From: Sondra Brasile (sbrasile@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat May 31 2003 - 13:07:42 EDT
Rich,
I'm glad Debbie questioned this, because I was thinking that is what I read
also.
I decided to keep my mouth shut though, since I was informed off list that I
am a moron, or "ignorant" to quote the fellow.
Thanks, Debbie for asking for clarifiction and Rich, I highly doubt that is
what you meant, but could you clarify?
Sondra
>From: "Debbie Mann" <deborahjmann@insightbb.com>
>To: "Asa" <asa@calvin.edu>
>Subject: RE: "partisan liberal pieces"
>Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 09:22:44 -0500
>
>RFaussette wrote:
>In orthodox Jewish communities eugenics is the norm and women are still
>chattel.
>
>And this is good? Galations 3:23? Obviously the Jews do not accept
>Galations.
>The O.T.'s virtuous woman from Proverbs is hardly chattel. Deborah was a
>judge. The O.T. has many strong women and the N.T. as well.
>
>It sounds as though you are saying, 'far better keep women as chattel' as a
>solution to having homosexuals in society. Is that the gist of your
>argument?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>Behalf Of RFaussette@aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 8:24 AM
> To: lfreeman@mbc.edu; asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: "partisan liberal pieces"
>
>
> In a message dated 5/30/03 5:52:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>lfreeman@mbc.edu writes:
>
>
>
> The liberal press is quick to praise the "biological basis for
>homosexuality" as support for the view that the orientation is "natural"
>therefore "good" (or at least "not bad") and quick to critcize the
>"biological basis for behavioral and cognitive sex differences" as a
>dangerous plot by right wing conspirators to keep women subordinate to men.
>
> My point is, the theories inspiring the research and the methodologies
>by which it is conducted are largely the same. And one type is no more
> "partisan" and no less "science" than the other.
>
>
>
> The liberal press is quick to praise the "biological basis for
>homosexuality" because it weakens indigenous populations, feminizing the
>male population and lowering birth rates. The neo-cons (liberals in
>disguise, wolves in sheep's clothing) are mostly red diaper babies.
>
> The liberals are of course quick to criticize the "biological basis for
>behavioral and cognitive sex differences" because that makes all races
>equally capable. By doing that the liberals disguise the efficacy of
>eugenics to advance the interests of specific populations who alone remain
>to practice eugenics giving them a singular advantage by militating against
>their being "spewed out of the land."
>
>
> The liberal press should be studiously ignored except to guage how much
>damage they are doing.
>
> rich
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 31 2003 - 13:08:26 EDT