Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No return to the closet [HYPER MEGA PUKE ALERT]
Idiot Acharonot ^ | July 9, 2006 | Fania Oz-Salzberger

Posted on 07/09/2006 9:26:39 AM PDT by Alouette

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last
To: Alouette
Dr. Fania Oz-Salzberger is a senior lecturer at Haifa University and the head of the Posen Forum for political thought.

Thought? Is there any thinking involved here?

21 posted on 07/09/2006 10:26:09 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
All our modern pathologies stem from the psychotic pursuit of an "objective morality" apart from the decrees of the Creator. To a Thenomic positivist (for whom "morality" simply means "regulation by Divine decree") any appeal to "justice," "morality," "tolerance," "peace," "democracy," etc., by non-Theists are simply square circles. And since right and wrong are determined by G-d's decrees, neither can a Theonomic positivist be shamed by references to slavery, holy wars, or anything else whatsoever. What is just, right, and moral is by G-d's decrees and are not subject to critique from eighteenth century rationalist philosophies (or from anything else).

Communism's great error is not its collectivism or even its mass murders, but simply its insistence that an objective morality can exist in the absence of G-d. This means that there is no real difference at all between Marxists and the atheist Randians (many of whom are members of this forum). It is the positing of an "objective morality" apart from HaShem that is the source of all our troubles.

Do these secular, anti-religious Jews ever consider the possibility that HaShem, the Jealous G-d of Israel Who commanded Israel's wars of old, just might actually exist and might still be G-d? Why are secularists the only people on earth who never face gnawing doubts about their fundamental assumptions?

May Mashiach HaMelekh come immediately, and may he turn back the clock 3300 years! And when the time arrives, may HaShem turn back the clock to Gan `Eiden!

22 posted on 07/09/2006 10:28:16 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Noladeti beShabbat Pinechas. Zo't meva'eret `alay harbeh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
"There is no way to turn back the clock."

The motto of moral (so-called) relativists, as though the passing of time automatically confers desired, and inevitable, progress and advancement of civilization.

For some reason atheists, who adamantly insist that there is no design or teleology in nature, insist on seeing it in history. History is "a budding rose unfolding," working its way upward, upward, ever upward (never any reverse currents) to absolute justice and perfection. It's not just the idea of the "inevitablilty" of the historical outcome that so puzzles me--it's its supposed inherent morality. Although there is no Programmer, human history is somehow programmed to end in perfection. All the protestations of belief in randomness ring hollow in the moral fury of people who believe the progress of history is being "thwarted."

Perhaps the answer lies in Hegel. Herr Hegel was some sort of pantheist who believed the world was creating G-d. Is there any other way to understand the fanatical moralism and teleology of the "atheists?"

23 posted on 07/09/2006 10:36:24 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Noladeti beShabbat Pinechas. Zo't meva'eret `alay harbeh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

It is NOT a "Pride" parade. It is a "GAY Pride" Parade. and I will continue to call it by its real name.


24 posted on 07/09/2006 10:56:27 AM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Well put. It reminds me of a "discussion" I've been dabbling in with a homosexual agenda promoter yesterday (on FR). I pointed out that anyone who espouses moral relativism [sic] is not only a hypocrite, but the very tenets of moral relativism are found on and permeated with hypocrisy. If they really believed that there are no moral absolutes, they'd be perfectly happy that others see things differently. It'd be no skin off their nose.

But your point about the supposed perfection of evolving civilization, while they deny any Creator or divine planner, is another very telling example of their insane hypocrisy. They are actually psychotic - to believe that which is so profoundly not so.
25 posted on 07/09/2006 11:34:43 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Libertina

It is not a "gay" pride parade. It is a "Sexual Perversion" pride parade.


26 posted on 07/09/2006 11:40:41 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
... it is difficult for you to see homosexuals and lesbians, alongside their straight supporters, marching through the holy city with their heads held high...

Only imbecilic "straights" support homosexuality and their perverted satanic agenda for America and the world!

Why would their heads be held high?

They achieve their filthy orgasms in a way that is condemned by God and radically opposed to the Ten Commandments.

Further, they spread deadly disease amongst themselves and the rest of the populace with reckless abandon.

When one examines the world's serial killers one finds that the large marjority are committed by homosexuals.

They prey on little boys. They want their filthy hands on our children and grandchildren.

They are the shame of polite society and have become a disgrace to humanity!

27 posted on 07/09/2006 12:52:25 PM PDT by HansGygi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertina
Unfortunately, the word "gay" is most certainly misplaced when applied to this gaggle of degenerates.

It should be labeled "Pervert Parade."

Gay used to mean, and still should, happy and fun=loving.

There's nothing "fun" about homosexuals.

28 posted on 07/09/2006 12:54:31 PM PDT by HansGygi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

Gay pride: desperate emotional appeals for acceptance and love. Look, I'm sorry you're unstable, but you need help, not applause. The homosexuality is simply acting out.


29 posted on 07/09/2006 1:30:17 PM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Well put. It reminds me of a "discussion" I've been dabbling in with a homosexual agenda promoter yesterday (on FR). I pointed out that anyone who espouses moral relativism [sic] is not only a hypocrite, but the very tenets of moral relativism are found on and permeated with hypocrisy. If they really believed that there are no moral absolutes, they'd be perfectly happy that others see things differently. It'd be no skin off their nose.

The freaking hypocrites think that removing G-d from the equation causes sexual morality to collapse as an anachronism while leaving "thou shalt not kill" intact and adding rules against "hatred" and "intolerance." Apparently "morality" only means "sexual morality" for some reason.

But your point about the supposed perfection of evolving civilization, while they deny any Creator or divine planner, is another very telling example of their insane hypocrisy. They are actually psychotic - to believe that which is so profoundly not so.

Unfortunately there are a lot of atheists here on FR (only capitalists instead of socialists) who are every bit as hypocritical as their Marxist co-"religionists." And their nastiness and billowing sense of superiority fufill every stereotype of an atheist you could possibly have.

30 posted on 07/09/2006 5:21:37 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Noladeti beShabbat Pinechas. Zo't meva'eret `alay harbeh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

I agree 100%. Taking the Supreme out of the equation is like taking the sun from the daytime. Their attempts will fail miserably but cause great suffering.


31 posted on 07/09/2006 6:03:33 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker
Two men kissing is just really icky. In public, it's disgusting. A bare-shouldered woman is not. Maybe provocative depending on the shoulders. But definately not icky or disgusting. That difference is never going to change. The vast majority of people will always, either publically or in secret, regard two men kissing as stomach turning.

It can be a whole lot worse than two men kissing. If you happen to live in a city like Seattle or San Francisco there are a lot of gay men who seem to seriously consider having sex in a public restroom as a civil right. Once in a blue moon the police will decide to bust them, (remember George Michael), and then they'll start screaming about homophobia, discrimination, racism and everything else. Everything that is but acknowledging that there is something fundamentally wrong with "screwing" in a public restroom.

32 posted on 07/09/2006 9:18:29 PM PDT by elmer fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

I can't remember--is " Hyper Mega Puke Alert" worse than "Uncontrollable Projectile Vomiting Alert"?


33 posted on 07/09/2006 9:30:13 PM PDT by exit82 (If Democrats can lead, then I'm Chuck Norris.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator; little jeremiah
The freaking hypocrites think that removing G-d from the equation causes sexual morality to collapse as an anachronism while leaving "thou shalt not kill" intact and adding rules against "hatred" and "intolerance." Apparently "morality" only means "sexual morality" for some reason. My tentative personal opinion is that religion arose primarily as a means to control the members of the societies in which they orginated with "carrots and sticks" that reached beyond the mortal world. If I am right about this (and I'm fully willing to consider that i'm not) then "Thou shalt not kill," not because it is objectively wrong, but because no society could function where everyone felt free to commit wanton murder. Same with theft, fraud, etc. Similarly, we aren't to worship any other gods or images because that would endanger societal confidence in "the code." We aren't to commit homosexual acts or adultery or disrespect of parents because the integrity of the family is (or at least was)important for society to function. If the above describes the assumptions of the "hypocrites" you describe, then they are not hypocrites at all. They simply believe that "thou shalt not kill" is still a vital rule to abide for society to function, and "thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind" is an anachronism that no longer provides any tangible benefit to society. Anyway, I guess I'm one of your FR "athiests." Though I don't really _believe_ it cause I'm not sure. Who can be?
34 posted on 07/10/2006 2:01:08 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ivyleaguebrat; little jeremiah
Thank you for admitting that in the absence of G-d all that remains is not objective morality but a mere utilitarianism.

Perhaps you can find out from your fellow non-theists on the Left why they believe that "racism," "sexism," "intolerance," etc., bring such grief to "our mother the earth."

35 posted on 07/10/2006 5:31:22 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Noladeti beShabbat Pinechas. Zo't meva'eret `alay harbeh!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
My principles, morals and my way of life are as important to me as Jewish law is to you.

Yes, definitely two analogous things:

1) The Torah, over 5000 years old and given by G-d to guide his beloved people.

2) The desire to put one's willie wherever one wants, whenever one wants.

Definitely belong on the same page, yup.

36 posted on 07/10/2006 5:36:28 AM PDT by Jim Noble (And you know what I'm talkin' 'bout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

They nag and are in everyone's face more often than a three year old with a full bladder.


37 posted on 07/10/2006 6:00:31 AM PDT by Convert from ECUSA (Mexico: America's Palestine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Yes, what remains is utilitarianism. Under that standard, we would judge personal actions based on how they affect the functioning of our society. Since by its Constitution our country is a federal republic, in which certain freedoms to act are (supposed to be) sacrosanct, we can only consider whether "racism," "sexism," "intolerance," etc. are helpful or detrimental to the ordering of society, within the constraints set by our Constitution. (Since our "society" is partially defined by the Bill of Rights, restricting the freedom of speech to combat "racism," for example, would be akin to curing the disease by killing the patient).


38 posted on 07/10/2006 1:01:58 PM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson