Lomax.
I previously observed:
“The problem with our discussion is this: You [another poster] believe that Trump is the devil incarnate and hold this belief with a kind of compulsive departure from common sense. Many on the extreme left agree with you, basically because they cannot abide straight talk and political incorrectness. More than all else, they do not tolerate anyone who disagrees with them.
“If they had their way, they would repeal the first Amendment and confer on everyone the right to agree only with them. This sad fact is amply demonstrated on college campuses by the inclination to punish those who have conservative opinions.”
I did not fully realize the wisdom of these words until I read many of the recent posts in this thread. It appears that anyone on this forum who disagree with the ideology of the extreme left can expect personal attacks, ridicule and insults of every description.
It is a sad state of affairs that there are some who see no benefit in the free exchange of ideas but, like peevish children, seek instead to muzzle those with whom they disagree. This does not speak well for this forum. Although, this is a matter for you, the moderator, it cannot help but make one disinclined to have any connection with such doings.
In fact, I was prepared to present a legal and political analysis of the recent indictments returned against several Russian citizens by the special prosecutor. To that end, I secured a copy of the full presentment.
Such an analysis would certainly bear directly on the issues presented. However, in view of the level to which this discussion has sunk, I am no longer interested in submitting it.
In your recent post, you seem more interested in side issues than in the more relevant aspects of the discussion. For the moment at least, I will indulge this inclination by presenting what follows.
Here are a few quotes from:
http://www.biomedsearch.com/article/Sex ... 84381.htmlRegarding Socrates:
“In Plato's early dialogues, Socrates engages in almost light-hearted banter around the subject of pederasty. He is ready to advise young men on the way to win a beloved, and he speaks openly of his own erotic arousal.(56)”
“Through much of the dialogue, Socrates seems to favor the ‘non-lover,’ [the young boy] but the climax is reached when Socrates, in altogether driven language, suddenly pours forth in glorious depiction of erotic erousal. Eros is 'inspired madness,' it is 'the greatest of heaven's blessings,'(57) and the soul possessed of it flies heavenward like a wing of feathers.” [Numbers refer to citations of authority in the paper]
Regarding the Age of the Victims:
“The boy himself was thought to be at the peak of his attractiveness between the ages of 12 and 16, though he might have been used by the man when he was even younger. The boy remained beautiful so long as his body seemed sexually immature. Once he passed through puberty and began to grow bodily hair, the man usually would replace him with a younger child. (16)”
I think that any decent human being would regard the homosexual exploitation a boy of 12, 13, 14 or 15 years as serious criminal behavior meriting a long term of imprisonment. The Exploitation in this way of a 16 year old boy, at the, very least, will constitute the serious crime of corruption of a minor.
I have prosecuted cases of this sort and I can tell you that the homosexual abuse of a particular boy typically starts at about the age of 12 and extends at least to about the age of 16. These boys are traumatized by this abuse and suffer mental problems all their lives. Many, if not most, become homosexuals themselves, although not necessarily pederasts.
Plato who likely was both a pederast and a victim in his youth, did, in the wisdom of old age, condemn the practice and argued that it be outlawed.
The homosexual exploitation of young boys was reviled by the lower classes in Athens but continued unabated for centuries among the ruling class. [See link above]
There was no law in ancient Greece that forbad the homosexual abuse of underage boys. However, I think it is safe to say that in the modern world this loathsome practice has been properly criminalized, except in the most backward areas.
Pederasty is abuse because it involves the sexual exploitation of young boys. It is homosexual because it involves sexual acts between males. Accordingly, it is a proper use of the English language to refer to this practice as “homosexual abuse.” I prefer the precise use of the language and do not concern myself with the foolishness of PC speech.
You miss the point of the expression. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” It certainly does not mean that “everybody has lost the capacity for critique,” as you put it. It means that it is hypocritical for one to condemn the sexual behavior of another when he and others commonly engage in the same behavior themselves. Here I refer to sex among consenting adults.
However, one who engages in consensual sex may properly condemn the sexual abuse of children, the forcing of young girls into prostitution, the sexual harassment of women, the unwanted groping of women, sexual assaults on women, the abuse of power by actual or implied threats designed to take sexual advantage of women, and the like.
This distinction should be clear enough.
