Saturday, October 3, 2015

Quickies: Words Fail Me Dept.

     Over the years, several persons have alleged, sometimes with evidence of variable quality adduced, that Barack Hussein Obama is actually a Kenyan by birth, and therefore ineligible to hold the presidency. Whatever the case, he’s not an American:

     President Obama may soon let the United Nations slap his own country for its Cuba embargo, which he dislikes....

     Monday, Cuban President Raul Castro insisted in his UN speech that all of America’s decades-old economic sanctions against Cuba be lifted. Actually, Obama did, too. And Obama’s objections to US Cuba policy came in the context of yet more complaints about America by the president — with the world spotlight on him....

     No UN diplomats can remember a case in which a country voted against its own policies, or abstained on them.

     Then again, few here can remember anyone using his UN speech to denounce his own countrymen or bash his domestic foes in front of other world leaders. These speeches, after all, are designed to present one’s country in the most favorable light.

     Yet on Monday, that’s just what Obama did. Again.

     What possible justification can there be for allowing this contemptible excuse for a human being, a man who openly despises his own country, has worked tirelessly to degrade it, and continues to do so as we watch to remain in the Oval Office, wielding all the powers of its chief of state? Indeed, what could anyone who voted for him in 2012 say for himself in light of the insults he’s allowed America to endure from other nations? Do you still think he’s preferable to Mitt Romney?

     A recent poll indicated that something like 40% of Americans could find it in themselves to support a military coup. Would anyone like to place a bet on which way that number will trend when word of this gets around?


gwynn romano said...

Word of this will not get around as his lap dog media will sweep it under the rug along with every other negative about him. It will instead focus on gun violence, global warming, racism etc. while pushing the story that, contrary to the actual facts, Obama put Putin in his place. When WWIII starts, most Americans will be wondering what happened?

furball said...

I listened to all 43 minutes of Netenyahu's speech.

I listened to some of Castro's.

Have you noticed, Obama uses this sort of argument: "My enemies say THE VERY WORST AND VILE THINGS, but that's not who we are?"

We are not saying the things Obama attributes to us, but we DO disagree with him.

Forget that, because you know it already. I want to talk about sex.

Sex. Yes, the guy-girl thing.

Fran, the other day you pointed to a guy who had ripped off your post VERBATIM. And so I went there and read his stuff. I have to admit, some of it sounded just like you - the dialogue between the female and male, the ongoing friendship, the background stuff while they found each other.

In fact, if it weren't for that guy's talking about his son and divorce on some of his posts, I would have thought his stories might have been yours.

This points out a couple of things: 1) I'm probably not very smart or insightful; 2) sex.

Yep. Sex. For whatever that guy was doing, and however he sometimes got "down and dirtier" about it, the two of you write about sex as a good and natural thing.

I'm almost 65 and will probably never have sex with a person again. But I want to know: Ann Barnhardt seems to say ALL those thoughts of mine are sinful and therefore, sort of anti-Catholic. YOU seem to say that there is nothing in the 10 Commandments against sex, per se.

That is, don't desire another guy's wife, but if she's single, maybe go for it?

I know our civilization may be going to heck in a handbasket,and Obama and government may be stealing our freedom. But, hey? Girls?

Tim Turner

Francis W. Porretto said...

A bit off-topic, eh, Tim? But you made me chuckle, which confers automatic redemption on an off-topic comment.

Your comment made me recall an Elvis Presley movie titled "Girls! Girls! Girls!" Not that that has anything to do with anything at all, but since we're already off-topic...!

Concerning Ann Barnhardt's views on sex, I'm minded to recall a maxim quoted by one of Jack Vance's characters: “A cow that has never been bred yields very sour milk, if any.” Mind you, I like Ann. I think she does the Web many valuable services. I've even contributed to her well-being. But neither she nor anyone else can cite Jesus in support of the notion that sex per se is sinful. And as He is the Authority, any prescriptions or proscriptions that lack His endorsement must be regarded as merely the preferences of mortal men.

There is one passage in the Gospels that’s widely interpreted as condemning sex outside of wedlock:

15:16 Jesus said, “Even after all this, are you still so foolish? 15:17 Don’t you understand that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach and then passes out into the sewer? 15:18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these things defile a person. 15:19 For out of the heart come evil ideas, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 15:20 These are the things that defile a person; it is not eating with unwashed hands that defiles a person.” [Matthew 15:16-20, also Mark 7:18-23]

My take on it is based on the Two Great Commandments:

22:34 Now when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they assembled together. 22:35 And one of them, an expert in religious law, asked him a question to test him: 22:36 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” 22:37 Jesus said to him, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 22:38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 22:39 The second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 22:40 All the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments.” [Matthew 22:34-40]

Viewed through the lens of the Second Great Commandment, “sexual immorality” would mean an immorality committed through sex: betrayal, abandonment, false promises, or the deliberate rejection of a responsibility. For example, if unmarried Smith were to impregnate unmarried Jones, it would be his responsibility to marry her and support her and her children, for a man must accept the consequences of his actions, including his sexual conduct. To refuse to do so would constitute a grave breach of that responsibility, a definite failure to “love your neighbor as yourself.”

Ultimately, it comes down to what Jesus said to the “rich young man:”

19:16 Now a man came up to him and said, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to gain eternal life?” 19:17 He said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 19:18 “Which ones?” he asked. Jesus replied, “Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false witness, 19:19 honor your father and mother and love your neighbor as yourself.”

The commandment says “Do not commit adultery.” Nothing more. Adultery is the violation of the marriage vow of fidelity and constancy; it always has been. When Paul of Tarsus attempted to broaden the commandment to include all the things he, an ascetic former Pharisee, disapproved, he went ultra vires. When subsequent preachers followed him in this regard, they were not following the Redeemer.

And I think that’s enough Gospel citations for one comment.

furball said...

Thanks, Fran!