Editor Kris Janisch firstname.lastname@example.org
5:49 pm on Sunday, May 12, 2013
you deserve a kudo on this one. seems to me that the school has fallen into the now politically correct version of "equality". thanks for your tough minded comments.
4:34 pm on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Susan, good grief. you really twisted that one. what A. was saying that households consisting of husband and wife are the foundation of the state. It implies that same sex households are not "natural" in the order of things but it doesn't claim by any stretch that everybody will be gay. You have simply and grossly misinterpreted the point. I know that it was an honest misinterpretation. If I thought otherwise, I would flag your comment as inappropriate. In any event I am out of here, left with a sense of guilt for having wasted valuable time in what has devolved into craziness and malice. For which I am partly responsible, thus adding to my sense of guilt and a sense that I have allowed to sully myself by participating in what has become a parody of honest discussion.
3:50 pm on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
who said anything about everybody becoming gay? Really S, I don't know where you came up with that one. That's really out of left field. As to JD, not only have I studied hard science:astronomy, zoology, meteorology, geology, economics (I guess that counts as a "hard" science), I have DONE hard science (admittedly as a hobby of sorts).And I have read a lot about scientific matters. Besides I have studied the philosophy of science. And sadly your latest comments don't even touch on my point.
2:15 pm on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
S. Until now, I didn't even know that deleting a "reply" also deletes the original post. The Patch system is a bit complicated and you learn as you go. And the more I learn, the more I am reluctant to post anything at all.
2:17 pm on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
that's a stretch. Why are same sex marriages presumed to be more stable than traditional marriages? And for Julia S (that's the lady with the sneering and mocking comments about Aristotle) here are some quotes. Plato: "I think that the pleasure is to be deemed natural which arises out of intercourse between men and women; but that the intercourse of men to men, or of women to women, is contrary to nature...Symposium, 2198-d). And Aristotle: ".....first of all, there must necessarily be a union of those who cannot exist without another...husbands and wives are alike essential parts of the family..." He also said that the family is pre-political, and that without heterosexual households there would be no villages and without villages, no polis.
You missed the mark again: didn't even hit the target. Why trust the research? You are still depending on some authority. Did you do the research yourself? Obviously not.I am puzzled as to why you can't recognize an obvious point. BTW, the research could not have taken place if there were not a "community of science" that preceded it. For that matter, w/o Ptolemy's astronomy and math, Copernicus couldn't have come up with his theory. Science does not progress ex nihilo: typically you have to have error/partial truth/prior knowledge before you can find truth. In closing, tell me if you choose to do so: why are we even having these "debates". What purpose do they serve? Maybe you can give me some good reason. Free me from the sense of wasted time that accompanies these exchanges.
11:54 am on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
for S: as regards DL. I doubt that I have read even half of his posts. (In fact, I probably have only read about 1 of 5 posts that appear on these threads.) That having been said, it seems that he does often give generic answers: he thinks, probably naively, that many people read this stuff and that he is speaking to a more general audience. That doesn't mean, of course, that he is not answering your questions. BTW, I doubt that many people read our comments, local politicos and a few ideologues probably do but very few of the people that I have talked to even know that such discussions are taking place. And don't you think that it is a bit out of order, as in the instance of Mau, to "demand" answers. Finally, as to why I delete my comments: I have good and sufficient reasons, one of which is the fact that what happens in Woodbury does not stay in Woodbury. Comments get spread all over the Patch network and I don't like that.
10:40 am on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Chris, first your question was, as they say, loaded: a "gotcha" question. Be that as it may, if you look at my blogs on Patch you will find that I have commented extensively on the subject of SSM. Then I decided that it was time to move on. And I think that DL answered your question quite directly. Obviously, you are deeply and emotionally committed to a position on SSM and anything that I would say would not change your mind anyway. And talk about abrasive: your comments are downright insulting, nasty. To say nothing of the rants posted by Julie S. But what bothers me most is the anti-intellectualism of many of the comments. I try to approach these topics by trying to get people to think a little more deeply about the issues of the day. Finally, a bit of advice: supporters of SSM -- people like JS -- are doing their cause more harm than good.
8:25 am on Wednesday, April 24, 2013
S. I don't think that it's either fair or accurate to say that DL doesn't directly answer questions that are put to him. I think that for the most part he gives relevant and intelligent answers. The problem, I think, is that many folks don't understand the answers or, alternatively, don't like the answers.
8:04 pm on Tuesday, April 23, 2013
what???? I was referring to divorce, single parenting, etc. Not condemning anyone, just making a sociological observation. The breakdown of family as an institution impacts the political order in many ways: increased social welfare costs, troubled youth, family violence, etc. And the expansion of government as it responds to the resulting social pathologies. Don't think that anyone would disagree with that. As to "nature" that is another issue: I would just ask you if "requiring" people to live against their natural impulses is ipso facto "cruel". But I'm butting in on DL's territory: I don't want to put any more words in his mouth than I already have.
Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information.
Learn more »
If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here.
Learn more »
Woodbury news, events, and deals sent to you daily and breaking news as it happens.
See more options
You’re now signed up!
Enter your tip here and it will be sent straight to
Kris Janisch, Zac Farber, Chris Steller, Editor Scott Carlson, Micheal Foley, and Hannah Gruber,
Woodbury Patch's (incredibly grateful)