the university of the blissfully united
I was created gay and I know I’m not the only one. I know in my heart of hearts that God put mortals on Earth to prove they can be true even when times are tough. Passively, He lets bad people do bad things. Actively, he hands out trials like blindness and massive flooding to test our mettle. Yet He didn’t create us to be miserable.
I wont throw love away and choose misery. Quite the opposite is true.
I know Mr. Right is out there and we’ll meet someday. Once I start looking, anyway. Hopeless romantic that I am, I can’t help feel a certain pull of destiny drawing me into the dating scene. However, the mere concept of physical intimacy is denied me. I am not a eunuch. Prick me; do I not bleed? Where then is my release?
If I can’t hold hands, date, kiss, hug, cuddle, or flirt with another man then what is to be my sexual outlet? Do I abstain? Until when? Abstinence is only abstinence when a goal is present, an end date, an objective. Without an endgame, it is celibacy: a moral no-no the church has preached against since time immemorial. "Celibacy denies a man his God-given right to procreate," they say.
I can certainly believe that celibacy is a design of the adversary. Physical intimacy is important for the emotional, physical, and spiritual health of all people. Sex is itself a critical element of the human condition and necessary for the continuation of mankind. So I don’t mean to imply that children aren’t of the utmost importance but I maintain that God has created me and others like me outside the usual formula.
So what’s our purpose, our objective? Maybe were supposed to adopt all the kids callous heterosexuals leave on firehouse door steps.* Who could be a better parent than a man outcast and abandoned by society? Who could show more love to an exile than another exile in a society of exiles?
Call us what you will: Domestically Partnered or Civilly Unionized. It’s marriage, it’s necessary, and it leads to the betterment of children, parents, and all society.
*Don’t worry about us recruiting them into the wide world of homosexuality as THAT CAN’T HAPPEN. You also need not worry that cameras will steal your souls and if you make a face when the wind changes direction you will turn into a snow cone.
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Zelda_3_Triforce_Majeure_OC_ReMix.mp3
26 March 2007
19 March 2007
X = Morality
solve for x
What defines a man’s moral character? Is it his political stance? Does it come from personal conviction or adherence to his principles? Is he patient by nature or bold by design? What is this elusive quality that touches good men who seek to possess it?
I'll quickly dismiss religious affiliation as the moral touchstone. Religions are by and large institutions of good that teach specific, applied-ethics behaviors that benefit society at large. Yet, every religion has produced a famous criminal or two. Besides, plenty of good people existed before any of the world's current religions.
It's silly to think that any one personality type could be moral. The aggressive go-getter and the passive-aggressive peace-maker are very different people but neither holds moral superiority over the other.
It is ridiculous to think any one political theory could be the moral one. Surely, morality has been around since before any contemporary political party was conceptualized.* No, morality is much older than that and has been important all along. Since the very beginning, in fact.
"Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right." -Isaac Asimov
So perhaps morality is defined by a man’s ethical core.
Think about lying. It’s not always wrong. Sometimes it's a good idea, in fact, but when is a good liar a bad person? When he lies for personal gain? When he seeks to harm another or betray a friend, perhaps?
If morality is a societal construct that transcends any one era and yet reaches each man individually then what is it's origin? What is it's objective? I subscribe to the meta-ethical theory. I believe morality is derived from man's need to avoid injury, disputes, or anything that might jeopardize his society/progeny. I feel that morality has this objective, quantifiable purpose. That doesn't answer my original question, however, "What defines a moral man?"
I believe a moral man, a good man, is he who places other’s needs before his own. A man who knows he is bettering himself by making sure his friends are taken care of. A man who sees his family’s needs as tantamount to his own existence.
May each of us find ourselves to be moral men.
*Do any of the political parties from the dawn of the US of A even exist?
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Castlevania_3_Froggy_Mosh_OC_ReMix.mp3
What defines a man’s moral character? Is it his political stance? Does it come from personal conviction or adherence to his principles? Is he patient by nature or bold by design? What is this elusive quality that touches good men who seek to possess it?
I'll quickly dismiss religious affiliation as the moral touchstone. Religions are by and large institutions of good that teach specific, applied-ethics behaviors that benefit society at large. Yet, every religion has produced a famous criminal or two. Besides, plenty of good people existed before any of the world's current religions.
It's silly to think that any one personality type could be moral. The aggressive go-getter and the passive-aggressive peace-maker are very different people but neither holds moral superiority over the other.
It is ridiculous to think any one political theory could be the moral one. Surely, morality has been around since before any contemporary political party was conceptualized.* No, morality is much older than that and has been important all along. Since the very beginning, in fact.
"Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right." -Isaac Asimov
So perhaps morality is defined by a man’s ethical core.
Think about lying. It’s not always wrong. Sometimes it's a good idea, in fact, but when is a good liar a bad person? When he lies for personal gain? When he seeks to harm another or betray a friend, perhaps?
If morality is a societal construct that transcends any one era and yet reaches each man individually then what is it's origin? What is it's objective? I subscribe to the meta-ethical theory. I believe morality is derived from man's need to avoid injury, disputes, or anything that might jeopardize his society/progeny. I feel that morality has this objective, quantifiable purpose. That doesn't answer my original question, however, "What defines a moral man?"
I believe a moral man, a good man, is he who places other’s needs before his own. A man who knows he is bettering himself by making sure his friends are taken care of. A man who sees his family’s needs as tantamount to his own existence.
May each of us find ourselves to be moral men.
*Do any of the political parties from the dawn of the US of A even exist?
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Castlevania_3_Froggy_Mosh_OC_ReMix.mp3
05 March 2007
Sympathy for the Intolerant
but what’s puzzling you is the nature of my game
Imagine, if you will, the average American family. Dad works days at the Insurance Company. Mom works all day tending their three* children. Two kids attend college to become doctors. The youngest learns to invest real estate. As dad approaches retirement, mom becomes active in community politics.
Then comes a fateful Christmas holiday. The family gathers together . The grandchildren are happy to help bake cookies. Dad teases his only unmarried child, “You really ought to bring us grandbabies, one day.”
Finally, it happens, “Mom… Dad… I’m gay.”
Mom bursts into tears. Dad gets heated, “Are you sure? How can you know?”
It takes time but time does heal wounds. Mom always kinda suspected. Dad realizes he has always been proud of our young protagonist. Nothing changed about his child and that’s what the whole family finally realizes.
A while back I wrote that a gay man can never be accepted until society as a whole understands that there is nothing special about being a gay man. Any uniqueness or oddity is imagined by people who had to guess because they didn’t know any better. It isn’t new to say mankind fears what it doesn't understand.
So is it any surprise that the left coast is so gay friendly? However it started, a gay community coalesced in California. It wove itself into the local scene; film, the area’s most important industry. There, homosexuals worked alongside heterosexuals displaying the same work ethics, the same attitudes, and the same virtues. A casual handshake and an honest demeanor was all it took to prove we’re here, we’re queer, there’s really nothing unusual about us.
Not as catchy as what you might hear chanted at a parade, I’ll grant you.
But far more effective.
*I’ll round up.
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Shenmue_DreamingWhileIWake_OC_ReMix.mp3
Imagine, if you will, the average American family. Dad works days at the Insurance Company. Mom works all day tending their three* children. Two kids attend college to become doctors. The youngest learns to invest real estate. As dad approaches retirement, mom becomes active in community politics.
Then comes a fateful Christmas holiday. The family gathers together . The grandchildren are happy to help bake cookies. Dad teases his only unmarried child, “You really ought to bring us grandbabies, one day.”
Finally, it happens, “Mom… Dad… I’m gay.”
Mom bursts into tears. Dad gets heated, “Are you sure? How can you know?”
It takes time but time does heal wounds. Mom always kinda suspected. Dad realizes he has always been proud of our young protagonist. Nothing changed about his child and that’s what the whole family finally realizes.
A while back I wrote that a gay man can never be accepted until society as a whole understands that there is nothing special about being a gay man. Any uniqueness or oddity is imagined by people who had to guess because they didn’t know any better. It isn’t new to say mankind fears what it doesn't understand.
So is it any surprise that the left coast is so gay friendly? However it started, a gay community coalesced in California. It wove itself into the local scene; film, the area’s most important industry. There, homosexuals worked alongside heterosexuals displaying the same work ethics, the same attitudes, and the same virtues. A casual handshake and an honest demeanor was all it took to prove we’re here, we’re queer, there’s really nothing unusual about us.
Not as catchy as what you might hear chanted at a parade, I’ll grant you.
But far more effective.
*I’ll round up.
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Shenmue_DreamingWhileIWake_OC_ReMix.mp3
01 March 2007
Go Ahead
biology equaling morality
There are two ways of looking at biology in defense of homosexuality, innate trait of animalia and innate trait of homo sapiens.
I dismiss the Animalia Theory out of hand. Animals can teach us about ourselves and the study of animal life has benefited mankind greatly.* In no way, however, should animal behaviors be grafted onto mankind. Tigers kill their young; that doesn’t justify any human behaviors.
The Innate Trait Theory carries a little more credibility. Many people believe that if it can be proven that homosexuality is genetically-based to some extent that homosexuals must be accepted as normal humans. Red hair, ambidextrousness, and homosexuality would each be genetic minorities but human nonetheless.
That only works to a point, however. Man is master of his own destiny. Proving that someone has a propensity to steal does not justify theft. Yes, there will probably be proof that theft is genetically motivated. Everything gets proven eventually once researchers with the right agenda come along.
Society will never accept that anti-social behavior is excusable because of genetics. So what is the true purpose of such findings? To screen and pre-jail the kleptomaniacs? Or to screen a fetus for undesirable traits and eliminate the unborn riffraff? Which is more scary?
The one, true path to acceptance is via the hearts of the members of society at large. We’re everywhere and maybe the straight folks should realize we don’t threaten society. We’ll have to tell them, of course. One by one. One at a time. “We’ve known each other for a long time and I believe I am a good man. You should know I’m gay. I always have been and it hurts when you belittle gays like that.”
Bold advice coming from a closet-case like myself, I know. So go ahead, you first.
*Scientists in England proved that ducks of the same species have regionalized accents. Hooray for scientists.
+++
A few weeks ago I read an opinion piece in a major, weekly news magazine (probably Time or Newsweek) in which the homosexual columnist opined, “A hormone patch that prevented homosexuality in fetuses might not be a bad idea. It means that homosexual children would be raised by mothers that, at the very least, didn’t seek to prevent their existence.”
If anyone knows where that article is, please, let me know. Thank you!
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Sonic_%26_Knuckles_Lover_Reef_OC_ReMix.mp3
There are two ways of looking at biology in defense of homosexuality, innate trait of animalia and innate trait of homo sapiens.
I dismiss the Animalia Theory out of hand. Animals can teach us about ourselves and the study of animal life has benefited mankind greatly.* In no way, however, should animal behaviors be grafted onto mankind. Tigers kill their young; that doesn’t justify any human behaviors.
The Innate Trait Theory carries a little more credibility. Many people believe that if it can be proven that homosexuality is genetically-based to some extent that homosexuals must be accepted as normal humans. Red hair, ambidextrousness, and homosexuality would each be genetic minorities but human nonetheless.
That only works to a point, however. Man is master of his own destiny. Proving that someone has a propensity to steal does not justify theft. Yes, there will probably be proof that theft is genetically motivated. Everything gets proven eventually once researchers with the right agenda come along.
Society will never accept that anti-social behavior is excusable because of genetics. So what is the true purpose of such findings? To screen and pre-jail the kleptomaniacs? Or to screen a fetus for undesirable traits and eliminate the unborn riffraff? Which is more scary?
The one, true path to acceptance is via the hearts of the members of society at large. We’re everywhere and maybe the straight folks should realize we don’t threaten society. We’ll have to tell them, of course. One by one. One at a time. “We’ve known each other for a long time and I believe I am a good man. You should know I’m gay. I always have been and it hurts when you belittle gays like that.”
Bold advice coming from a closet-case like myself, I know. So go ahead, you first.
*Scientists in England proved that ducks of the same species have regionalized accents. Hooray for scientists.
+++
A few weeks ago I read an opinion piece in a major, weekly news magazine (probably Time or Newsweek) in which the homosexual columnist opined, “A hormone patch that prevented homosexuality in fetuses might not be a bad idea. It means that homosexual children would be raised by mothers that, at the very least, didn’t seek to prevent their existence.”
If anyone knows where that article is, please, let me know. Thank you!
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Sonic_%26_Knuckles_Lover_Reef_OC_ReMix.mp3
Should You Feel So Inclined
solitude is misery. shame on those who would push it on a select few.
The church doesn’t just demand celibacy of it’s gay members, it forbids them to congregate, too.
"What society tells those born deaf or mute that they must never validate themselves as deaf or mute people, that they must fight the temptation to think that they are OK as deaf or mute people, and that they must never seek to express themselves in ways that are only right for hearing and speaking people? What healthy society, in fact, doesn’t encourage the deaf and mute to band together, and to see themselves not as "defective," but as different?" - Rick Fernandez
Everyone is free to identify themselves however they choose and gather with those who are like-minded. That’s why there are groups of grown men who dress up like civil war conscripts, sleep in tents, and hold mock-battles.* Generally those men don’t think of themselves as soldiers but some weekends they do. Identity is flexible.
I don’t personally think of myself as a gay man; usually I’m a Mormon man. Sometimes I’m an elite space marine. Sometimes I’m an armchair quarterback. Usually I can find good company to share these identities with. An armchair quarterback with nobody to explain his masterful strategies to is a lonely man.
And man is not meant to be alone.
*Ours is not to understand, ours is but to question why.
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Actraiser_Thy_Followers_OC_ReMix.mp3
The church doesn’t just demand celibacy of it’s gay members, it forbids them to congregate, too.
"What society tells those born deaf or mute that they must never validate themselves as deaf or mute people, that they must fight the temptation to think that they are OK as deaf or mute people, and that they must never seek to express themselves in ways that are only right for hearing and speaking people? What healthy society, in fact, doesn’t encourage the deaf and mute to band together, and to see themselves not as "defective," but as different?" - Rick Fernandez
Everyone is free to identify themselves however they choose and gather with those who are like-minded. That’s why there are groups of grown men who dress up like civil war conscripts, sleep in tents, and hold mock-battles.* Generally those men don’t think of themselves as soldiers but some weekends they do. Identity is flexible.
I don’t personally think of myself as a gay man; usually I’m a Mormon man. Sometimes I’m an elite space marine. Sometimes I’m an armchair quarterback. Usually I can find good company to share these identities with. An armchair quarterback with nobody to explain his masterful strategies to is a lonely man.
And man is not meant to be alone.
*Ours is not to understand, ours is but to question why.
+++
good tune
http://djpretzel.web.aplus.net/songs/Actraiser_Thy_Followers_OC_ReMix.mp3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
