zut alors! A movie celebrating the life of an openly gay homosexual! Those commie homo-lovin sons of guns in Hollywood...... ;)

wow, what a great column...

"Traditional America is dying"

Oh, cry me a river. I see plenty of wonderful healthy and happy Americans every day.

Oh, cry me a river. I see plenty of wonderful healthy and happy Americans every day.

Posted by: Hal at February 23, 2009 12:49 PM

Not according to your president Nobama. All he ever saw was poor downtrodden Americans that had no hope and no future. (Unless they were sitting at one of his $32,000.00 per meal fundraisers.)

I see plenty of wonderful healthy and happy Americans every day.

Maybe we're healthy and happy in part because we boycott Hollywood. I don't go to the cinema. I don't watch the self-glorification of the Emmys, the Oscars, etc. I don't watch pay-per-view movies and I don't buy DVDs. I refuse to spend my money on that garbage.

I'm healthy and happy Hal. And I LOVE movies!

I'm healthy and happy too. Don't see as many movies as I'd like. Did see Slum Dog, thought is was okay. Want to see Milk, not too aware of the others.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWL more, conservatives. You people have been writing this nation's obituary for decades. If you hate the land of the free so much, why don't you leave? Iran is run by a patriarchal religious leader; I bet you'd love it there. Or how about sunny Saudi Arabia? They don't even let women drive, let alone exercise reproductive rights. You'd fit right in. No permissive secular culture there!

If you're so sure we're doomed without forced religion, why not get out and leave us to our doom? Go enjoy your oppressive theocracy. It's waiting for you. What are you waiting for?

Jill, I know it's your blog and you have the right to go off-topic, but I always sigh a really tired, frustrated sigh when blogs that are supposed to be about one topic start going into another, as though the people who are reading the blog for the main topic are supposed to agree with the off-topic posts. I love reading your pro-life-related posts, and abortion in Revolutionary Road is on-topic, but what on earth does Harvey Milk have to do with any of this? Homosexuality in society is a totally different subject and I don't see how it would connect, as it's not like gay people are conceiving babies and aborting them.

Marauder, it doesn't appear you read the entire post. Did you read paragraphs 6 onward?

Boohoo,ifyoudon'tliketoday'smoviesdon'twatchthem!

"Traditional America is dying"

Oh, cry me a river. I see plenty of wonderful healthy and happy Americans every day.

And there are many miserable Americans I see in my neighborhood everyday embroiled in too much "baby Daddy" drama...

"If you're so sure we're doomed without forced religion, why not get out and leave us to our doom? Go enjoy your oppressive theocracy. It's waiting for you. What are you waiting for? "

Reality, how about we split it down the middle, with traditional americans on one side and secular progressives' on the other. Then let's see which side Americans flock to.

Reality, how about we split it down the middle, with traditional americans on one side and secular progressives' on the other. Then let's see which side Americans flock to.

Posted by: Jasper at February 23, 2009 2:27 PM

Ummm.... hasn't this happened already. You "traditional americans" have that swath through the middle of the country! We have all the rest.... including Washington!

I only watched the last three awards (and hadn't seen any of the movies nominated in the big categories) but my husband and I both rolled our eyes at Sean Penn's "speech." What a bunch of hoo-haa.

On a good note, now I want to see Slumdog Millionaire.

We have all the rest.... including Washington!
Posted by: asitis at February 23, 2009 2:34 PM
----

You can keep Washington! yuck!

You know I meant Wasington DC, right Chris? Alrighty then.... hopefully we'll do just that!

take California too....

Reality, how about we split it down the middle, with traditional americans on one side and secular progressives' on the other. Then let's see which side Americans flock to.
Posted by: Jasper at February 23, 2009 2:27 PM

Isn't this what the civil war was about - the South wanting to secede (sp) from the Union and make their own country? Hmm. Maybe we should revisit.

take California too....

Posted by: Jasper at February 23, 2009 3:07 PM

Thanks, we've already got that too!

The conservative idea that things were so much better before has always been hard for me to understand. We have made so much progress in making our society more conducive to human happiness, certainly as compared to "traditional America," which demanded conformity and marginalized outsiders.

I am thrilled to have witnessed an explosion of unprecedented opportunities for women and minorities in my lifetime -- not to mention an end to some of the most severe forms of discrimination and sanctioned hatefulness.

I am glad I have had the freedom to marry for love, rather than feeling forced to marry because it is expected or because it is the only way to get sex or because it is the primary way for a woman to obtain status and financial comfort. I am glad to witness people's increasing freedom to marry members of the same sex or of a different race.

I am relieved to live in an America where law enforcement is increasingly likely to take rape and domestic violence seriously, and where marital rape is no longer considered legal.

I love the fact people can walk away more freely from unhappy marriages -- which can often cause their children as much pain, or more, than divorce.

I am happy that in most places, people are freer to choose their religious expression without the same risk of social ostracism as in the past.

It has been a pleasure to see the destigmatization of mental illness beginning to unfold, along with more integrated and respectful treatment of people with physical and mental disabilities -- many of whom would have been packed off to institutions in "traditional America."

The growing national awareness of pedophilia has been painful, but a necessary step in protecting our children.

While I know this will be a controversial statement on this blog, I think children are in fact more protected and valued than ever before. I particularly rejoice in the waning of punitive and shaming disciplinary styles.

Those are just some of the things that give me a warm, fuzzy feeling. That doesn't mean things are perfect. I am not a huge fan of the enormous popularity of pornography that degrades women (as opposed to pornography that doesn't) -- but then the average "I Love Lucy" episode was pretty degrading too. There are certainly many other problems too. But on the whole I see a more honest, life-affirming society that allows for opportunity and individual self-expression of people from all demographics.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWL more, conservatives. You people have been writing this nation's obituary for decades. If you hate the land of the free so much, why don't you leave? Iran is run by a patriarchal religious leader; I bet you'd love it there. Or how about sunny Saudi Arabia? They don't even let women drive, let alone exercise reproductive rights. You'd fit right in. No permissive secular culture there!

If you're so sure we're doomed without forced religion, why not get out and leave us to our doom? Go enjoy your oppressive theocracy. It's waiting for you. What are you waiting for?

Posted by: reality at February 23, 2009 1:40 PM

Oh reality, get a grip.
You liberals are the one and only group who have doomed this country since your 1960's free love, do it if it feels good mentality. Your liberal quackery has turned our tax funded schools into nothing more than training grounds for more liberal quackery.

How many abortions out of this "fee love" society has my hard earned tax money had to fund?

Your oppressive government idealogy is turning this county into a socialist nation, which is such a contradiction to what you just stated.

Your liberal "everyone deserves to own a home" mantra just cost us billions and billions of dollars that now "we" conservatives will be paying for.

That's oppressive. And gee I can't wait to see how many more oppressive "stimulus" bills will be passed mandating I pay more in taxes for those who choose to live so "freely"

Prochoicer, wonderfully said @ 3:33pm

Prochoicer at 3:33, that was beautiful.

If we're talking heroism, I think that's what "Milk" was all about. Being heroic is about standing up for what you think is right, even when everyone tries to put you down. In the movie he gives hope to a teenage boy who calls him saying he wants to commit suicide because his parents are sending him away to "get straight"- from Harvey Milk, that boy finds inspiration to keep going. That's heroic to me.
Harvey Milk stood up against the rampant discrimination of Prop 6 (threatening to take homosexual teachers out of schools for fear that they're "recruiting" kids to be gay). Now there's a Harvey Milk school in New York City, which is a safe haven for gay teens who had to leave public school because they were so tormented by their peers just for being the way they are. Harvey Milk is a hero to me (a straight woman, in case anyone was wondering).
Didn't see the other movies yet. Want to see Rev. Road though, just to see Kate and Leo together again :)

PC 3:33PM

While I certainly want to see mental illness destigmatized, I don't agree treatment is any better or more humane.

Granted, early institutions could be barbaric and people were deposited in them for convenience.

However, the closing of these institutions put mentally ill people on the street and into society with absolutely no means of coping.
While there was boasting of how the big state hospitals were closing, no one was asking what happens to people in these institutions. Where do they go? Who cares for them? Can they even care for themselves?
People who should be institutionalized have not been, posing a serious danger to be the mentally ill and society as a whole.
So many of those lost souls you see on the street were once in institutions. Is life on the street any more humane?

I would think making institutions more humane was the answer. Regrettably there are people who belong in them, and are best cared for and safer in institutions.
It would also provide a haven for those who truly want to be admitted and cared for. All too often families cannot find the care, shelter, and supervision their mentally ill loved ones so desperately need.

"take California too....

Posted by: Jasper at February 23, 2009 3:07 PM

Thanks, we've already got that too!"

Good, you can pay for all the defaulted mortgages there too..

Marauder: "Homosexuality in society is a totally different subject and I don't see how it would connect, as it's not like gay people are conceiving babies and aborting them."

Jill Stanek: "Marauder, it doesn't appear you read the entire post. Did you read paragraphs 6 onward?"

I read them and I agree with Marauder. A film rationalizing the killing of one's children would be sad, but the message of MILK seems to be, simply, tolerance of others. Abortion and homosexuality don't belong in the same paragraph, let alone the same level of tragedy.

Mary,

Looks like we might agree on this too. I certainly didn't mean to imply that just shutting institutions a la President Reagan is the way to go, and yes, some people need to be institutionalized. But I think the decision makers and treatment providers are now more inclined to look for the least restrictive options, and to seek community integration whenever possible. Not saying the system is perfect -- but I believe it is improved.

P.S. I may not be back to this thread since this evening and coming week promise to be a doozy. If I disappear, have a lovely week.

On the plus side, I've finally found a movie I want to see... Slumdog Millionaire looks like a good pick. (Hubby is over-the-top sappy, so I'll load up on the Kleenex for him. He can't watch Extreme Home Makeover without going through half a box.)

I came to the conclusion that Pro Abortionists, hate Anti-Abortionists, and vice versa more than they would love to find a solution to the cuase of their alleged problem. I don't think any Pro Abortionists or Anti-Abortionists would essentially be happy if as of tomorrow every single woman on the planet magically inserted an IUD, and for the rest of the 21st century, there weren't one abortion, nor one conceived unwanted baby.

Seriously, I may be wrong; but what 'issue' would Pro-Abortionists have to hate Anti-Abortionists, or vice versa, then?

So I finally conclude; that if both sides are well aware that they could focus on working together and providing opportunities or funding for every single poor or rich woman on the planet to be provided with contraception to avoid the conception of any unwanted baby; and they CHOOSE NOT TO DO SO; because they prefer bickering and playing the blame each other hate game....

Well, then I wonder: QUI BONO???

Lara JMCSwan

Elisabeth, it is good! But I'll warn you the first bit is tough to watch. But in the end, I understood why it was necessary.

Hope you enjoy the movie!

Jill - Yes, I did, but I still don't see the connection. AIDS is a terrible disease and I think promiscuity is a sign of some serious problems, but homosexuality on its own? I can see where someone would have a religious objection to homosexuality, but I don't think the concepts of men who are attracted to other men and women who are attracted to other women are related to abortion.

Harvey Milk was far from a perfect person, but when it came to gay rights, he just wanted openly gay people to be able to have the same rights that straight people and closeted gay people had. He wanted them to be able to go to bars and get a few drinks with friends without getting arrested or beaten up, to not have to worry about having their jobs taken away from them because of factors that were unrelated to their jobs. He didn't want to destroy the family or Middle America. He was proud of his military service (Navy, lieutenant junior grade), he loved his country, and he didn't want other gay kids to have to hide things and feel miserable the way he had.

bmmg39: Thanks. :)

Was Lara's post at 4:45 written by one of those nonsense post generators like the one Rae was using the other night?

PC 4:19PM

Institutions were closing long before Reagan, as early as 1955 with the arrival of psychiatric drugs. A major one in my hometown, a small city in itself, began the process in the late 60's.
This was a policy known as "Deinstitutionalization" and involved moving severely mentally ill people into society and shutting down state hospitals.
This was further defined by President Jimmy Carter's Commission on Mental Health as treating mental illness in the least restrictive setting.

The intentions were very noble. The trouble is good intentions are what pave the road to hell. Ideally, the mentally ill would be integrated into society, there would be halfway houses, community care, etc.
This policy varied from state to state.

In what amounted to a huge social experiment, people with major psychiatric illness, brain damage, retardation, autism, and dementia were discharged without the services and medication supervision they needed. Closing the hospitals also meant no services for those who would need them down the road
Consequently approximatel 2.2 million psychiatric patients are not receiving the care and supervision they need.

I knew one elderly woman who had been in my hometown institution for years. Good or bad, the institution was her home. It was her world and her friends.
Closing it only meant shuttling that poor soul from one nursing home to another until she finally died.

So I finally conclude; that if both sides are well aware that they could focus on working together and providing opportunities or funding for every single poor or rich woman on the planet to be provided with contraception to avoid the conception of any unwanted baby; and they CHOOSE NOT TO DO SO; because they prefer bickering and playing the blame each other hate game....

Well, then I wonder: QUI BONO???

Lara JMCSwan

Posted by: Lara Braveheart at February 23, 2009 4:45 PM

Ummmm......Free or low cost birth control is available everywhere. Condoms can be purchased at every speedy mart or gas station in your neighborhood.

I do believe that a significant amount of women do get pregnat while on birth control because they are too lazy to take a pill every morning, or put on a condom, or replace the nuvaring or the patch in a timely manner, or insert a diaphram when needed.

How about not having promiscuous sex with every man a woman meets?

I do believe the IUD does cause abortion. It does not allow a fertilized egg to implant into the uterus.

Buzzer goes off..............try again.

AM said,
Being heroic is about standing up for what you think is right, even when everyone else puts you down.

I think that describes the prolife movement very well. :)

How did Harvey Milk die? Never heard of him.

I am relieved to live in an America where law enforcement is increasingly likely to take ... domestic violence seriously

I must be living in a different America, Prochoicer. Law enforcement may be taking more reports due to stricter laws, but the judicial system is still failing victims by dropping charges in most cases or settling for wrist slaps.

I am happy that in most places, people are freer to choose their religious expression without the same risk of social ostracism as in the past.

Unless, of course, you happen to be a Christian, in which case you can forget about being ostracized. You can expect to be attacked.

It has been a pleasure to see the destigmatization of mental illness beginning to unfold, along with more integrated and respectful treatment

Mary already hopped on this one. Destigmatized, yes. More integrated treatment, I think not. More legal rights for psych patients? Yes, but that's far different than respectful treatment.

I think children are in fact more protected and valued than ever before.

Strongly disagree with that one. Child abuse is epidemic. It's part and parcel of the culture of death.

But on the whole I see a more honest, life-affirming society that allows for opportunity and individual self-expression of people from all demographics.

Life-affirming? Not unless you consider abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide affirmations of life.

Carla, he was assassinated.

Thank you, Erin. That is horrible.

Sexual "freedom" is used as a tool for distraction by socialists and other statists. Those who claim to promote rights based on behavioral choices, simultaneously seek to oppress the rights of those who disagree with them. Their defense is always "you are a bunch of Nazis no different that terrorists."
They force brainwashing material on children in kindergarten to break down the natural order of things. My children did not need to be told that anything but a man and woman together is unnatural. I did not have to tell them this. They just knew.
Yet it seems every movie targeted at children has a "gay is normal" scene in it.
What's next? Promoting "alternative lifestyles" as "green" because they do not produce children which drain resources?

I don't watch the Oscars. I won't let my children watch them. It is three hours of Hollywood celebrating the abnormal. It is very rare for a truly great performance to which these days. It is usually the most politically correct.
I must admit, Heath Ledger deserved the statue. He was scary good as the Joker. I long way from his comic styling in A Knight's Tale.

Fed Up, what do you mean by attacked? Did some attack you as a Christian? Verbally or Physically? Symbolically?

"Sexual "freedom" is used as a tool for distraction by socialists and other statists. Those who claim to promote rights based on behavioral choices, simultaneously seek to oppress the rights of those who disagree with them."

I don't follow this at all. If you don't want sexual freedom, don't have it. I don't care, but don't try to take those rights away from the rest of us. Who's trying to oppress your rights?

only time I watched the Oscars lately was when "Our Town" from Cars and "That's How you Know" from Enchanted were up for Best Song. Both Lost. And I think I watched one year when they had a montage with showing past winners of Best Movies. Most of the junk that Hollywood produces now is inferior to the movies they had in the beginning. There will never be another Classic like Casablanca or Gone with the Wind.

If an actor in his or her acceptance speech had spoken out in favor of traditional marriage it would have been condemned as "hate" and his or her career would be over..... or at the very least they would be doing serious damage control.

However Sean Penn can in his speach condemn people for "intolerance" and calls people against gay marriage "shameful".... yet he obviously has no tolerance for people who have different beliefs than he does.

And he made some comment about how great it was that people voted for an "elegant" President...... hello...... BO has said he is against gay marriage also!! But its ok because BO is totally left in every other respect.

All four candidates in the last election were in favor of traditional marriage..... BO, Biden, McCain and Palin.

But its ok for BO to be against it! Give me a break..... the hypocracy is ridiculous.

Good for Bill OReilly for bringing this up on Fox. OF course, about the only place its being discussed is on conservative shows. The mainstream media loves people like Penn because they are as far left as he is.

However Sean Penn can in his speach condemn people for "intolerance" and calls people against gay marriage "shameful".... yet he obviously has no tolerance for people who have different beliefs than he does."

It is "shameful" to be against gay marriage. I thought you guys believed in objective right and wrong. Denying the right to marry to gay partners is objectively wrong and anyone who believes otherwise should be called out on it. No reason to tolerate evil.

Conservatives are always talking about the the so-called sexual revolution as though it introduced promiscuity, hedonism, STDs, abortion, illegitimacy, godlessness, and moral decline etc to America and the world.
In fact, these things have been quite common throughout world history, and always will be.
The ancient Romans made people like Hugh Hefner, Allen Ginsberg, and Jane Fonda etc, look positively prim by comparison. Abortion is nothing new and has existed for thousands of years, and infanticide was alot more common than most people realize.
Poor women were forced to abortion routinely in the past, and poor,large families lived in abject misery in America.
The fanatically puritanical and pathalogically sexually repressed Anthony Comstock persecuted many innocent people and made their lives miserable in the 19th century.
Yes, trashy movies are made today, but to say that there is some kind of sinister Hollywood plot to corrupt America is just plain laughable. Hollywood is out to make money and it provides entertainment,good and bad, period. And just because conservatives find the subject matter of some movies objectionable does not mean that these films are automatically immoral and dangerous.
But there are also plenty of serious and
thoughtful films being produced today, and innocuous ones too.
It's totally unrealistic to expect every film, TV program or whatever to be blandly wholesome. And if conservatives think that they have both the right and duty to ban every form of entertainment which they find offensive, they are deluding themselves.
If the government is going to ban things, who should decide what is acceptable or not? Which group of people should get to decide? Where do we draw the line? What is offensive to one person is not necessarily offensive to another. And if a certain group of people is going to get the power to ban things, where do they stop? It's a slippery slope to oppression.

It is "shameful" to be against gay marriage. I thought you guys believed in objective right and wrong. Denying the right to marry to gay partners is objectively wrong and anyone who believes otherwise should be called out on it. No reason to tolerate evil.
Posted by: Hal at February 23, 2009 10:53 PM

Most if not all people who oppose gay marriage do so on religious beliefs. Christians, Mormons and possibly other religions do not agree with it.

My faith is Christianity and so I oppose it on those grounds. Shame on Sean Penn for being intolerant of people of other faiths!

And by the way, Hal, your hero BO believes in this "evil" as well. It's the only thing I agree with him on.

To be honest I think "BO" and the others are pro-gay marriage, they just had to make some concessions come election time.

Come on, do you really believe that he is honestly against gay marriage??

Right on, Berger! The liberals are the cause of all of the worlds problems, including the craptastic movies lately!!

And if conservatives think that they have both the right and duty to ban every form of entertainment which they find offensive, they are deluding themselves.

Did someone mention banning films on this thread? I missed that.

If the government is going to ban things, who should decide what is acceptable or not?

Ask the libs who are calling for reinstatement of the fairness doctrine.

PiP- My comment above wasn't about me specifically. I was referring to the attack on Christianity in general in this country. I'd rather not mention personal attacks on me as a Christian because I suspect others who read and comment on this blog have endured much more than I have.

No problem, Fed Up. I'm just wondering. I know that in our society, skeptics or contrarians are vocally anti-religion but since I'm not specially religious I'm never sure when humor becomes slander to you all or where some jibes or arguments become attacks.
You know? It may be a personal thing- everyone has their own limits. So I was wondering if you were referring to any specific incidences that's all :)

PiP, I appreciate your sensitivity in trying to clarify humor vs personal attack. I was referring to things that happen offline, not comments on this blog. I am certain that my experiences offline pale in comparison to what others here have been through.

BO has said he is against gay marriage also!!

Posted by: Joanne at February 23, 2009 10:48 PM

BO isn't "against" gay marriage. He is against the federal government telling churches that they must allow gays to get married in their church. Joe Biden spoke to this as well in the debate: That he and Obama are all for homosexual couples to have ALL the same civil rights that merried couples have, but that marriage should be something left to the churches to decide, based on their faith. Sounds pretty tolerant to me!

Here's Obabma's position:

Opposes CA Prop. 8, one-man-one-woman marriage. (Jul 2008)
Being gay or lesbian is not a choice. (Nov 2007)
Decisions about marriage should be left to the states. (Oct 2007)
Homosexuality no more immoral than heterosexuality. (Oct 2007)
Ok to expose 6-year-olds to gay couples; they know already. (Sep 2007)
Has any marriage broken up because two gays hold hands? (Aug 2007)
We need strong civil unions, not just weak civil unions. (Aug 2007)
Legal rights for gays are conferred by state, not by church. (Aug 2007)
Disentangle gay rights from the word "marriage". (Aug 2007)
Gay marriage is less important that equal gay rights. (Aug 2007)
Gay rights movement is somewhat like civil rights movement. (Aug 2007)
Let each denominations decide on recognizing gay marriage. (Jul 2007)
Pass ENDA and expand hate crime legislation. (Mar 2007)
Opposed 1996 Illinois DOMA bill. (Mar 2007)
Supports health benefits for gay civil partners. (Oct 2006)
Opposes gay marriage; supports civil union & gay equality. (Oct 2006)
Marriage not a human right; non-discrimination is. (Oct 2004)
Include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws. (Jul 1998)

However Sean Penn can in his speach condemn people for "intolerance" and calls people against gay marriage "shameful".... yet he obviously has no tolerance for people who have different beliefs than he does.

Posted by: Joanne at February 23, 2009 10:48 PM

No tolerance for people with different beliefs than he has? You mean people who believe in heterosexual marriage? I'm pretty sure Penn beleives in that... being married to Robin Wright Penn! You can be married yourself and still believe that gays should be able to "marry" as well and have the same rights that married couples have. This has no impact on your marriage.

My faith is Christianity and so I oppose it on those grounds. Shame on Sean Penn for being intolerant of people of other faiths!

Posted by: Joanne at February 23, 2009 11:22 PM

Joanne, you can believe gay marriage (and homosexuality in general for that matter)is wrong because of your faith. No one is saying that you are wrong to do so. What they are saying is wrong (i.e."shameful" and "intolerant") is when you attempt to impose your own religious beliefs on others.

Just like Sean Penn is doing?

How so Carla?

Conservatives are always talking about the the so-called sexual revolution as though it introduced promiscuity, hedonism, STDs, abortion, illegitimacy, godlessness, and moral decline etc to America and the world.

Posted by: Robert Berger at February 23, 2009 11:02 PM

No, didn't introduce it, just made it acceptable in society.

You don't need religion to inform you that homosexual relations are wrong. Biology can prove that.

Kristen, good point @ 7:47 AM.

You don't need religion to inform you that homosexual relations are wrong. Biology can prove that.

Posted by: Eileen #2 at February 24, 2009 7:53 AM

Oh REALLY Eileen? Just because it doesn't produce offspring doesn't mean "science says it's it's wrong". Nice try!

Gotta go, but I'll be back.

Oh REALLY Eileen? Just because it doesn't produce offspring doesn't mean "science says it's it's wrong". Nice try!

Gotta go, but I'll be back.

Posted by: asitis at February 24, 2009 8:01 AM

Not science - mother nature. There are plenty of things science says are right that are completely, totally, and utterly wrong.

Oh do pray tell Kristen, how does "Mother Nature" tell us that homosexuality is "wrong"?

"Mother Nature" has shown us lots of gay behavior in other species of animals and in fact some people hypothesize that homosexuality might arise from factors occuring through natural processes like embryonic development. ARen't you in the "just cause its found in nature doesn't mean its right for us" crowd?

Posted by: asitis at February 24, 2009 11:28 AM

Do I REALLY have to explain the birds and the bees to you asitis?

PiP, It's been awhile since I've had biology of any kind but I do remember some animals being asexual and could therefore be either male or female when it came to procreation. Humans however, aren't like that.

I do believe that Mr. Penn was being hypocritical in his speech, although he certainly was not self-aware enough to realize he had done it...

It is all well and good for people who support certain ideas, such as homosexual marriage, to voice their support of that idea. I don't agree, but that is the wondrous part of living in a free society. However, that does NOT give that person the right to tell me that my opinion is less valid than theirs.

And as for voting, I expect all people to vote their conscience. Only in that way, with open and honest discussion of the issues, rather than ignorant lambasting of those who view the issue differently, can any true dialogue be reached.

But, unfortunately, more people would rather ridicule those with deeply held religious convictions than attempt to come to any true understanding.

Kristen,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexuality

asitis, maybe you need to take a refresher course in anatomy and physiology -- the parts don't fit.

Do I REALLY have to explain the birds and the bees to you asitis?

Posted by: Kristen at February 25, 2009 10:59 AM

You're forgetting Kristen that I already said that just because it doesn't produce offspring doesn't mean it's wrong.

asitis, maybe you need to take a refresher course in anatomy and physiology -- the parts don't fit.

Posted by: Eileen at February 25, 2009 11:55 AM

No, I'm good. But maybe you need to take a course on human sexuality to see that they do!

That should suffice ;)

Elisabeth,
I really liked what you said and how you said it. Thank you!!

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Elaina

http://www.craigslistpostingtools.info