Sex ads a poor way to respect future citizens
There are still some things in our society that are private and sacred. The sexual acts that take place within the marriage covenant are surely at the top of the list. Please consider this and the respect due our future citizens — that is, the children and grandchildren of the Rocky’s readership. They deserve — as do all Rocky readers — the respect and dignity so necessary to grow in the moral life.
If we are to raise a generation of young people who can uphold the moral direction to which our beloved nation has been raised by religion and civilization, then we as adults must surely be the leaders in the struggle.
Please, no more ads in the Rocky Mountain News about erectile dysfunction or premature ejaculation.
Rudolph and Mary Andras, Denver
So then I guess you approve of ads for the armed forces?
The ones where if you sign up, you are advocating the death of others. Since after all that is what our armed forces do, they are trained to kill.
You are against (what would appear to be) consensual sex but don't appear (according to this letter) to have a problem with killing others......
And your 'morals' are where exactly????
Michelle is right. After all it is people like her who support sex education to kindegarden. Classes that demonstrate how to place a condum on a bananna. That it is ok to experiment with the same sex. All this taught to children under the age of 6 in a classroom paid for and supported by our tax dollars.
Yet when it comes to defending this absurdity she doesnt want any support for those who would gladly lay down their life for her to have the right to force her will on her fellow citizens.
What a great country, no?
Posted by on October 6, 2007 05:31 AMand michele really loves abortion as it is her form of birth control because it lets her be free, but hates the death penalty as it takes a life.
Posted by on October 6, 2007 06:42 AM"who can uphold the moral direction to which our beloved nation has been raised by religion and civilization, then we as adults must surely be the leaders in the struggle.
Please, no more ads in the Rocky Mountain News about erectile dysfunction or premature ejaculation."
I think civilization is a much better explanation. It seems that once upon a time many of this country's "religious" leaders felt that it was acceptable morality to string someone up in a tree for the color of the skin, even to this day most white supremacy groups maintain a close affiliation to Christianity. Or maybe you are referring to the immorality of consensual sex by adults and the morality of feeling up altar boys under the age of consent? That's some adult leadership. Let me guess, you two have already written a check to replace the revenue that the paper would lose should they follow your suggestion. All you lefty collectivist types are the same, "Listen to me, follow my orders, even if I don't provide any practical means of doing so". Ever think about keeping your own house clean instead of trying to break into other people's?
Posted by Johnny Chan B. on October 6, 2007 07:07 AMJohnny Chan B,
Just a note to keep the record straight:
You are casting the onus for attempts to force religious and superstitious self-righteousness down the throats of everyone else, onto what you call "lefty collectivist types". The people who are in the forefront of that kind of "religious/moral" movement are NOT of the "left", nor are they "collectivist" - unless you call getting a full collection plate every Sunday morning by shearing the sheeple "collectivist".
Rather, they are the Right-wingnut "conservatives" much beloved of the current Republican Adminsitration, whose preachers and chief "moralists" revel in their invitations to the White House to confer with Bush about how to cheat the public out of taxpayer monies by way of "Faith Based" grants, while thumbing their noses at the First Amendment and the wall of separation between church and state.
Indeed, they are the first to whine and cry about being persecuted BY "the left", if anyone from anywhere dares to mention how devious, duplicitious, and otherwise offensive they are; regarding themselves, as they do, as the "guardians" of everyone else's business, having none of their own to begin with.
Posted by Old Grouch on October 6, 2007 07:56 AMOld Fool, please go to the surge thread for an explanation of what leftist/collectivism are, I really don't think there is a need to type all that twice. Don't jump to the conclusion that you are not ignorant of the meaning of leftism/rightism just because most of these folk are also ignorant. The hallmark of leftism is the viewpoint that individuals of differing viewpoints should be subjugated to the majority for the "betterment of us all", regardless if this violates their individual rights. It is a symptom of how out of wack this country is that people even try and argue that there are mainstream political figures of a rightist/individualist mindset, if you know of one, please let me know who they are so that I can research their platform as a potential for my vote next year. Not going to hold my breath though, state/people powers and respect for individual rights don't normally go hand-in-hand, just look at how well those left wing politics worked in early 20th century Germany and the late 20th century USSR. Or are you one of those lefties that won't fess up to all the deaths that have occurred as the result of your sick worldview?
Posted by on October 6, 2007 08:27 AM"The hallmark of leftism is the viewpoint that individuals of differing viewpoints should be subjugated to the majority for the "betterment of us all", regardless if this violates their individual rights". This is a classic case of setting up a straw man and then knocking it down. Please provide documentation of this ridiculous statement. It is in fact the left that is standing up for individual rights in the face of the relentless attack by this administration on the Bill of Rights.
Posted by Romulus on October 6, 2007 09:07 AMRudolph and Mary,
You stated:
"There are still some things in our society that are private and sacred. The sexual acts that take place within the marriage covenant ..."
Since you refer to the "marriage covenant", a private agreement of the partners to the marriage, I hope this means you see the clear requirement to exclude the "State" from your covenant. The current state definition of marriage, in no way, intersects with the concept you have defined. Yes, your view is the traditional concept, but completely at odds with the legal and modern definition created through a series of extremely offensive laws. According to those laws, sex and marriage are completely separated; marriage is only about money. There is not even any difference in the law concerning children - they are treated the same whether produced within a "legal" marriage or not. Colorado is a unilateral, no-fault, divorce state and even provides significant financial incentives for divorce. Consider it full employment for family destroyers - divorce lawyers- as there are certainly no other logical explanations beyond "it's what the feminist demand". If you truly believe in the covenant of marriage, then you and your church must exclude the evil of state "permission" from your marriages. Do not seek a marriage from a minister who will ever perform a "state" marriage or allow the union to be controlled by the third party of government.
Posted by RS on October 6, 2007 09:08 AMRomulus,
Are you truly so naive? The Left has been the absolute opponent of individual rights for decades, prefering to place people into group identities while working feverishly to exclude any independent thought. As far as the Bill of Rights - the Left prefers the court created rights over the objective ones which are clearly spelled out. Take the 2nd Amendment as an example, a clear requirement designed to protect individual self-defense rights from the tyrrany of the majority. The need for this was repeatedly demonstrated throughout the 20th century by dictators such as Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and others. Yet, the Left continues to advocate control of those who demand their rights as individuals. Tell us, just how much control over personal choice will result from the "universal health care" proposals being bid up by the Left's presidential candidates? Will your hobby or lifestyle be banned as too costly?
Posted by RS on October 6, 2007 09:19 AMLeft /right, right /left, your all marching in lock step to the same opposed ideologies that existed during the inquisition and all other travesties of justice mankind has managed to visit on their fellow humans, if taken to it's irrational ends.
Nothing of value comes from that kind of diametricaly opposed arguments and diatribes. It's an absurdity indulged in by those lacking the imagination to seek solutions.
Posted by Allen Campbell on October 6, 2007 10:09 AMAnon male at 5:31. You have to admit that the birth rate among bananas has fallen sharply since they use condoms. Now if only our neighbors would teach their zucchini to use rubbers, we would all be better off.
Posted by Sharon B. on October 6, 2007 10:13 AMI bet there are kindergarteners who can spell condom and banana better than 5:31 can.
Posted by Hans Christian Brando on October 6, 2007 10:21 AManonymous of whatever hour and/or RS, or whoever,
I have been down to the postings on the line about the surge; and I have read your posting.
To begin with, I was unaware that you are holding yourself to be now the principal philosopher of the 21st Century, and that your presentation is to be taken as the absolute last word in definition of what things are; and how they are to be regarded. That being the case, I'll respond as I always do to a self-created delusional belief-system.
You will win few - if any - converts to your position of current "sole, only, and expert, seer, revelator and exponent of all truth " with your unpleasant habit of starting your attempts by insulting those who do not happen to already believe in your delusions.
Your outrageously arrogant personality aside, however, belief-systems are, by their very nature, not debatable. And I waste no time on delusions, of grandeur or any other self-inflation. That said, there is nothing more to be added, except that I return to the last line of my posting of 11:32 AM; and suggest you might consider it as the final word from me on the subject.
RS:
"Take the 2nd Amendment as an example, a clear requirement designed to protect individual self-defense rights." If things are so clear, why is there that inconvenient modifying clause, which you are trying your best to ignore, about the need for a well regulated militia? Sensible regulation of gun ownership is not the same as confiscation.
I agree, anybodys actions with their spouse should be sacrad and secret, but definately brag about the stripper mom that took it in all three holes to by diapers (its a turn on!:) or if you are republican you can read about bathroom sex with your selected senater or congressman!
Posted by TJ on October 6, 2007 12:52 PMOld Grouch what is with the rise in anonymous posters.? And the quality of threads has fallen off to slinging insults at each other, no matter the subject matter.
Must be getting old, longing for the good old days, just 2 months ago. Love. S.
Posted by Sharon B. on October 6, 2007 02:29 PMhI sHARON,
Do you suppose we could blame it all on the overpopulation of the zuchinni? After all, this is the season where the "proud parents" go around to drop off their overage on everyone else. Does that lead to a higher "birth-rate" among the "logically challenged" - to stay perfectly PC about it - would you suppose?
Might make just about as much sense as the self-procaimed expert on the matter of political philosophy does anyway.
Have a good weekend. I'm off to an evening event. And I hope that snow they predicted doesn't start too soon.
Posted by Old Grouch on October 6, 2007 02:45 PM"Sensible regulation of gun ownership is not the same as confiscation."
Yet, confiscation is precisely what has happened in New York, California, Washington, DC. etc. Fortunately, an appealed decision from Washington, DC. court will clarify the individual right that is so clear in the Constitution. You can ignore the clear intent all you would like, try to stretch the "militia" justification in as many new directions as you please, it does not alter the fact that the intent was a restating of an existing human right. We are citizens, not subjects; nor are we slaves, even as many Leftists attempt to slowly recreate slavery through excessive taxation. You do need to have the consent of the governed in order to remove our rights - just understand their are millions of us who will not give you that consent!
Posted by RS on October 6, 2007 02:58 PM"Sensible regulation of gun ownership is not the same as confiscation."
Yet, confiscation is precisely what has happened in New York, California, Washington, DC. etc. Fortunately, an appealed decision from a Washington, DC. court will clarify the individual right that is so clear in the Constitution. You can ignore the clear intent all you would like, try to stretch the "militia" justification in as many new directions as you please, it does not alter the fact that the intent was a restating of an existing human right. We are citizens, not subjects; nor are we slaves, even as many Leftists attempt to slowly recreate slavery through excessive taxation. You do need to have the consent of the governed in order to remove our rights - just understand their are millions of us who will not give you that consent!
Posted by RS on October 6, 2007 03:00 PMSharon: yer so funny!! :-)
I don't think the letter writers exist. Seriously. That kind of mindset is too wierd to be real, isn't it?
Posted by Sheila on October 6, 2007 05:41 PMBy the way, where I can I sign up for the class with the banana? My expertise goes only as far as the real thing and I'm a great proponent for learning new skills. Ya never know when they might come in handy.
KISSES!!!
Posted by Sheila on October 6, 2007 07:17 PMTo the original letter writers; The examples you gave of information on erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation are problems that in fact interfere with a healthy sexual relationship between loving partners.
We no longer live in the dark ages where sex was a taboo subject and people dealt with their issues in shame and ignorance.
Posted by Michael R on October 6, 2007 08:25 PMSheila, hi. I don`t know where the kids have those banana lessons. But we hear about them all the time.
Some of these threads attract seriously mental people. After awhile, I just have to get a good book or do something else.
You should be prepared for Holloween if Mr. Happy comes in a disguise, what can he be but a banana or a cucumber?
Posted by Sharon B. on October 6, 2007 10:49 PMANONYMOUS TO OG AT 9:35
yeesh!!! I skimmed through your post, hoping there would be some point to all you had typed, but alas, I was disappointed.
I did come upon one thing you said that I found rather interesting. You said you like to write essays. I support this, however, I think you need to take a writing lesson or two. You drone on and on about things in a rather incoherent manner. Thus, you seem to be wasting your time.
Also, you (and sadly, Old Grouch) tend to go WAY off topic in these posts. I suggest you two exchange email address and/or phone numbers and get together in the real world to discuss whatever silliness you find OH-SO-DAMNED-IMPORTANT.
Good luck.
KISSES!!!
Posted by Sheila on October 7, 2007 10:12 AMNo one seems to have picked up on the curious phrase "future citizens." What are " the children and grandchildren" now, aliens?
Posted by Hans Christian Brando on October 8, 2007 11:00 AM"Future citizens" can be found in the reservoir tip.
Posted by Trojan on October 9, 2007 11:48 AMSince when do advertisements about erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation make us immoral?? I've probably glimpsed these ads in my paper hundreds of times, but they've never made me want to go out and kill, lie, steal, or commit adultery.
Posted by karen on October 16, 2007 05:38 PM