Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The Woke without their makeup …

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
Clarence Thomas official SCOTUS portrait.jpg
Clarence Thomas (2007)/Public Domain

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Roe (abortion on demand everywhere) unconstitutional, the elite Woke have been rampaging generally – but against one judge in particular. Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas is black and, wouldn’t you know …

Brendan O’Neill has the story at Spiked. We can’t republish this racist abuse; you must read it there for yourself. One of his own comments sums up the enlightened Woke view:

Why has Clarence Thomas become the target of so much flak following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade? It’s because he’s black. It’s because, as someone with black skin, he is not meant to hold conservative views on issues like abortion. In the eyes of the furious woke agitators who are haranguing Thomas even more than they are the other Roe-sceptical justices, he has not only made a bad legal decision – he has also betrayed his race. His sin is twofold: he has undermined the right to abortion and he has failed in his racial duty to nod unquestioningly along to every ‘progressive’ idea. He’s a racial transgressor, a bad black man, and therefore he must be reprimanded even more severely than the white folk on the Supreme Court. Ladies and gentlemen, behold the scourge of woke racism.

(June 26, 2022)

Apparently, Mr. Justice Thomas does have civil rights so long as he does not exercise them.

When you read this stuff, you don’t wonder why the Woke believe in “nature red in tooth and claw,” Darwin’s “survival of the fittest,” and all that. When they were deafening the rest of us us with “Love Is Love!” the sharper among them were just trying to spot the carotid artery…

Here’s what the court actually ruled vs. what the Woke are screaming about.

Here’s a sympathetic view of Thomas and his role on the Court:

Meanwhile, a very active American abortionist gets the true crime treatment from a pair of investigative journalists from Ireland. Perhaps no American would touch it.

And now, let’s turn it over to the Babylon Bee for some lighter moments: Roe vs. Wade aborted in the 198th trimester:

Millions become prolife after learning that they won’t have to listen to Pink any more.

and, Bee-style,

Are you a journalist? With Roe v. Wade overturned it’s YOUR job to fight back by controlling the language and righteously steering the narrative toward a world in which abortions are safe, legal, free, common, and performed through all 9 months of pregnancy. That’s what journalism is all about! Here is a list of terms you should use going forward.”

The good news is, readers will learn more by seeking out sources other than Woke newsrooms.

Speaking of Woke newsrooms: This isn’t fake news: Mainstream media are very out of touch. Massively so, if recent survey research is any guide. But how did they get SO far out of touch? Pew Research Center’s recent survey sheds some light on the gap between journalists and the public they are supposed to be trying to reach.

Comments
Vb at 59, It's not enough to say there's a war. People need actual examples. Specific things to focus on.relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
05:23 PM
5
05
23
PM
PDT
“Would you care to say why you left?” It’s not that I am hesitant to share the whys but it’s way off topic. Suffice to say I have some very serious theological problems with the Roman Catholic Church. Let’s us both lock arms together as we fight the war being waged on Western Civilization “You’ll note that my statement was general, not specific to you.” Thanks for the clarification. Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
05:18 PM
5
05
18
PM
PDT
Vb at 57, Would you care to say why you left? You'll note that my statement was general, not specific to you. I was pointing out the bad atmosphere I experienced myself at college and reports I read about Catholics, in general, leaving or no longer practicing their faith, which often started once they got to college.relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
05:05 PM
5
05
05
PM
PDT
“A common problem for Catholics. Leave High School and start attending a “party time” college” Interesting, rather than ask me why you assume. I attended a D1 school on a Football scholarship which kept me quite busy.. Partying had nothing to do with my leaving the Roman Catholic Church. Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
05:01 PM
5
05
01
PM
PDT
“There will be a judgment. I’m required to remind you.” I guess I am required to remind you of that as well. Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:53 PM
4
04
53
PM
PDT
Vb at 54, A common problem for Catholics. Leave High School and start attending a "party time" college. Let's look at the menu: lots of attractive women, sex outside of marriage, drinking and illegal drugs. So some people took one of each. Not good for the soul or a good life. So you decided to leave. Your Baptism still matters. There will be a judgment. I'm required to remind you. A brief personal aside. I got involved with the local Punk Rock scene in the late 1970s. I never went to the parties because I needed - yes, needed - to stay away from that.relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:42 PM
4
04
42
PM
PDT
“I suspect you’re not a Catholic “ Attended Catholic schools from grade 1 thru 12. Was an altar boy. Left the Catholic Church when I was 18. Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:36 PM
4
04
36
PM
PDT
Almost 8000 roses were sent to Nancy Pelosi's office from that campaign, and I will imagine that quite a lot more rosaries than that were prayed for her.Silver Asiatic
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:33 PM
4
04
33
PM
PDT
Vb at 49, I suspect you're not a Catholic and did not look into that. Catholic News Agency excerpt: “I am therefore inviting all Catholics to join in a massive and visible campaign of prayer and fasting for Speaker Pelosi: commit to praying one rosary a week and fasting on Fridays for her conversion of heart.” Cordileone urged Catholics and people of goodwill to sign up for the “Rose and a rosary for Nancy Pelosi” campaign.'relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT
Vivid @46 - very true. I'm glad to see more black commentators and leaders realizing that fact and speaking out about it. The number of black conservatives is growing. Clarence Thomas was a pioneer in that way.Silver Asiatic
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:27 PM
4
04
27
PM
PDT
Related https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alrxnLK9AxA Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:24 PM
4
04
24
PM
PDT
Related “What do you care about what the Pope does? “ As a Catholic you should . Did he not just embrace Pelosi? Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:21 PM
4
04
21
PM
PDT
Vb at 46, Can you be more specific? What did "white liberals" do to qualify as an enemy?relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:18 PM
4
04
18
PM
PDT
CD at 45, What do you know about Catholic doctrines? What do you know about the Catholic Church's position on any issue? "... “doctrines” that not even the Vatican is interested in these days."relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:16 PM
4
04
16
PM
PDT
Reading through these comments I can’t help but think of Malcom X and his views on white liberals. He called the white liberal the biggest racists and biggest threat to blacks and ain’t that the truth.. CD ,Joholo and Sev pick out the black man as their target “Blacks' biggest enemy is a white liberal” Malcom X Vividvividbleau
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
04:11 PM
4
04
11
PM
PDT
During one of Mitt Romney's early forays into running for the WH, radio pundit Lynn Samuels said, "I don't dislike Romney because he's Mormon, I dislike him because he's a schmuck." The same can be said about Clarence Thomas, it's not the fact that he's black that makes him so odious, it's that he is a sanctimonious creep that took full advantage of affirmative action to get himself into elite schools and cushy federal jobs, then turned around and did everything he could to pull up the ladder behind him, thumbing his nose at a generation of young people of color. The snickers, even among the GOP, were palpable when GHWB nominated him to the Supreme Court saying that he was "the most qualified candidate in the country." It is almost incomprehensible that a sitting Supreme Court justice, in the 21st century, would even entertain overturning decisions affording fundamental due process and equal protection rights to the use of contraception and same-sex marriage (read his concurrence in Dobbs), but there you have it. Thomas with all the vision of an 8th century prelate is weaving into American jurisprudence Catholic "doctrines" that not even the Vatican is interested in these days. His mentor, Scalia, would be mighty proud of old Clarence as he takes us kicking and screaming back to the Dark Ages........chuckdarwin
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
03:39 PM
3
03
39
PM
PDT
JH at 39, False equivalence regarding adoptive children placed in heterosexual households. A group I will now call The Blind exists and you are being led by the them. Let's do the math: One Man + One Man OR - One Woman + One Woman DOES NOT EQUAL One Man + One Woman. So the math doesn't work and the biology doesn't work. So same-sex couples can get 'married' because the Supreme Court, not the people, said so? This was on the ballot. It did not go well. So the Supreme Court gave them what they wanted? Hurray for the Supreme Court? Let's see the reasoning: Mom and dad could object or throw us out of the house, so we'll create 'domestic partnerships.' Oh wait. Gay groups said that's not enough. They wanted 100% "equivalence" with heterosexual marriage, otherwise they are 'second-class.' So, the "legal" exists out of thin air. "puritanical sensibilities" from page 32 of The Leftist Handbook. Nonsense. Private sexual conduct should meet certain criteria as opposed to "She's hot." You are ruled, and others like you, by your flesh. "BS. You saw what you wanted to see. You didn’t see the neighbour’s wife who always wore sunglasses to hide the bruise. You saw the neighbours teen daughter who went to live with her aunt for seven months. You saw the priest reassigned to another parish. You never saw the uncle who your neighbour would not allow near their daughter. You never saw the illegal abortions, the homosexuals jailed, etc. because they were never talked about. " QUIT LYING? OK? Stop now. Do you think men have stopped beating their wives or girlfriends today? Yes or no. Have teen daughters suddenly stopped living with their aunt for seven months today? Yes or no. I saw one religious that was removed from a convent. Me and others never heard the reason why. Catholics believe in avoiding scandal. That whatever this woman did was handled by those with the proper authority. And uncles behaving badly toward daughters stopped today? Yes or no. I stood outside of an abortion clinic and never saw a legal abortion. I read how NARAL lied about the scope of illegal abortions. Why were homosexuals jailed? You talk about that without any context at all. Do people who are homosexuals still end up in jail today for other reasons? You are just mindlessly quoting from the What Leftists Should Say to Christians Who Say the 1950s Were Good handbook. I definitely approve of censorship in the media. In the 1960s, a man would appear on TV and address viewers. "I represent the Standards and Practices Department of your TV station. We review all programs to make sure they are suitable for the entire family." Did you get that? Standards, as in real, and good standards so that everyone from grandma to the 4 year old could watch TV without anything offensive. Again, you are mindlessly reading from the Leftist handbook: "Tell Christians that they are stupid if they think two FICTIONAL married characters from the 1950s, who were always seen in separate beds, did not have sex." (Page 63.) Here's reality: I had two parents, I knew where they slept. And Leftist were responsible for everything good? Not by a long shot. "But in your “golden age” men were legally allowed to hit their wives. It took your despised “leftists” to change it." Only Leftists use the Official Leftist Term: "golden age." What are you talking about? There was nothing good about the 1950s - at all? Well, according to Leftists - no. And now, men are still hitting their wives. Look up battered women's shelters. So in the sick and twisted Leftist mind, only Leftists are good. Only Leftists do good. Nobody else. And everything is better today? NO. Definitely no.relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
03:28 PM
3
03
28
PM
PDT
consenting adults
Who is an adult?jerry
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
03:27 PM
3
03
27
PM
PDT
Seversky at 33, If a married couple divorces without cause and remarries, that's wrong. In the Catholic Church, a married couple can get an Annulment. This means there was some defect in the marriage. "What is often referred to as a “marriage annulment” in the Church is actually a declaration by a Church tribunal (a Catholic Church court) that a marriage thought to be valid according to Church law actually fell short of at least one of the essential elements required for a binding union. "The process for obtaining such a declaration is frequently misunderstood. "These FAQs explain the process and its effects. For more information about the Church's teaching about divorce, see Divorce FAQs." Source: https://www.usccb.org/topics/marriage-and-family-life-ministries/annulment#tab--what-is-an-annulmentrelatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
01:23 PM
1
01
23
PM
PDT
JH at 31, "Not hurting anyone"? Again? I wanted a hand grenade when I was 12. Do you think 12 year olds should be allowed to have hand grenades? For the record, I'm totally against it. Allow me to translate your vagueness: I want to have sex with anybody so LEAVE ME ALONE! That's stupid. A society needs to be ordered in all its parts. Do you understand? Not - sex, sex, sex, followed by more sex with whoever. How about a "family" with three adults? Good idea? How about more than one conjugal partner? Here's where that's going: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2006/08/robert-george-beyond-gay-marri And pedophiles. Shouldn't they get the sex they want? Why not? So, how do you sell that idea to normal people? First, you stop calling them pedophiles. They are now "minor attracted persons." Doesn't that sound ... uh... vague? That's the idea. Since the late 1960s, radicals, anarchists and others said, "Give us this and we won't ask for anymore." That was a lie. It's still a lie todayrelatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT
JH at 30, The common Leftist tactic - someone is trying to "impose" on you and everybody else who believes like you do. That's false. 100%. True morality is regarded as foolishness. Man replaces the judgment and rules of God with his own perverse, fleshly judgment. "I'm not harming anyone else" is no excuse. You are promoting a situation where true love and commitment is replaced by the desires of the flesh. Why do you constantly modify your morality? Because you're waiting for the word on high from TOTAL STRANGERS and/or LEFTISTS? Do you think your own thinking skills are inferior? Do you wait for certain ideas to become popular and just imitate the cool kids? Going to Church due to "societal pressure" ?!!!? Pure, 100% Leftist propaganda. I did not go to Church because I didn't believe in God? I only went because my parents told me to go and went with me? NO! According to You, I went because my neighbors might look at me funny if I didn't? That's crap. Apparently, you are suffering from Leftist societal pressure. I hope you realize that. According to you, eat, drink, have lots of sex, and be merry, because this life is all there is. I am required to say the following: There is a judgment. It cannot be avoided.relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
01:04 PM
1
01
04
PM
PDT
Relatd: What “families” are you talking about? You mix truth with falsehoods. Homosexuals have no natural capability to have children.
Neither did my mother’s adoptive parents. Does this mean she wasn’t part of a family?
So they adopt kids and what do these kids see? Two men who are “married.” How are they married?
They are married in the same way that my wife and I are. The concept isn’t difficult. They avow their love and faithfulness to each other in front of witnesses and sign the necessary documents.
Even kids understand what heterosexual married couples do.
So? Do they do it in front of their children?
So you and some relatives are married. I don’t care about people who are doing things right. I’m concerned about people who are doing it wrong.
And who decides this? Without proof of harm, live and let live. The concept is simple. How does two men marrying each other harm anyone, other than your puritanical sensibilities?
NEVER EXISTED” “NEVER EXISTED” It existed. I was there. I saw how people BEHAVED toward each other.
BS. You saw what you wanted to see. You didn’t see the neighbour’s wife who always wore sunglasses to hide the bruise. You saw the neighbours teen daughter who went to live with her aunt for seven months. You saw the priest reassigned to another parish. You never saw the uncle who your neighbour would not allow near their daughter. You never saw the illegal abortions, the homosexuals jailed, etc. because they were never talked about.
TV was CENSORED so sexual perverts could not get their way. You could not say sex on TV. Married couples could not be shown in bed together. It was good. It was clean. It was wholesome and that’s what I saw.
So, you approve of censorship and against freedom of speech. Good to know. And, yes, I watched the same shows. Do you really think kids are so dumb that they though Rob and Laura Petrie actually slept in separate beds?
And homosexuals. Do you think I’m stupid?
The thought has crossed my mind.
And black people. I am friends with black people.
I’m not racist. Some of my best friends are black.
Women? I am sick and tired about hearing about WOMEN. Those people were used and abused by TOTAL STRANGERS for a long time. Still are. How much “progress” have women made?
Not enough. But at least they have legal recourse to husbands that hit them, which in your beloved era was legal. Sexual harassment now results in the firing of male coworkers and bosses rather than dismissing the woman making the complaint.
The Church is no longer covering up what? Have you taken one microsecond to get both sides of the story?
Both sides? When an adult is having sex with a minor under his charge, there isn’t two sides. And for decades the church handled it by moving the priest to a different parish rather than calling the police.
Spousal abuse is no longer “legal”? Do YOU think it stopped the moment that happened?
Of course not. Just as making abortion illegal won’t stop them. But in your “golden age” men were legally allowed to hit their wives. It took your despised “leftists” to change it.JHolo
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
12:54 PM
12
12
54
PM
PDT
Seversky, perhaps you could quote someone other than Pullman to try to undermine Lewis's quote? i.e. After all, Pullman is apparently a militant atheist and a liar in and of himself!
Philip Pullman Is A Liar https://jimmyakin.com/2007/11/philip-pullman.html
And Seversky, since CS Lewis is not to your liking, perhaps you can answer Dr. Colin Patterson's, former Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, question? i.e. "Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true?"
Colin Patterson: Can You Tell Me Anything About Evolution That Is True? - May 12, 2019 (with audio links to Patterson's speech) Excerpt: One or the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, or let’s call it non-evolutionary, was last year I had a sudden realization that for over twenty years I had thought that I was working on evolution in some way. Then one morning I woke up, and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it. That’s quite a shock, to learn that one can be so misled for so long. So either there was something wrong with me, or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory. Naturally, I know there is nothing wrong with me, so for the last few weeks, I’ve tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people. The question is: Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff in the Field Museum of Natural History, and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar at the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time, and then eventually one person said, “Yes, I do know one thing. It ought not to be taught in high school.” https://uncommondescent.com/evolution/colin-patterson-can-you-tell-me-anything-about-evolution-that-is-true/ Colin Patterson (1933–1998), was a British palaeontologist at the Natural History Museum in London from 1962 to his official retirement in 1993 also see many more damning quotes against Darwinian evolution from leading experts, here https://gerdapeacheysviews.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/can-you-tell-me-anything-you-know-about-evolution-any-one-thing-that-is-true-colin-patterson/
bornagain77
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
12:12 PM
12
12
12
PM
PDT
Seversky
Doesn’t the Catholic Church forbid divorce and regard remarriage as a sin?
Yes, this is reserved for Catholics who are married with vows before God - in a sacramental marriage. To break that vow (a promise "until death do us part") would be like lying under oath in a federal court, or in some very significant situation. If however, one of the spouses defrauded themselves at the time of marriage and had no intention of living the Catholic lifestyle - then that's not a valid marriage and could be annulled so the other party can marry again (if the marriage breaks up). If both parties fully understand their vow and commitment, then they're bound. If they divorce, they cannot remarry because they're bound by their vows before God. In the Catholic view, the purpose of marriage is not the feeling of love (although many people think that's what it is and when they don't feel love they think the marriage failed). It's instead, being of service to one another, desiring to raise a family (and doing that if possible) and being a good example to society of married life - helping others, etc. It's a means of serving God, not just in giving oneself pleasure. There is necessary pleasure and joy that comes along with it, but couples can work out their differences and keep the family together. But even if they have to split that's not necessarily a sin. It's only immoral if they marry another person after having made their vows.Silver Asiatic
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
12:09 PM
12
12
09
PM
PDT
Jerry/32
Is there anytime sex is immoral or should be prohibited?
As long as sex is between consenting adults, I see no reason for any restrictions. If one party refuses consent or is unable to provide informed consent for some reason or is too young to be able to provide informed consent then that should be prohibited.Seversky
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:47 AM
11
11
47
AM
PDT
JH at 27, What "families" are you talking about? You mix truth with falsehoods. Homosexuals have no natural capability to have children. The Supreme Court did a workaround with voters who rejected same-sex marriage, so-called. So they adopt kids and what do these kids see? Two men who are "married." How are they married? Even kids understand what heterosexual married couples do. So you and some relatives are married. I don't care about people who are doing things right. I'm concerned about people who are doing it wrong. I wrote about DIVORCE in the context of ads in newspaper Classifieds from the 1980s. "Who cares about the sanctity of marriage? I'm a lawyer and I want to make a quick buck." Divorce became too easy and the "No-Fault" aspect was abused. So divorce is down? If people do it wrong for years, and see the wreckage among people they know, they start to see how to do it right - after YEARS of doing it wrong. "NEVER EXISTED" "NEVER EXISTED" It existed. I was there. I saw how people BEHAVED toward each other. I had neighbors who were like family. There was a man down the street who grew beautiful roses. On the next street were two men who sharpened saws and blades out of a garage. The Church was the center of the community. No, not everyone went to the same Church but they went. During Summer Vacation I would wake up to the sounds of a hammer pounding or see someone painting their house or garage. TV was CENSORED so sexual perverts could not get their way. You could not say sex on TV. Married couples could not be shown in bed together. It was good. It was clean. It was wholesome and that's what I saw. And homosexuals. Do you think I'm stupid? That I have not studied this? Who was in charge of diagnosis for homosexuals back then? I know that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual came out in 1952. But, the American Psychiatric Association decided to ignore the evidence and held a vote in 1973 to declassify it. A vote? And black people. I am friends with black people. I am grateful that non-violent people like the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. did things the right way. He was a Baptist minister. It's not correct to call him Dr. King. Women? I am sick and tired about hearing about WOMEN. Those people were used and abused by TOTAL STRANGERS for a long time. Still are. How much "progress" have women made? https://theweek.com/articles/467944/most-common-job-women-same-1950 Your beloved LEFTISTS are lying to to you. Got that? The Church is no longer covering up what? Have you taken one microsecond to get both sides of the story? Or did you only hear the MainFake Media side? So, tell me, out of all priests in the time period in question, what number actually did something? All Christian ministers? When something like that actually happened, actual victims acted - not the date on the calendar. As in, today is automatically better because it's the 21st Century. Reality doesn't work like that. What do you care about what the Pope does? It's obvious the Leftist/Liberal Media does because at certain times of the year and after certain "legal" events that go against Leftist ideology, the Church gets dragged through the mud. That has not changed and it's gotten worse. I don't defend wrongdoing but I will always point out that the Church takes blame but when sexual abuse occurs in public schools, not so much. "Teenage girls that get pregnant are no longer removed from high school." Why is that a good thing? "Suicide rates amongst gay teens is declining." And what? I don't think suicide is a good thing but you are pushing the LEFTIST narrative again. And IF rates are declining, where is the scientific evidence? Interracial marriage is legal? Again with the "legal." You think zero interracial marriages occurred before the legal? Do I want people to be treated well? Treated fairly? Yes. But today, just because something is legal does not always mean it's right. "There is nothing wrong with having sex before marriage. I highly recommend it." Why do you write such idiotic things? Who died and put you in charge of sexual morality? You say you're married and you promote this? Truth mixed with lies. Spousal abuse is no longer "legal"? Do YOU think it stopped the moment that happened? Do you think men, right now, have stopped beating their wives? Is the "legal" all you care about? Do you think battered women no longer exist?relatd
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:46 AM
11
11
46
AM
PDT
Bornagain77/28
Sev, of all people, at 26 laments the supposed lack of honesty in others? I think my irony meter just blew up: https://i.gifer.com/7OFh.mp4
‘I wish I were younger. What inclines me now to think you may be right in regarding it [evolution] as the central and radical lie in the whole web of falsehood that now governs our lives is not so much your arguments against it as the fanatical and twisted attitudes of its defenders.’ – Lewis, C.S., Private letter (1951) to Captain Bernard Acworth
I don't know why you think I would be impressed by a CS Lewis quote. I prefer Philip Pullman
Philip Pullman, whose His Dark Materials trilogy presents as a sort of anti-Narnia, regards Lewis's religious writings as "bullying, hectoring and dishonest in all kinds of ways", and the Narnia books as actually "wicked". He says: "I find them very dodgy and unpleasant – dodgy in the dishonest rhetoric way – and unpleasant because they seem to embody a world view that takes for granted things like racism, misogyny and a profound cultural conservatism that is utterly unexamined." Among Pullman's charges ("other little things that just occur in passing") is that "he pours scorn on little girls with fat legs. And, as one commentator said, among Lewis's readers will be some little girls with fat legs who find themselves utterly bewildered by this slur on something they can't help and are embarrassed and upset by already. It's the position, as this commentator said, of the teacher who curries favour with the bullies in the class by bullying the weak children with them."
Seversky
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT
Doesn't the Catholic Church forbid divorce and regard remarriage as a sin?. In that case, instead of acknowledging that humans are fallible creatures and can make mistakes in choosing their partners, it would force people to live out their lives in a failed and loveless relationship? How does that benefit anyone?Seversky
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:24 AM
11
11
24
AM
PDT
Who says that sex before marriage is immoral
Is there anytime sex is immoral or should be prohibited?jerry
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:15 AM
11
11
15
AM
PDT
PS, but please don’t get me wrong. I fully support your right to live your life according to your beliefs. But I do oppose the imposition of laws on others based on religious beliefs, when the behaviours being prohibited or persecuted are doing no harm to anyone.JHolo
July 2, 2022
July
07
Jul
2
02
2022
11:05 AM
11
11
05
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply