About Me

Name: Tomás Aquinas
Location: La Junta, CO
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

"Un-Christian behavior ..."

Posted by Tomás Aquinas on Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:07:56 PM


Doug Jones, chairman of the board of the Colorado State University system, is a perfect example of why we do not want a "Christian" or any other religious influence in our political and governmental affairs.

Sound recording of CSU closed-door meeting

The board has agreed to pay legal fees for the Pueblo Chieftain, the Fort Collins Coloradan, and the Colorado Independent, three organizations that filed suit against the board for repeated violations of the Colorado Open Meetings law.

In a recording of the closed door meeting during which the board finally selected then vice-chairman Joe Blake to be university chancellor, board member Doug Jones went on about how efforts by the General Assembly to open the meetings was "un-Christian".

His logic escapes me, but apparently the rest of the board agreed, as they continued to fight to keep their shenanigans out of the public eye.

I would really like for Jones to explain to me the theological foundation for his reasoning. Meanwhile, Jones and his cronies continue to run the university system. We may not have that "Christian" nation the fundies go on about, but we apparently do have a "Christian" board of directors for the state university. I can only wonder if they will bring back burning at the stake those they deem to be heretics.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Gay Marriage Slippery Slope Is Back

Posted by Tomás Aquinas on Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:07:04 PM


Here is an interesting commentary from Bill Jacobson over on Legal Insurrection:

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: The Gay Marriage Slippery Slope Is Back

It's based on an article in the current issue of Newsweek:

Polyamory: the next sexual revolution

If you thought the Fundies could come unhinged over gay marriage, what do you think they will do over this?

Even more interesting are some of the economic 'issues'. Many people don't really think of it, but one of the big arguments against gay marriage has nothing to do with either religion or morality - note that the two are not mutually inclusive.

Nope. It has to do with economics, with finances.

Benefits. Spousal benefits paid by employers. Health insurance, for example. Life insurance. It has to do with taxes. Lots of money in the game here.

Now, if we are going to recognized gay marriage, what possible argument can be presented against legitimizing - particularly for the purposes of collecting said benefits - these polyamoric relationships?

Gay rights activists are already distancing themselves from polyamoric relationships:

Gay-marriage advocates have become leery of public association with the poly cause—lest it give their enemies ammunition. As Andrew Sullivan, the Atlantic columnist, wrote recently, "I believe that someone's sexual orientation is a deeper issue than the number of people they want to express that orientation with." In other words, polyamory is a choice; homosexuality is not. It's these dynamics that have made polyamory, as longtime poly advocate Anita Wagner puts it, "the political football in the culture war as it relates to same-sex marriage."

If that ain't a hoot, I don't know what is. Is the Gay Rights marriage thing about interpersonal love? Or is it simply about sexual orientation? Gay rights activists are fine with dumping the traditional vision of marriage, going on about gay couples who 'love' each other should be able to express this by way of the marriage union ... but they are not going to cut anyone else with ... 'non-traditional' ... views of human relationships any slack at all. Because if they do, it will cloud their own battle, and there's a lot of money at stake in that.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Four men, three women, and a gorilla

Posted by Tomás Aquinas on Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:06:12 PM
The National Endowment for the Arts has been a bone of contention for some time, given some of the real trash it funds.

But under the Obama regime, they've hit some new lows.

The National Endowment for the Arts, for some reason, qualifies for Porculus Americanus funding. They got $80 million out of the $787 billion that the Obamanians are busily flushing down the toilet.

I'm wasn't sure how shoveling money into the NEA was going to stimulate the economy, but it's becoming clear now.

The NEA is funding .. nude simulated-sex dances, Saturday night "pervert" revues and the airing of pornographic horror films at art houses in San Francisco.

I gotta tell you, I really have a hard time seeing how this is stimulating the economy. I can envision the pervs thumping their mules, so to speak, in the dark theaters, but that's a different kind of 'stimulation'. Is that what Congress had in mind? Well ... maybe Barney Frank ...

The Obama Plan. Four men, three women, and a gorilla. All with jobs. Primary jobs, too. Another Obamanian success story.

Stimulus bill funds go to art houses showing 'perve' reviews
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »