I just saw a quote from you where you said one of your concerns - were you to become First Lady - was regarding your husband's mental state over the course of his presidency.
I find that an odd choice of concern to bubble up to #1 on the list. It begs the question: what evidence in the past leads you to be SO concerned about your husband's mental state? People don't just spontaneously go crazy - they typically manifest signs of it long before any designation would be applied.
Thus - as concerned voters - can you elaborate on past manifestations of psychotic breaks by your husband? We too would be very concerned if he were to be elected and his subsequent mental state were to become an issue. In the role of "leader of the country" it is very important to elect people who are expected to be mentally stable over the course of their term of office. Don't you agree?
Saturday, September 29, 2012
Ratzinger - regarding humans
Your claim that non-heterosexuals "aren't fully developed humans" raises several questions.
Theologically: how does this revelation affect dogma regarding a Creator? Did God just make a mistake - and why has the topic of "non-human humans" not ever come up in the past? Surely you of all people know that there have been non-heterosexuals since long before the forming of the Church; the papacy alone has had several of them according to well-documented history. Since the apostolic nature of the Church is THROUGH the papacy itself, what does it mean since some of that tradition involves "non-human humans"?
Rights: Of course the wider problem is introduced within the context of "human rights." Which human rights apply ONLY to "complete humans" and which are no longer extendable to "under-developed homans?"
Language: to what extent does a word like "humane" apply to those who are no longer included as real humans?
Genetics: if someone has children and then is discovered to be "not fully human" what status does that make the child? IS there some miracle in conception that a non-heterosexual parent having a fully-heterosexual child somehow re-instates their complete humanity? If the child is also non-heterosexual are they even less human than their less-than-human parent?
Theologically: how does this revelation affect dogma regarding a Creator? Did God just make a mistake - and why has the topic of "non-human humans" not ever come up in the past? Surely you of all people know that there have been non-heterosexuals since long before the forming of the Church; the papacy alone has had several of them according to well-documented history. Since the apostolic nature of the Church is THROUGH the papacy itself, what does it mean since some of that tradition involves "non-human humans"?
Rights: Of course the wider problem is introduced within the context of "human rights." Which human rights apply ONLY to "complete humans" and which are no longer extendable to "under-developed homans?"
Language: to what extent does a word like "humane" apply to those who are no longer included as real humans?
Genetics: if someone has children and then is discovered to be "not fully human" what status does that make the child? IS there some miracle in conception that a non-heterosexual parent having a fully-heterosexual child somehow re-instates their complete humanity? If the child is also non-heterosexual are they even less human than their less-than-human parent?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)