Posted on 02/15/2005 11:16:43 PM PST by Keyes2000mt
I think Alan DOES owe us an explanation. First, he is a leader and secondly, he's always said, yes stated that he would not remain silent on matters that are important. The situation with his daughter is importantant. The man has staked a claim in absolutes. If you absolutely do something, the absolute result will occur. There is a problem with his daughter that the absolute inputs did not equal the absolute outputs. If you believe as does Alan that Maya's sexuality is simply a matter of choice, then some input was faulty. If the equation of absolutes is in fact valid, then some input was in error. If the faulty input is not discovered to show and teach people not to repeat it, then Alan has missed the mark then he has so often stated that he will not remain silent with regard to matters of importance.
BULL! Anyone with any maturity knows that the rantings of a sullen teenager do not merit explainations, even if they appear in the press.
If Alan is worth his salt, then the issue is to get to the root cause and explore it so it is avoided in every future family, expecially if the root cause is internal and not external.
Alan has always been quick to make broad brush sweeps on matters such as this. If he hadn't in the past, then yes, I would say it would be a family matter. But he hasn't and if it were someone else, he likely would have not remained silent, especially if coming from the other side of the political spectrum. If Desi Arnaz was alive today he would be saying "Alan, you got some 'splainin to do."
I like how you think we NEED to know more than you've already admitted to on your blog. One fly spoils the whole bowl, kiddo.
You're assuming what you say about absolutes makes sense. It does not. I'm not critisizing your thinking; it's your writing.
Are you torqued because of her coming out or are you torqued because it hurts someone you hold in high esteem.
That's not the issue that precipitated all this.
I'm torqued because I'm surrounded by IDIOTS that can't see the frickin' emperor is naked.
I'll type this slow for you...she says on her own blog he threw her out in response to her activities at the counter-inaugural.
Ok, so the counter inagural caused her to be evicted. What is the cause of her being a lesbian?
Come on Joe. You've been reading these threads. Speculation like that is as useful as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, and only confuse the relevant issues.
The part that concerns us as the public was a stealth attack by trying to use a "McGreevey" defense.
Either absolutes don't equal absolute outcome or there was a straying from the absolute somewhere.
What absolute are you claiming was violated?
First of all, I don't think the issue has ever been that homosexuality is purely a choice. We all understand there are reasons that people get caught up in homosexuality.
In writing this article, I had to walk a very fine line between providing information that clarified the truth of the situation and being far too invasive in posting a lot of personal details.
I mean you can certain form an analysis of why Ms. Keyes is a lesbian just by going through her blog, but it's the type of thing that is very unseemly for a father to discuss in public.
It's also very painful and I'm certain there's a lot of "where did I go wrong" analysis that Dr. Keyes has himself.
One thing Dr. Keyes said back in December, he was asked about pullings kids out of public school. Keyes responded that he couldn't give a flat answer because he'd done both. He said he'd kept the kids in public school until "the results got too bad".
So, the lesson I take from this is "Homeschool Your Kids" and monitor the type of cultural input they get very closely during their formative years. However, beyond that, I don't think he's required to go through self-flagulation in public and to make a speech, "Where I went wrong and failed as a parent" in order to please people. Again, such analysis of the most private areas of life would be beneath most people who wouldn't appear on the Jerry Springer show.
If we are going to hold to that thesis, then there was an absolute(s) that were violated. It's up to Alan and Maya to explain those.
Frankly to allow his surrogates to provide formal responses is ducking accountability.
If we are going to hold to that thesis, then there was an absolute(s) that were violated. It's up to Alan and Maya to explain those.,
I'm not wanting to make an enemy out of you Joe, but that's got to be the most doctrinaire and pathetic attempt to justify fishing for lurid details I've ever seen. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Really.
What adult is supposed to take you seriously when you spout tripe with the logical cohesion of "smoking dope is illegal" therefore "smoking cigarettes is illegal." That's exactly what you're saying about absolutes. Are you sure you're not fourteen?
C'mon you know better.
Will you accept G-d's explaination? He says the willful rejection of divine axioms causes habitual homosexual behavior. Read Romans 1:18-32.
Dude! That's what you're saying. It may not be what you mean, but that's what's coming across.
Alan's never shied away from making his views known, no matter the consequences. So have him come forward.
Alan's always stated that we must follow absolutes to accomplish what is intended for us. Either that failed or an absolute was violated. Now is the time for Alan to do some deep inner reflection and come forward with either defending his beliefs about absolutes or explain how one was violated.
You know, for the first time Alan may have to explain in plain words and not his usual Alanspeak something critical about life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.