these fools the middle finger they deserved, I fully understand how you feel.
But Elvira, you need to realize that we Jews have our own task - to teach the Seven Commandments of Noah. And we've been slacking off on the job for two millennia.
Christianity and Islam in particular, have mostly been interim solutions until we Jews get our own act together to do what OUR job is.
Something for you to ponder.
#432
Mark
January 28, 2006
09:07 PM
When did we stop talking about abortion? thats why ive been saying you shouldnt kill people all this time. i dont care if you have sex, get an STD, die and rot in hell. Sorry to disappoint.
#433
KYS
January 28, 2006
09:39 PM
Mark,
On another thread you seem to care deeply about "genital herpes, gonorrhea, AIDS, prostitution, pedophilia, pornography, etc."
I submit that education is the best weapon against unwanted pregnancy and everything else you've mentioned. NOT an abstinence-only agenda.
#434
Elvira Black
URL
January 29, 2006
02:56 AM
Ruvy:
Thank you! I can wholeheartedly agree with nearly all that you said. As far as the mention of teaching the Seven Commandments of Noah--I recall reading a piece you wrote which talked about this, but I need to re-read and/or get more info.
Offhand, it sounded like it might be prosteletyzing to other faiths, which as I said rubs me the wrong way. The only public instances I've ever encountered of Jews trying to actively bring others to the fold is when they approach people around Purim, ask if they're Jewish, and invite them into their vans to pray. But that's just reaching out to their own who have, in their eyes at least, fallen astray.
Thanks again, Ruvy!
#435
Elvira Black
URL
January 29, 2006
03:14 AM
KYS:
Somehow it doesn't exactly shock me to learn that Mark has visited other forums spreading his heartfelt message of tolerance and goodwill far and wide. Good one.
Mark:
"When did we stop talking about abortion? thats why ive been saying you shouldnt kill people all this time."
You have GOT to be kidding. Your own words in the earlier comments you've left--and your frenzied cheerleading of Roseanne and her harsh yet ill defined brand of religious frontier justice--remain here, alive and well, to mock you.
"i dont care if you have sex, get an STD, die and rot in hell. Sorry to disappoint."
Of course you don't care, now that you know I'm Jewish. After all, I'm doomed to rot in hell anyway, aren't I now?
Disappoint? Sicken and disgust is more like it.
Buh bye now. Don't let the comment box hit you in the ass on the way off my post--which is entitled, BTW, "Pro-life or anti-sex?" and not "pro-life or pro-choice?" for good reason.
#436
KYS
January 29, 2006
03:21 AM
Elvira,
LOL! Silly commenters, they think they won't be seen trying to change their spots on other threads!
#437
Mark
January 30, 2006
04:45 PM
Yeah, KYS you need to read words more carefully and sound them out. take your time. c'mon, you can do this. I never said anything about STDs in that other thread, it was some guy named Howard. H-O-W-A-R-D. I know both our names have an A and an R right next to each other, but this is why sight reading is such a dangerous thing for our society to encourage. Hooked on Phonics worked for me.
#438
KYS
January 30, 2006
08:23 PM
Mark,
You are absolutely right, and I owe you an apology! Thanks for the correction.
However, feel free to stuff the sarcasm.
;)
#439
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:25 PM
Mark, in 353 you said it PERFECTLY!!!
I want to add though, that the reason we call ourselves "Pro-Life" is because we believe that abortion is murder, and murder is wrong. I know that that sounds simple to some and to some it sounds confusing. The reason is because we continue to try and make arguments on how abortion is murder, but those people who are not Christians don't truly see the reason why. I will clearly say that without Christ, you will not see the light and the truth. THIS is because otherwise someone could make the argument that Murder is okay. There has will clearly one-day be a large liberal group of people that are anti-christian supporters*(maybe they already exist) and believe that murder and rape and lying and sex outside of marriage is okay. BUT that is where they will go wrong. The reason abortion was illegal at one time is because Christ was in America and Was America. Now we want to take "God" out of our schools, continue to keep him out of Government policy and look where we are going. I think it is possible for someone to say they don't believe in abortion and be a non-christian, but I don't believe they would have any valid whole-hearted argument to back it up if they do not have Christ in their heart.
#440
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:38 PM
Mark AGAIN, Wonderful argument and perfectly stated in #362. I enjoy that fact that your statements are so true and factual. They further encourage my quest to have abortion illegalized as do many other good Christians. I just wanted to say again to all those people who "think" that Pro-lifers are against any choice in the personal matters. The choice is and ALWAYS will be yours in everything you do in life. We are not against the right to choose, we are just against the legal option that doing so has no repercussions. As stated by Mark before, you can kill somoene if you choose to do so, but you will go to jail, and possibly even have a death sentence. That's what we are advocating; putting the law in its place.
#441
Scott^Pro-Life4-Ever
URL
February 5, 2006
03:45 PM
Redtard, #363 is a very good argument again showing how the government already puts the man who took part in creating that baby in his place and makes him take responsibility for his actions. NOW we need to do the same for the women who decide to have sex outside of marriage and tell her it is illegal to have an abortion, so the only reasonable option is to have the child and deal with her actions appropriately by upbringing her child or by putting her baby up for adoption if she or the father or one of her family members cannot properly take care of the baby.
#442
KYS
February 5, 2006
09:03 PM
Scott,
The facts of conception stand within and without the teachings of the bible. So, what is your view of contriception?
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Quotes from the EWTN 25th Anniversary Family Celebration in San Francisco
EWTN 25th Anniversary Family Celebration in San Francisco
Bill Graham Civic Auditorium, January 28 and 29, 2005
From the prayer of Mother Angelica at the launching of the EWTN satellite transmissions on August 15, 1981: "O God, Lord of heaven and earth. You alone have accomplished all we have done. May this first Catholic satellite television network be a tribute to the beauty of Your Church."
Crucifix over the stage
From Raymond Arroyo's best selling book: Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles:
The misson statement of the Eternal Word Television Network clearly stated its dedication to "the advancement of truth as defined by the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. . . . to serve the orthodox belief and teaching of the Church as proclaimed by the Supreme Pontiff and his predecessors.
----------------------------------
Father Joseph Mary Wolf is one of the original friars in the order created by Mother Angelica, the Missionary Franciscans of the Eternal Word, MFVA. During a pilgrimage in November 2005 to the Holy Land, Father Joseph Mary met Catholic Arabs who live in a precarious situation in Palestinian-owned Bethlehem. They recognized him at the Church of the Nativity and told him that EWTN gives them hope.
Father Joseph hears confession at the SF Civic Center
Father Joseph descends from the stage after Mass on Saturday.
----------------------------------
Michael P. Warsaw, President of EWTN:
Mother Angelica always says that you have to have the courage to do the ridiculous so God can do the miraculous. In 1981, a cloistered 58 year old nun with $200 in the bank and no broadcasting experience started a TV network in a garage. It now reaches 125 million television households in 147 countries and territories. EWTN broadcasts simultaneously in English and Spanish, 24 hours a day. Everything Mother accomplished was based on her trust and faith in God’s providence. Based on her complete and total reliance on God’s awesome providence along with her prayers and sacrifices. Mother Angelica did the ridiculous so God did the miraculous There are all those stories of conversions, the sick and the dying comforted, suicides and abortions averted because of EWTN. We come together to celebrate and give thanks to God. And to thank you our family for your love and support..
Michael P. Warsaw
From the program notes: It is [Mother Angelica’s] suffering and prayers that have helped sustain this Network since her stroke four years ago. . . . It is her hope that this event will save many souls and provide hope for all of those who are affected by loneliness, despair or physical suffering.
---------------------------------
Father Brian Mulhaddy, O.P., Host of EWTN’s upcoming series The Seven Sacraments:
People ask: What does the Church teach [on one topic or another]? But they don’t read the Catechism. .. The source of our faith is not only the Bible but the catechism.
We go to Mass to worship God because He is God, not to fill our emotions.
When someone asks Father Mulhaddy, “What do you think of the DaVinci code?” He answers, “What section do you find it in at the bookstores? FIC-TION!”
---------------------------------
Speaking about the ETWN Media Missionaries: We have $2.1 million a month in expenses. No support from the Catholic communications campaign. We are free as a bird at EWTN because we are not dependent on anyone (bishops or anyone else). Only on the Magisterium. Only on Truth.—Robert Rodriquez, Manager of Volunteer Support.
--------------------------------
Four young men in black tee shirts. The backs of the shirts all read in white letters, “Real Men Watch.” The front each have a different letter, which when they stand together in the right order reads: “E,” “W,” “T,” “N.”
One of the four "real men."
---------------------------
Father Mark Mary Cristina, MFVA, was celebrant and homilist during the reverential Saturday Mass in honor of the feast of St. Thomas Aquinas.
The goal of all evangelization: it’s the Eucharist. St. Thomas’ teachings were used to defend the Eucharist during the Reformation three hundred years later. Father Mark Mary quoted Flannery O’Connor, who listened to an Episcopal friend go on about the symbolism of the Eucharist, and then blurted out, “If it’s only a symbol, I say the heck with it. But she didn’t say “Heck.”
---------------------------
Father Francis Mary, MFVA, Host of EWTN's Life on the Rock
JP II brought millions of young people into the public square. B16 will bring them in. [Pope John Paul II] [Pope Benedict XVI]
He calls San Francisco “Assisi by the Bay.” But also, “The Belly of the Beast.” We stand for the good vs. being bad, nice vs. just mean. He spoke about how the friars were all still coming off the previous Saturday’s Walk for Life. Numbers doubled from last year, protesters decreased. We are the Church Militant. We are engaged in Christian warfare. During the walk, the battle showed itself in prayer, silent meditation, saying the rosary, singing.
We will go into the public square and preach the Gospel of Truth. Thank God for the Catholic Church. The sisters here [Cloistered Poor Clare Nuns from Our Lady of the Angels Monastery] are our prayer support. Priest show you the way and feed you: We give you Jesus, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. Our Leader is Our Lady sand she is always pointing to the Boss. Our Lady has risen up this army of young men with vocations. There are a lot of good guys coming through the seminaries. They desire to be conform to the Truth, not nuance or explain anything away.
We love the life of celibacy. Have no intention whatever to get rid of this long-standing discipline. We’ve seen the quote unquote sexual revolution/deformation, the A bomb that hit the family. The answer is not to go have sex. We as a society have this infatuation with the gift of human sexuality. We as priests freely give that up. We don’t hate marriage or women. Spouse and priest cannot both be done.
We in this JP II generation, we love the Church. We cherish its divinely mandated authority. We have a drop dead love for the Church, not for anything less than the Mystical Body of Christ which is the Church.
Father Franciis Mary Cristina
---------------------------
Deacon Bill Steltemeier: Day 1: When Mother first met him, she said, “How often do you go to confession? He weakly said, “Oh, maybe every 90 days.” He didn’t dare tell her it was more like once every four months. She smiled at him and said, “Try weekly. Or more often.” There are priests hearing confessions on the fourth floor next to the Adoration Chapel. I want all of you to go to confession while you are here. Day 2: Isn’t that a beautiful Monstrance in the Adoration Chapel? It’s been wonderful to see in the Adoration Chapel, tears of joy on the faces of people coming back from confession.
---------------------------
Raymond Arroyo, ETWN news director and author of best-selling Mother Angelica, A Nun, a TV and a Network of Miracles.
Pope Benedict XVI recently wrote the first encyclical about the nature of love. It’s the primordial creative power that moves the universe. Mother Angelica harnessed some of that energy. Mother Angelica said, “I am convinced God is looking for dodoes. He found one: me! There are a lot of smart people out there who know it can’t be done, so they don’t do it. But a dodo doesn’t know it can’t be done. God uses dodoes.” Every major thing that God wanted her to do was preceded by suffering. When she started the network, she was 58 years old. She had diabetes. A twisted spine. You pay the cost to be the boss. She was following inspiration and the dictates of her spouse. The struggle. The cross. That’s her real story. Her life has become a parable. She wanted to reach people. She did what she did for love of souls, It was never about TV. For God’s sake, be a dodo!
To a questioner from the audience: Don’t look at the big picture. Do the little things. Begin in prayer and sacrifice. Bet the light in your community. Be the light in your family. Be a faithful spouse. Be faithful where you are.
Bob and Mary Jo Wieland, Raymond Arroyo, Roseanne Sullivan at Arroyo's book signing for Mother Angelica: A Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles
From the book: On her visits to at least nine cities between 1979 and 1980, Mother Angelica preached about the promise of television and the need to support her efforts. “And what if you fail,” On doubter asked. “Then I’m going to have the most lit-up garage in Birmingham,” Angelica fired back from the stage.
---------------------------
A question from the audience on a special edition of former Lutheran Marcus Grodi’s show The Journey Home: “What advice would you give to someone who was where you were?
A: Doug Gonzalez, former minister of the Church of the Nazarene: "If you say 'I will go wherever I have to go to be like Christ,' every road will lead to Rome. Every holy desire is fulfilled in the Catholic Church."
---------------------------
Dale Alquist, Baptist convert, host of an EWTN show called, G. K. Chesterton, the Apostle of Common Sense, told the audience that he started towards the Catholic Church when he did what any good Baptist would do, went to Rome on his honeymoon and started reading G. K. Chesterton. Chesterton wrote things like, “The Christian ideal hasn’t been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult and left untried.” “Chesterton,” Alquist quipped, “Is one of the few writers who have more one liners than Mother Angelica.
-------------------------------------------------
Bob Fishman, convert from Judaism: There is a revival in the Catholic Church and EWTN is a great part of it.
He asked his mother one time, “How come Jews don’t believe in Jesus?” In classic Jewish mother style she retorted, “I don’t have to tell you why . This is my house, and we don’t believe in Jesus.”
----------------------------------
Johnette Benkovic, Host of EWTN’s The Abundant Lifespoke, often in tears, about the loss of her son Simon in an automobile accident and her husband Anthony’s inoperable cancerous brain tumor, and she said that God is teaching her family to embrace the Cross, “We must take all of our sufferings as a gift from God. We don’t need to go out and look for sufferings. The closer we draw to God, the deeper the suffering we experience.”
Johnette Benkovic
------------------------------
Most Reverend Allen Vigneron, Bishop of Oakland, celebrated and gave the homily during Sunday’s Solemn Mass of Thanksgiving. The Gospel (Mark 1:21-28) speaks of the people of Capernaum being astonished at Jesus’ teaching “for he taught them as one having authority.” Bishop Vigneron said, “We give thanks for Mother Angelica, the Sisters, the Franciscan friars. And we ask God’s blessing on all the coworkers. In the economy of grace a natural observance such as the 25th anniversary celebration today is taken up, healed, and perfected. That’s what we’re about here today. We place on this altar all the sacrifices, offer all the good fruit that these good works have borne, as a pleasing offering to the Father. ... We thank God for all have served the authoritative Word, all who have been a voice for the revelation of God’s saving Word. And for all who have been served.”
Bishop Vigneron gives Communion
Thursday, January 26, 2006
You Never Know When You Get Up in the Morning Where Your Life Might be Headed By the End of the Day
Thursday 1/26/06
This day I came to work half hour late (every day I resolve to be there at 8:30, and almost every day I'm at least 15 minutes later than that, and even though I make it up by working into the evening, I still regret that I misssed the goal). This sign was affixed to the glass door onto the back parking lot:
Please attend company presentation at the
Hilton at 9:30. Maps at reception.
Then after the painful long wait before my computer allows me to log in and the additional painful long wait before the mail
program (Lotus notes) launched, I found this email.
From Joe Millares [our CFO]
To cyus
Subject Please Attend Company Presentation at 9:30
Date: 01/26/2006 04:18 AM
Good Morning Everyone:
Please attend a Company Presentation at 9:30 AM today (Thursday) at the Newark Hilton, 39900 Balentine Drive, Newark. John and Daniel have an important message for everyone. Please arrive on time. Thank you.
Regards,
Joe M. Millares
Chief Financial Officer
Cyclades Corporation
-----------------
Another email from Daniel Delarossa, one of the two co-founders, announced: Cyclades merges with Avocent. In Daniel's email,the news was presented as a way for the company to get more resources to keep growing.
But the reality, when we listened to the Avocent manager whose group Cyclades is joining, is that Cyclades has been sold for $90 million. The two co-founders John Lima and Daniel, will stay for six months, and then they will leave to start another company. Cyclades will be no more.
I asked what's the difference between a merger and an acquisition? And Dave Parry, the Avocent executive, admitted that we were acquired.
The 4 am email was due to the fact that the contract had only been signed at 2 a.m.
This day I came to work half hour late (every day I resolve to be there at 8:30, and almost every day I'm at least 15 minutes later than that, and even though I make it up by working into the evening, I still regret that I misssed the goal). This sign was affixed to the glass door onto the back parking lot:
Please attend company presentation at the
Hilton at 9:30. Maps at reception.
Then after the painful long wait before my computer allows me to log in and the additional painful long wait before the mail
program (Lotus notes) launched, I found this email.
From Joe Millares
To cyus
Subject Please Attend Company Presentation at 9:30
Date: 01/26/2006 04:18 AM
Good Morning Everyone:
Please attend a Company Presentation at 9:30 AM today (Thursday) at the Newark Hilton, 39900 Balentine Drive, Newark. John and Daniel have an important message for everyone. Please arrive on time. Thank you.
Regards,
Joe M. Millares
Chief Financial Officer
Cyclades Corporation
-----------------
Another email from Daniel Delarossa, one of the two co-founders, announced: Cyclades merges with Avocent. In Daniel's email,the news was presented as a way for the company to get more resources to keep growing.
But the reality, when we listened to the Avocent manager whose group Cyclades is joining, is that Cyclades has been sold for $90 million. The two co-founders John Lima and Daniel, will stay for six months, and then they will leave to start another company. Cyclades will be no more.
I asked what's the difference between a merger and an acquisition? And Dave Parry, the Avocent executive, admitted that we were acquired.
The 4 am email was due to the fact that the contract had only been signed at 2 a.m.
Reacting to comment on my comments in my previous blog
KYS wrote: "People can have loving, committed relationships that include sexual intimacy without marriage or children."
TA Dodger wrote: People can love each other without marriage.
But do they? WIthout marriage there is no real commitment. And love that is conditional on an emotion or thrill is not love. Love is an action. It's being there for the other person sometimes even when they can not do us a bit of good.
Gay "committed" couples I've met are promiscuous, with options for "relationships" on the side. If monogamous, their "committments" are usually short-lived.
It's the nature of sexual pleasure (when it is divorced from the bonding and the fruitfulness of engendering a child) to lead to disatisfaction. When the thrill is gone, the person looking for the thrill starts scanning the horizon for someone to regain the thrill with.
If you are a committed heterosexual couple, why not marry? How many movies you see these days show the answer to that question: the person is hoping to find a better partner, and if a better catch comes along the "committment" will be over in a flash, even up to the moment the vows are being pronounced. Or later.
Sure women enjoy intercourse. But they also enjoy being valued for more than orgasmic pleasure. Even the raunchiest woman I have ever met once expressed to me that she feels badly when a man breaks off with her. What she does, she told a group of us out for Mexican at Chili's one noon time, that she goes out and picks someone up. Waiting to see if the man she has a one night stand with is going to call her keeps her from thinking about the loss of the first guy. For even this clearly "sex"-loving woman, the attachment is real and is painful if ended. This woman has since divorced her third husband. To me she is one of a large set of people I've known whose lives show that uncommitted unions lead to an inability to commit.
Intercourse has a biological function and a psychological function, and but the philosophers of sex like Hugh Hefner who helped bring about the overthrow of morality like to pretend it is just an isolated act.
The way we live now:
People are denying the natural law built into their own bodies.
Yes, I'm saying that a bond is created with sexual union, whether or not you like the person or not. Whether or not you are "just using" (what a horrible phrase) that man or woman.
If a woman or a man doesn't want marriage or children, that person should not engage in intercourse, because the natural outcome of the act of what used to be called love is bonding for life and children.
If you really love someone you don't do things that damage them. Having sex outside of marriage is skimming the cream off the top and tossing the rest of the person aside. You are taking that person out of the full context of what they are. You are not building a life with that person and with the to-be-expected lives that are to be born of that union. Everything is conditional, even if you "love." We all know how fast "love" can disappear.
And all of a sudden a conceived child becomes "a by product of conception" instead of a human being. We have made sex our god, and we see that any consequences of worshipping sex are to be endured stoically because they serve the highest goal of life, which is to be free and to have as many orgasms as possible.
Do you know how much you have been brainwashed by the culture you were raised up in? The set of beliefs seem to me to be unreasoned and embraced blindly. THere is no right to have sex. Even for something as mundane as driving is not allowed to people who will not do it responsibly. You don't give someone a car unless they are licensed to drive.
"I don't want to tell you how to live your life any more than I want you to tell me how to live my life."
The Department of Motor Vehicles tells us how to live our lives.The people that make traffic laws tell us how to live our lives. The laws of physics tell us how to live our lives: If you crash into something because you are speeding you hurt yourself and others. These constraints on our freedom are to be desired.
In the same way, by nature intercourse is designed for a purpose and harm comes when the purpose is denied. There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. Sure I want to tell you how to live your life, because it is for your health and happiness. But if you want to keep driving 85 miles an hour without a seat belt four sheets to the wind, don't say I didn't warn you. And if I can, I will try to get your license taken away before you kill yourself or someone else.
There are many people who won't obey any laws because they don't want compromise their freedom. But they are risking a lot.
Freedom is not being free from constraints. Freedom is being free to choose to do the right thing.
TA Dodger wrote: People can love each other without marriage.
But do they? WIthout marriage there is no real commitment. And love that is conditional on an emotion or thrill is not love. Love is an action. It's being there for the other person sometimes even when they can not do us a bit of good.
Gay "committed" couples I've met are promiscuous, with options for "relationships" on the side. If monogamous, their "committments" are usually short-lived.
It's the nature of sexual pleasure (when it is divorced from the bonding and the fruitfulness of engendering a child) to lead to disatisfaction. When the thrill is gone, the person looking for the thrill starts scanning the horizon for someone to regain the thrill with.
If you are a committed heterosexual couple, why not marry? How many movies you see these days show the answer to that question: the person is hoping to find a better partner, and if a better catch comes along the "committment" will be over in a flash, even up to the moment the vows are being pronounced. Or later.
Sure women enjoy intercourse. But they also enjoy being valued for more than orgasmic pleasure. Even the raunchiest woman I have ever met once expressed to me that she feels badly when a man breaks off with her. What she does, she told a group of us out for Mexican at Chili's one noon time, that she goes out and picks someone up. Waiting to see if the man she has a one night stand with is going to call her keeps her from thinking about the loss of the first guy. For even this clearly "sex"-loving woman, the attachment is real and is painful if ended. This woman has since divorced her third husband. To me she is one of a large set of people I've known whose lives show that uncommitted unions lead to an inability to commit.
Intercourse has a biological function and a psychological function, and but the philosophers of sex like Hugh Hefner who helped bring about the overthrow of morality like to pretend it is just an isolated act.
The way we live now:
People are denying the natural law built into their own bodies.
Yes, I'm saying that a bond is created with sexual union, whether or not you like the person or not. Whether or not you are "just using" (what a horrible phrase) that man or woman.
If a woman or a man doesn't want marriage or children, that person should not engage in intercourse, because the natural outcome of the act of what used to be called love is bonding for life and children.
If you really love someone you don't do things that damage them. Having sex outside of marriage is skimming the cream off the top and tossing the rest of the person aside. You are taking that person out of the full context of what they are. You are not building a life with that person and with the to-be-expected lives that are to be born of that union. Everything is conditional, even if you "love." We all know how fast "love" can disappear.
And all of a sudden a conceived child becomes "a by product of conception" instead of a human being. We have made sex our god, and we see that any consequences of worshipping sex are to be endured stoically because they serve the highest goal of life, which is to be free and to have as many orgasms as possible.
Do you know how much you have been brainwashed by the culture you were raised up in? The set of beliefs seem to me to be unreasoned and embraced blindly. THere is no right to have sex. Even for something as mundane as driving is not allowed to people who will not do it responsibly. You don't give someone a car unless they are licensed to drive.
"I don't want to tell you how to live your life any more than I want you to tell me how to live my life."
The Department of Motor Vehicles tells us how to live our lives.The people that make traffic laws tell us how to live our lives. The laws of physics tell us how to live our lives: If you crash into something because you are speeding you hurt yourself and others. These constraints on our freedom are to be desired.
In the same way, by nature intercourse is designed for a purpose and harm comes when the purpose is denied. There are laws about how to live our sexual lives that are for our own good. Sure I want to tell you how to live your life, because it is for your health and happiness. But if you want to keep driving 85 miles an hour without a seat belt four sheets to the wind, don't say I didn't warn you. And if I can, I will try to get your license taken away before you kill yourself or someone else.
There are many people who won't obey any laws because they don't want compromise their freedom. But they are risking a lot.
Freedom is not being free from constraints. Freedom is being free to choose to do the right thing.
Mean New World
Random thoughts some posts I read at http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/14/122726.php.
The posts that scoff about the futility of expecting people not to go to bed outside of marriage are denying reality. For ages it was understood in the majority of cultures that sleeping with another person is reserved for marriage(except for the occasional disfunctional cultures dug up by anthropologists like Margaret Mead who were looking for justifications for their own sexual immorality).
Parents used to protect their daughters from unprincipled men that would take their virginity and discard them. Decent fathers used to advise their sons not to take advantage of women by seeking to have the thrill without being willing to give the love and commitment.
Before the sexual revolution, the norms were different than they are now. When something is illegal or recognized as immoral, only those who are on the fringes are likely to do it. Most people live within the values of their society.
Now everything is legal, and the consequences are horrible. I would argue that separating sex from conception and love and that the violence of abortions are root causes behind child abuse, not the lack of available contraception or lack of access to abortion (which some claim). When love and child bearing and any inconveniences on our way to pleasure are perceived in such a negative light, then a child is seen as an object that can be abused when it interferes with our pleasure. Just as other people are seen as objects in the way we live now.
What we do to our children with this Brave New Morality is damage them. Instead of training our children with the age-old morality that physical "knowing" of a member of the opposite sex belongs only in marriage, we encourage our young people not to "repress" themselves. We now teach that people are incapable of self control.
The truth is that people that have sex outside of marriage are playing havoc with their normal feelings. They have to learn how to repress instead a whole other set of associated feelings that come with sexual union without love or commitment.
The hatred of someone who "clings" or is "possessive" is part of that whole mindset. The real crime is to use without love, but in our society the natural feelings of jealousy, along with the desire to want to "own" or keep the other person in our life after we have given ourselves to that person in that most intimate of all acts, these natural feelings are perceived as being evil and we are taught to repress them.
Liberals in these matters give their children permission to freely engage in a heartless coming of age ritual that in many ways is a mutilation of the soul and body that is equivalent to or even worse than genital mutilation.
When a young woman and man have "sex," for the first time, they enter into a physical union that for the health and happiness of them both belongs in a committed relationship. The consequences are harmful psychologically, physically, morally, and spiritually. Breaking up is hard to do.
Learning how to manage the feelings is the rite of passage I'm speaking of, which is wrong because it teaches people to deny their real feelings in pursuit of an imagined freedom, which ironically often leads to slavery.
Women are especially cheated of the full expression of their natural instincts with that kind of relationship. When I was growing up, future thinkers like Hugh Hefner and Isaac Asimov and Isaac Asimov dreamed of a world like we have now, where a person could have intercourse with a stranger without any ties. Women's instincts are for child bearing and love of husband and children, but they are being taught the perversion of their natural instincts is for their good. Abortion, the violation of a woman's natural feelings of love for the fruit of her womb, is for the convenience of people like Hefner, whose vision of freedom is freedom to use women who are always young, never dependent, never fertile, never inconvenient.
Learning how to let go of someone with whom you have the sexual union is painful. Drugs and alcohol and meanness help dull the pain and guilt. Everyone acknowledges that when a "relationship" ends, it is like a little death. It can take six months or often a lifetime to recover from losing a person who is connected to you whether or not you want to admit the connection exists. Our society denies the connection exists, but that does not make it any less real.
The person who is rejected (the dumpee) is always diminished in their sense of their own value. How can that other person have known me so deeply and found me unworthy of love?
A lifetime of making and breaking these bonds has many evil consequences, and one of them is the people who are schooled in immoral sex find it very hard to make real and lasting commitments.
They start with what used to be called love, and don't call it love unless it suits them.
It's like we don't call a baby in the womb a child unless it suits us. A man can be tried for killing an unborn child if he kills a pregnant mother, but society paradoxically says that for a woman to kill a baby in her own womb is not murder.
Words used to deny the reality of love and of life are lies.
Don't laugh at the idea that you can avoid sexual disease and unwanted pregnancies by not having sex until marriage. Don't forget that for ages upon ages humans understood the natural results of intercourse are both a permanent connection with the other person and the creation of new life.
Just because birth control was invented doesn't mean that it is a good thing for the human race. If a pill gets invented that reliably enables people to eat more than they need without the food being converted into bodily nutrition and fat reserves, that won't make gluttony a good thing either.
People bond because they do literally become one flesh, whether or not they even like each other. Separating from that bonding is traumatic, but people accept the pain because it's part of the illusion of freedom that we value so highly. And when the person gets trained into lust separated from love, that person probably learns to be very cavalier about the pain that the pursuit of lust causes in their dealings with other people.
Oh Mean New World that has such values in it.
PS. People often claim that Jesus did not speak out against fornication or homosexual practice, so they claim that Jesus thought it was enough to love our neighbor. Jesus didn't speak against these obvious evils because he didn't have to. Everybody in the Jewish culture of that day understood that fornication and homosexual practice are evil. Jesus didn't speak out against a lot of other bad things like murder or child abuse, but that didn't mean he was saying that we could do these things as long as we were baptized and believed in the Gospel. It was left to the authors of the early Christian epistle to spell these things out, because the epistles were often writing to people from differing cultural backgrounds who may not have been taught God's laws for healthy living. "Shun sexual immorality," St. Paul had to write to the Corinthians, for example, because the Corinthians' culture, like our own, had made sex an object of workship. The Jews had been chastized over the centuries for such practices, and had learned that lesson. At the time of Christ, worship of the True God and expectation of the Messiah was part of the air all the Jews breathed.
The posts that scoff about the futility of expecting people not to go to bed outside of marriage are denying reality. For ages it was understood in the majority of cultures that sleeping with another person is reserved for marriage(except for the occasional disfunctional cultures dug up by anthropologists like Margaret Mead who were looking for justifications for their own sexual immorality).
Parents used to protect their daughters from unprincipled men that would take their virginity and discard them. Decent fathers used to advise their sons not to take advantage of women by seeking to have the thrill without being willing to give the love and commitment.
Before the sexual revolution, the norms were different than they are now. When something is illegal or recognized as immoral, only those who are on the fringes are likely to do it. Most people live within the values of their society.
Now everything is legal, and the consequences are horrible. I would argue that separating sex from conception and love and that the violence of abortions are root causes behind child abuse, not the lack of available contraception or lack of access to abortion (which some claim). When love and child bearing and any inconveniences on our way to pleasure are perceived in such a negative light, then a child is seen as an object that can be abused when it interferes with our pleasure. Just as other people are seen as objects in the way we live now.
What we do to our children with this Brave New Morality is damage them. Instead of training our children with the age-old morality that physical "knowing" of a member of the opposite sex belongs only in marriage, we encourage our young people not to "repress" themselves. We now teach that people are incapable of self control.
The truth is that people that have sex outside of marriage are playing havoc with their normal feelings. They have to learn how to repress instead a whole other set of associated feelings that come with sexual union without love or commitment.
The hatred of someone who "clings" or is "possessive" is part of that whole mindset. The real crime is to use without love, but in our society the natural feelings of jealousy, along with the desire to want to "own" or keep the other person in our life after we have given ourselves to that person in that most intimate of all acts, these natural feelings are perceived as being evil and we are taught to repress them.
Liberals in these matters give their children permission to freely engage in a heartless coming of age ritual that in many ways is a mutilation of the soul and body that is equivalent to or even worse than genital mutilation.
When a young woman and man have "sex," for the first time, they enter into a physical union that for the health and happiness of them both belongs in a committed relationship. The consequences are harmful psychologically, physically, morally, and spiritually. Breaking up is hard to do.
Learning how to manage the feelings is the rite of passage I'm speaking of, which is wrong because it teaches people to deny their real feelings in pursuit of an imagined freedom, which ironically often leads to slavery.
Women are especially cheated of the full expression of their natural instincts with that kind of relationship. When I was growing up, future thinkers like Hugh Hefner and Isaac Asimov and Isaac Asimov dreamed of a world like we have now, where a person could have intercourse with a stranger without any ties. Women's instincts are for child bearing and love of husband and children, but they are being taught the perversion of their natural instincts is for their good. Abortion, the violation of a woman's natural feelings of love for the fruit of her womb, is for the convenience of people like Hefner, whose vision of freedom is freedom to use women who are always young, never dependent, never fertile, never inconvenient.
Learning how to let go of someone with whom you have the sexual union is painful. Drugs and alcohol and meanness help dull the pain and guilt. Everyone acknowledges that when a "relationship" ends, it is like a little death. It can take six months or often a lifetime to recover from losing a person who is connected to you whether or not you want to admit the connection exists. Our society denies the connection exists, but that does not make it any less real.
The person who is rejected (the dumpee) is always diminished in their sense of their own value. How can that other person have known me so deeply and found me unworthy of love?
A lifetime of making and breaking these bonds has many evil consequences, and one of them is the people who are schooled in immoral sex find it very hard to make real and lasting commitments.
They start with what used to be called love, and don't call it love unless it suits them.
It's like we don't call a baby in the womb a child unless it suits us. A man can be tried for killing an unborn child if he kills a pregnant mother, but society paradoxically says that for a woman to kill a baby in her own womb is not murder.
Words used to deny the reality of love and of life are lies.
Don't laugh at the idea that you can avoid sexual disease and unwanted pregnancies by not having sex until marriage. Don't forget that for ages upon ages humans understood the natural results of intercourse are both a permanent connection with the other person and the creation of new life.
Just because birth control was invented doesn't mean that it is a good thing for the human race. If a pill gets invented that reliably enables people to eat more than they need without the food being converted into bodily nutrition and fat reserves, that won't make gluttony a good thing either.
People bond because they do literally become one flesh, whether or not they even like each other. Separating from that bonding is traumatic, but people accept the pain because it's part of the illusion of freedom that we value so highly. And when the person gets trained into lust separated from love, that person probably learns to be very cavalier about the pain that the pursuit of lust causes in their dealings with other people.
Oh Mean New World that has such values in it.
PS. People often claim that Jesus did not speak out against fornication or homosexual practice, so they claim that Jesus thought it was enough to love our neighbor. Jesus didn't speak against these obvious evils because he didn't have to. Everybody in the Jewish culture of that day understood that fornication and homosexual practice are evil. Jesus didn't speak out against a lot of other bad things like murder or child abuse, but that didn't mean he was saying that we could do these things as long as we were baptized and believed in the Gospel. It was left to the authors of the early Christian epistle to spell these things out, because the epistles were often writing to people from differing cultural backgrounds who may not have been taught God's laws for healthy living. "Shun sexual immorality," St. Paul had to write to the Corinthians, for example, because the Corinthians' culture, like our own, had made sex an object of workship. The Jews had been chastized over the centuries for such practices, and had learned that lesson. At the time of Christ, worship of the True God and expectation of the Messiah was part of the air all the Jews breathed.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Linking to ProLife Blogs.com
ProLifeBlogs"
This link is to meet a requirement for being connected to ProLifeBlogs.
I just want to post the blog I wrote about the prolife march in San Francisco today.
roseannesullivan.blogspot.com/2006/01/march-for-life-san-franciscco
This link is to meet a requirement for being connected to ProLifeBlogs.
I just want to post the blog I wrote about the prolife march in San Francisco today.
roseannesullivan.blogspot.com/2006/01/march-for-life-san-franciscco
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
