So here are some comments, along with commentary to and from JD. "Anonymous" makes a couple points worth noting. Read on:
Anonymous said...
Gotta' admit...I am disappointed in your post on Iran.
Our concern with Iran is Ahmadinejad, nukes, the Islamic fascists and their destabilizing effects on the region and world. They are truly an oppressive brutal group, don't get me wrong on that...but your post is off base. Hope I am not sounding too "intolerant" for you JD.
I cringe whenever I read the word "intolerant" (or any variation thereof). Combine that with your "porn is free speech" crap and welcome to PC land my good man! The ACLU, great defenders of child porn and NAMBLA, would be proud.
Your "speech" and tolerance rant is defending what? Porn?...porn has destroyed so many, many individuals: those directly being used (and thrown away) by the industry and those countless more who are addicted to the crap (not to mention the destroyed marriages, families and violent crime). Though I am inclined to agree that capital punishment...may(?)...be a bit "cruel and unusual" here...with, perhaps, the exception of the sick ba$tards that publish the "rape" and child porn. Clearly, we have become a use and throw away society with disposable babies (oops fetuses or embryos...sorry) & disposable adults (oops vegetative Terry Schiavo's), etc.. We use people, love things and worship ourselves. Sorry...got on a jag...bottom line...Porn degrades and dehumanizes.
Let's get back to your other point of confusion Mr. Flynt. The filming and distribution of immoral, abusive and shamefully degrading treatment, of primarily women and children, is NOT a "free speech" issue. The first amendment was never intended to protect ALL "speech," including obscenity. Ever heard of that free speech called slander or libel? Oh yeah...you can go to jail for that too. Never mind. But...if you want to show a horse and a young lady getting friendly...well hey...go for it...it's America dammit...not Iran. Any half-wit, myself included, who gives our founding father's materials an honest read can see that.
I suppose the delegates in Massachusetts were really pro-same sex marriage but simply forgot to include that in their state constitution. Just gotta hate those typo's. It was in there somewhere..oh yeah....right after the "our Creator" section. So much absolute evil has been justified by our socially liberal friends based on "rights" and "penumbras" (i.e. Roe v Wade...how many millions of pre-born?) and the imaginary "separation of church from state." Sorry....one of those jag things again.
Please be clear on this...I am not using this to justify any Saddam type death squads or the murder of abortionists, etc. But right is right and wrong is wrong. Porn is wrong.
June 15, 2007 10:56 PM
JD's Page said...
My commentary was not on porn. The gist was the “blind eye,” “see-no-evil“ attitudes of people who stomp on us for “oppression”, when our tolerance of expression is clearly the most beautiful of rights. I have no commentary endorsing or condemning porn. Your porn could be my adult entertainment which could be someone else’s Sears Catalog which could be another’s chat with their prepubescent child. To echo a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, I don’t know how to describe it, but I know it when I see it (paraphrased).
I’m also not here to advance my “moral agenda.” That bit of wisdom is between me, God and my children. I’m interested in being as tall to them as God will allow. As for judgment, I thank God for giving me a fair amount of it, and for showing me how to reserve plenty of it.
My post is also a continuation of a point (made in several previous posts) on how the left pounds on human rights (that would be women’s rights) right hear in the States, yet call the Iranian government, et al., friends, and Ahmadinejad a peach.
You pulled a lot of emotional debate from my 164 words on Iran…enough to address me as Mr. Flynt. I guess I admire your imagination.
Thanks for the comment. I truly do appreciate it!
JD.
June 16, 2007 12:01 AM
Anonymous said...
JD
Thanks for your post and follow up.
The Flynt comment was, dare I say it given the topic, "tongue-in-cheek" for fun. I am, indeed, very passionate about such topics. These are, and should be, emotional issues. Not in the sense of irrational & out of control, but in the "be angry, but do not sin" sense. They should be front and center.
Back to your post. Agreed. I intentionally took your commentary in a complete 180. I do not disagree that our precious liberties are being challenged and are shrinking before our very eyes. As much as I would love to see the "God Hates Fags" Westboro Baptist folks beaten, it is indeed their right to spew their nonsense or someone else's right to worship allah, etc. I also agree, though I did not read your previous posts, with the fact that the left is amazingly hypocritical on most issues, especially on "human rights."
But you miss and make my point. You speak of the blind eye and see-no-evil and go on to say, "Your porn could be my adult entertainment..." yada yada yada... Talk about "slipping," "blind eye," and "see-no-evil"...WOW! The what "consenting people [don't need to be adults anymore] do behind closed doors" crowd would be proud. Again, you land in the ACLU's court. You gotta keep better company. You talk from the "right" (politically) but your arguments sure sound like the morally bankrupt left. The standard fair from the left, for example, is I am personally against abortion, but believe in a women's right to choose...gag me.
Our freedoms and the "most beautiful of all rights" are ours solely because the constitution and laws of the great country are founded on very specific beliefs. The Judeo-Christian heritage held by most of our founding fathers is the elephant in the room that too many simply choose to turn a blind eye to or to rewrite and deny. The fact that laws must be based on a rock-solid moral foundation is lost on too many. If law is based on a 60s feel good, relative morality, we are, as a society, toast. You must draw a line in the sand. This requires discernment, not the nasty PC "judgement" word you use.
I applaud your teaching your children right and wrong and about God. Christ called us to be "salt and light" and to hang our "lamp stand" high so our light shines, not to place it "under a basket" where no one will see it.
In short, you cannot separate your morals from your politics, JD.
June 16, 2007 10:14 AM
JD's Page said...
If there is one attribute I universally admire in this wonderful world, it is informed passion! You apparently have an abundance.
Thanks for the lecture, but I’m going to hang my “lamp stand” high and tell you…I’m not looking to live up (or down) to your moral code.
On your abortion point and what you see as one of the Left’s hypocrisies; conversely, I don’t call myself pro-life and then cheer for the death penalty. Real world observation?...even some morals are interpretable.
Political correctness works in all directions, which is one of the reasons I don’t much care for it. I’m not going to choose my words to dance around anyone else’s perception of what’s correct and what’s not, “politically” or otherwise. You see, I don’t live my life to satisfy anyone’s code. I base my life and politics on truths as I’ve learned them whether biblically or constitutionally. And the learning never stops. When sense (God’s hand?) tells me I’ve mistaken, I adjust. You may accuse me then, of exercising “relative morality.” I’ve seen too many definitions of morality to think it is not relative. I’ve seen too many hypocrites to think it is not relative…especially on the right.
I appreciate and respect your thoughts and opinions, but they seem a little sanctimonious for me to incorporate.
You said in one sentence that we (I?) “Must draw a line in the sand and that this requires ‘discernment,’ not the nasty PC ‘judgment’ word." Discernment, judgment…semantics. You kind of tackle your own point there. Besides, I never was one for “lockstep,” so if someone dismisses some of my language as PC, I don’t consider that a good reason to change it.
I also want to point to what hopefully is obvious; the Right doesn’t own the moral code. I’ve known too many of these people (at all official, socio-economic and religious levels) to know better…here’s a cliché for you, I wasn’t born yesterday.
I wouldn’t live with the attitude that “if you don’t agree with me, you’re wrong.” I couldn’t learn a thing that way.
I truly appreciate your input. Keep on coming on!
You’re stimulating and fun! (Stimulating isn’t a dirty word, is it?) Just had to take that poke…
Thanks again,
JD.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
WHO SAID PORN WAS GOOD? - TALK BACK THAT'S WORTH SHARING
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
JD
(“You apparently have an abundance") Did you say I was full of it? …smile
Okay…on the proverbial soap box…here we go…
First, and most importantly, it is not my moral code (“I’m not looking to live up (or down) to your moral code”). That would indeed make it relative. If "truth" were truth simply because that is what I “believe” or because that’s what I wastaught as a child, then "people" who blow up school buses in the name of allah (because that is what they were taught and now believe) are doing what is right and true. Stop and think about that. Truth must be true regardless of whether you believe it or not; whether you like or not; whether you even know about it or not. It is must be objective, external and stand in and of itself (semi-mangled quote).
Christ said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6). Christ also stated that he came so that, “[he] should bear witness unto the truth” (Jn 18:37). Lastly, though I do not recall the chapter/verse, “I am the Lord thy God; I declare what is true and what is right.” Sadly, you are correct (especially about the “right”). You are also correct in that there are areas of debate and “interpretation.” Many, even amongst the most so-called” devout” of “Christians,” cannot agree on basic theology and truth. Many others fall big time (e.g. Haggard). This is why, however, you must build on firm ground…placing your faith in the only place that is worthy…Christ. If you put your faith in your Priest, Pastor, Church, Wallet, etc….they can (will) falter and fall. Truth never changes. God never changes. When we remove Christ from his throne and absolute role in salvation and or when we remove the bible from its place of solemn truth and God’s inspired and holy word, we become lost and a falling away is inevitable (e.g. Episcopalian Church, Presbyterian Church USA, etc.).
("Discernment, judgment…semantics.") Nope! Christ said, “Do not judge others, so that God will not judge you, for God will judge you in the same way as you judge others, and he will apply to you the same rules you apply to others. Why, then, do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, and pay no attention to the log in your own eye? How dare you say to your brother, ‘Please, let me take that speck out of your eye,’ when you have a log in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the log out of your own eye, and then you will be able to see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” (Mth 7:1). “Judging” involves the necessity of knowing a man’s heart and motives, something God states that only He knows. The PC folks sadly are happy to quote “judge not!” and go on their way. However, if you recall another story from the good book, an adulteress is being chased by a mob and about to be stoned to death (Jn 8). Christ addressed the mob of (judge, jury and) executioners saying, “…He that is without sin among you, let him first cast the first stone.” (Jn 8:7). Christ chastised the mob (“hypocrites”) for judging and forgave her. But…that is not where He stopped. After the mob left, Christ addressed the adulteress again and stated, “…go, and sin no more” (Jn 8:11). We are called to discern, perhaps distinguish or differentiate are better words, between what is right and wrong. We are also called to forgive (not judge) one another. Christ points out both the hypocrites in their behavior and judgment and He discerns regarding the sin. Not easy to do…but, good stuff, huh?
("…seem a little sanctimonious…") Please understand I could never live up to the moral code of which I speak. I would not even try, if left to my own devices. It is a standard that only one has ever reached. I, in no way, expect anyone to live up (or down) to "me." All of us fall short (Rom 3:23). The Apostle Paul, the guy that wrote 2/3 of the New Testament, referred to himself as the “chief of sinners.” I hate to think where that leaves me…remember that line in Amazing Grace? “..that saved a wretch like me” (probably not too far off, for me). Fortunately, as you have heard, there is “good news.” I am not “perfect”…I am forgiven (SMILE). Not being able to be “perfect” on a personal level, however, does not change “truth.” You may argue and deny that gravity does not exist, but you are still subject to its laws. The fact that all of us are hypocrites does not change truth either. It makes us sinners.
You are flat out correct (“the Right doesn’t own the moral code."). Sadly, many don't even try to follow one either. In the continuum of “right” and “left”, in my personal experience, generally, the folks on the right tend to be more morally conservative. I consider myself a Christian, a "values voter" and a “conservative.” That has, so far in my voting career, except at the state & local judicial level, resulted in my voting on the right/Republican. It will always be, however, a matter of picking the lesser of evils. Let’s hope 2008 will be more “stimulating,” then mind-numbingly painful.
Thank you for your reply, JD
AMEN!
Post a Comment