March 4, 2005

THE FOUNDERS DIDN'T THINK TO INCLUDE A CLAUSE FOR THIS:

Virginia HS Calls Off Talk by 'Gay Porn' Author (Jim Brown and Jody Brown, March 4, 2005, AgapePress)

After hearing from concerned parents, a Virginia high school has canceled a speaking appearance by an author who writes "gay porn."

The program, sponsored by the Gay-Straight Alliance, was originally scheduled for March 11 at Manchester High School in Midlothian. Principal Pete Koste had even approved the speaker, homosexual author Greg Herren, who has written fictional books such as Fratsex: Stories of Gay Sex in College Fraternities and Midnight Thirsts: Erotic Tales of the Vampire. Upon a Midnight Clear: Queer Christmas Tales is also among his titles.

Herren's visit to the school had been planned about a month ago. However, after Chesterfield County Public School officials recently became inundated with phone calls and e-mails from parents who objected to the speaking appearance, superintendent Bill Canaday called off the program. A report in the Richmond Times Dispatch says "a flood of protest e-mails circulated around the county" -- among them one with the heading: "What is being taught in our schools?"


Secularism.

Posted by Orrin Judd at March 4, 2005 6:01 PM
Comments

Excellent point. The seclarist must, perforce, become an enemy of permanent things. Because religion and religious institutions function as custodians of the mos maiorum, to strike out at religion is to be a mindless contrarian,

Thus, to a secularist, buggery becomes a sacrament; likewise abortion. The contrarian institution is never evaluated for its utility per se, rather, it is approved simply and only because its promotion deconstructs religion. Why would any same person embrace evil simply to spite God? No sane person would do so, of course.

Posted by: Lou Gots at March 5, 2005 6:33 AM

It is absurd to blame this on secularism. This would never occur in a public school in either France or Singapore, both nations have some educational standards despite their obvious secularism.

In America, we have some concept that the State must intervene in affairs which normal people throughout the world consider beyond its purview. That is not a function of religion or lack thereof. It is instead the function of a busybody culture where no one has any fundamental respect for the rights and privacy of others. Thus, every single stupid issue ends up in the hands of government or the courts or the schools which are entirely unsuited to deal with them. What we eat, what we smoke, what we drink, what we watch, what our sexual behavior is, who we live next door to, whether we accept others rather than merely tolerate them, how we spend our free time, whether we contribute to the community at large, the list just goes on and on.

Posted by: Bart at March 5, 2005 10:46 AM

Busybody is just another term for neighbor love.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 10:53 AM

Hardly.

It is instead the belief that you know what is best for your neighbor, and that the government should reflect those wishes. It is egomania writ large combined with a strong dollop of disrespect for your fellow man.

OTOH, I neither like, nor love, nor particularly trust my fellow man. But I do treat him with respect. Thus, I do not care what he does so long as I am not affected and if he chooses to push his narrow ideas of how I should live my life, there's always my gun collection.

Good fences make good neighbors.

Posted by: Bart at March 5, 2005 11:45 AM

We do know what's best for our neighbor. The same that's good for us.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 12:09 PM

Nonsense. There are millions of things which if I were the all-powerful Emperor of the Cosmos I would ban like cigars, tattoos, loud noise, Cosmopolitan magazine, MTV, health food stores and cats. But I am not so empowered, nor should I be, and living in society means that we have to give a large berth to the quirks and peculiarities of those around us.

Why draw the line at drugs? Why not fatty foods? Why not cigars?

We don't even 'know' what's best for ourselves, we only think we do and even that changes constantly. The notion that we can make such choices in the private lives of others is egomania on the grandest of scales.

Posted by: Bart at March 5, 2005 12:24 PM

I agree. We should target fatty foods with taxes and ban cigars.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 12:36 PM

If we are going to ban things based on the way they impose side effects on non-partcipants, things like "fatty foods", smoking and alcohol, then we need to add homosexuality to the list (think AIDS and other diseases, or just pedophile Catholic priests).

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at March 5, 2005 12:42 PM

Raoul:

Rather, it should not have been allowed to be taken off by the Court.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 12:51 PM

Bart:

Some states and municipalities do ban tattoos, and have you never heard of noise pollution regulation? Are you unaware of religious conservatives' efforts to stop the negative influences Cosmopolitan Magazine and MTV has on our culture?

Move to a deserted island somewhere if you want to live in some libertarian "paradise."

Posted by: Vince at March 5, 2005 1:14 PM

oj,

So that whole Zone or Atkins Diet thing just blows by you? Should we mandate exercise periods for everyone too? Perhaps have everyone sing the company song at a certain hour? But then as Rodney Dangerfield said,' Because of jogging, more perfectly healthy people are dropping dead in the prime of life than ever before.' I just keep in mind that everything causes cancer in white mice.

The issue is how it affects non-participants and that alone. If you are merely engaged in activity which is perhaps slow-motion self-destruction like too much Pinot Grigio, too many Mallomars or smoking, that is your business precisely because you are not impacting anyone other than yourself. How you choose to dissipate your health and fortune is your business.

I think Cosmo and MTV have dangerous influences on society but it is not the government's role to deal with them. If I date a girl and I find out she reads Cosmo, she doesn't get a second chance, unless she does something significant to countervail that impression. That is my choice. Someone else might be different.

I agree with Lombroso that tattooing is the sign of the criminal class, but I would not bar them under any circumstances, given the fact that we live in a free society.

Vince,

The 'Wild West' was pretty close to a libertarian paradise for about 75 years. When we settle space, that will be another and probably for much longer.

If you want your life micromanaged by the State, North Korea awaits your arrival.

Posted by: Bart at March 5, 2005 3:25 PM

Bart:

We do. Phys ed in school. Corporate exercise periods.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 5:45 PM

Phys Ed in school is a cruel joke, particularly if you are unathletic to begin with. It is the rare company with corporate exercise periods. If we tried it, half my department would be in ICU.

Posted by: Bart at March 5, 2005 6:13 PM

Bart:

Your department just needs a dominatrix to snap the whip. They'd shape up PDQ. Might be a good way to cut insurance costs.

Why do schools think they can slip this dreck past the public? Must be the Peter Principal.

Posted by: ratbert at March 5, 2005 10:12 PM

Bart:

Yes, that's why your company will adopt it--to cut health care costs.

Posted by: oj at March 5, 2005 11:01 PM

Bart:

The West is now the most liberal part of the country. It just shows what libertarianism really leads to.

Posted by: Vince at March 6, 2005 1:18 PM

Lou, that is the most ridiculous dribble that I've seen on this blog for a long time, and that is saying a lot! Exactly why is the secularist an enemy of permanent things?

The secularist argument is precisely about utility, there is no other basis for him. The secularist has no problem agreeing with religious institutions when they promote values that are constructive to society, "constructive to society" being the key qualifier, not "because God(we) say so".

It seems that you are accusing the secularist of precisely the behavior that you commit against him, namely the automatic gainsaying of anything he is for without regard to utility. I guess it is your worst nightmare to ever be caught in an agreement with one.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at March 6, 2005 2:33 PM

Utility is the enemy of permanent things. It elevates personal opinion above all else. The secularist has no basis for anything except himself. That you generally have the decency to accept Judeo-Christian morality, institutions, and the rest even though you have no means of deriving them from your own beliefs just shows that you are a better man than philosopher.

Posted by: oj at March 6, 2005 2:41 PM

Gee, lets make a list of permanent things:

1. One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

2. The Divine Right of Kings.

3. The inviolability of marriage vows.

4. The geo-centric universe.

5. Six day Creation.

6. The dignity of all human beings.

Yes, Christians have quite a track record for maintaining the permanence of things.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at March 6, 2005 5:21 PM

Robert:

The only one gone is Kings, and Europe is rapidly approaching the point where it will realize it needs them still. Who else can serve the interests of the nation alone when the collapse comes?

Posted by: oj at March 7, 2005 8:50 AM

#1 was gone after the Reformation, there is not one church anymore.

#3 is gone, look at the divorce rates among Christians.

#4 is gone, you're just in denial.

#5 - see #4

#6 - slavery, pogroms, witch hunts, inquisitions, .. lets not go over the whole list again. Christians have not been any better at maintaining this value than anyone else.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at March 7, 2005 12:22 PM
« PERILS OF ISLAMOPHOBIA: | Main | STILL ON THE CUTTING EDGE: »