|
June 24, 2003
Some of these Ayatollahs
Events keep confirming my pessimistic view that compromise with religious fundamentalists is utterly impossible. It would seem that on this point at least, the fundamentalists agree with me. I guess I should be thankful that we still have the First Amendment. First, (from Instapundit) there's this none-too-magnanimous letter to Jonah Goldberg: No clear-thinking person believes that the homosexual sexual ethic and that of the family-based society can peacefully coexist. The opposing presuppositions about sexuality, marriage, family and culture inherent in these world views are contradictory and mutually exclusive. One must prevail at the expense of the other. We can't "peacefully coexist?" "One must prevail at the expense of the other?" What does this language mean? Speaking that way -- in the name of any religion -- evokes very dark periods in history, as well as recent periods in the past: "Death to compromisers!" -- Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini At least guys like Mr. Lively can't issue fatwas against those they deem heretical. What really gets me is what I blogged about yesterday -- the sneaky and underhanded way the radical fundamentalists, like the Communists whose tactics they share, try to hide their true agenda. They don't merely want to cure homosexuals; they want to imprison those who would refuse their "cure." But they keep hiding it, making it tougher and tougher for the public to catch on -- just as the above letter was printed in the hard copy of the Washington Times but never appeared on their web site. This forces people to scurry around, combing through some very dreary web sites. I don't like it at all, as I have better things to do with my time. Anyway, because Scott Lively seems to enjoy evasion and obfuscation, I feel obligated to share the fruits of my research with you. Meet Scott Lively, the man. If he shuts that down, try this lively page. His primary organization. (Lively launched Abiding Truth Ministries.) This is the same outfit I have been complaining about for constantly changing its web sites. Really, it's like pulling teeth getting the truth out of these guys. They want to pose as quasi-medical "helpers" of homosexuals, when in reality they want to imprison them. As I said before, I don't think the goal here is to help homosexuals learn the fine arts of vaginal-penile intercourse. Lively also argues that Hitler was gay, and he has been pestering Jewish organizations and the National Holocaust Museum to stop portraying homosexuals as Holocaust victims and instead tell the world that the Nazi movement was gay. (A fact which, if true, proves what? That we need to copy Nazi Germany's sodomy laws?) Interesting that Mr. Lively's book was endorsed by R. J. Rushdoony a man well-known for publicly demanding the death penalty for homosexuals, and (why should this surprise anyone?) for his Holocaust denial. Also (again, not surprisingly) Lively has written for Rushdoony's magazine, The Chalcedon Report. Forgive me for getting carried away here. I know this blog is supposed to be about Classical Values, but I just get a little hot under the collar when a Holocaust denier accuses me of being part of the Holocaust. Where was I? Oh yes, here are a couple of pieces of Lively advice: help for Republicans Has anyone ever heard of blaming the murderers? I thought I was being a bit hard on the fundamentalists yesterday, because for the life of me I try to be fair and I dislike attacking anyone's sincere religious beliefs. However, sodomy law advocacy goes too far. So does Holocaust denial. So does threatening my right to peacefully exist. posted by Eric on 06.24.03 at 09:16 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
They are despicable, they are The Enemy, and I'm proud to be intolerant of their kind. Legal toleration (i.e., First Amendment), yes. Any other kind, no, none whatsoever, no quarter, no moral sanction whatsoever, none, period. I'll stop calling what they are, ChristiaNazis, the minute they finally stop acting like Nazis or Communists and not one minute sooner.
And, by the way, the first person to bring up "Goodwin's law" has lost the argument. "Goodwin's law" is a crock, and this Prof. Goodwin is either a crypto-Nazi himself or else at best a useful idiot paving the way for another Auschwitz.