Rendering Unto Caesar: Separating the Wheat from the Chaff‏‏

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

In the few the fragments of the Jesus legend that were spared from the flames of orthodox censorship we can read of a metaphor of preparing grains of wheat for use as food. The metaphor can be applied a variety of ways depending on the intention of the individual applying it. The orthodox censors may have considered all aspects of the Jesus legend that challenged their own authority to be chaff for the literary funeral pyre. Only the few poorly transcribed texts that guaranteed orthodox sovereignty qualified as wheat for the minds of future generations. Likewise orthodox authorities may have seen heretics as chaff to be burned in vain over bonfires while orthodox virgins were upheld as exemplary wheat for generations of benighted people to come.

The leitmotiv of fiery martyrdom has been brought forward again with a call from a defender of Constantine Caesar. Peter Leithart hopes that Christians will face the fire of trial in the courts to oppose the Supreme Court's recent decision to strike down DOMA. Liethart is a big advocate of martyrdom given its effectiveness in promoting the cause of the early Church in the hearts and minds of Pagans of the time. The zealotry of early Christians to stand up against brutal persecutions struck non-Christians as awesome. It even led to a number of conversions. Leithart likes to think of Christians today as the same as those who willingly faced the lion's den.

In his own historic winnowing process Liethart downplays the way that the orthodox adopted the tactics of Pagan persecutors when they established a state sanctioned religion with little resemblance to the one that existed before the fourth century. By treating heretical leaders as chaff for the flames of state sanctioned religious terror the orthodox imitated the same kind of persecution that put them in power. Leithart sees the need for martyrdom on the part of Dominionists in an attempt to wrest control of the state back from heathen forces of secularism, but he fails to see the martyrdom of homosexuals who died at the hands of Christian persecutors. He also fails to see the martyrdom of teens homosexuals who commit suicide because of vicious bullying on the part of the pious.

In his book on his hero Constantine Caesar Leithart holds the man's hand up for curtailing animal sacrifice in Roman civil practice. He characterizes Pagan persecution against early Christians as a form of human sacrifice but fails to do the same for orthodox persecution against heresy. I got the distinct impression that he would have no problem making symbolic cannibalistic ritual a requirement for civil service as it was during the dominion of the medieval Church. Liethart professes to eschew sacrifice while espousing his own favorite form of sacrifice. Leithart gives us a great deal of food for thought. If his kids ever expressed such thoughts, they would receive a whipping at his hands.

What do you consider to be wheat for nourishment and chaff for the fire?

Links: Peter Leithart's call to enter the oven of martyrdom. Video on the defense of Constantine. Leithart's book defending a particular Caesar and his use of corporal punishment on his own kids.

First they came for Porn, but I said nothing...

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jul/22/david-cameron-crackdown-internet-pornography


This man wants to legislate your thoughts

And I thought U.S. politicians were all up in people's privates!

Seems the UK is about to get nasty with people who get off on viewing nasties on the intertubes.

From the above article:
( See, It's for the women & children.. )

Look, I am all for measures to eliminate child pornography, exploitation of children, or women, and anything to do with children/adult sexuality. As well as political corruption and unnecessary deaths from illegal abortions. I also want my teams to win every single game...

But...

The UK government's broad definitions of images that depict violence against women and rape, for example will stop many types of that nassy BDSM  on the internet. Then what is the next step? Mandatory Bible knowledge tests? I'll leave that to you to project.

This post is not a call to save porn. This is further evidence the trend toward making thoughts a crime.

Not that I support all of those thoughts - that is not the point. I support the rights of free people everywhere to think, and to write what they think. The criminal line is clearly reality; action upon the thoughts.
What do you think about this effort: protecting the children? An open door to total government internet control? Or something in between?

Harvey Fierstein New York Times Op-Ed / Russia’s brutal crack down on gay rights

[telemann.livejournal.com]

A participant in the "kissing protests" was attacked and kicked in a recent Moscow protest*

In the Sunday edition, the New York Times published an Op Ed by New York City actor, playwright, and producer Harvey Fierstein condemning the Russian crackdown on gay rights; with an appeal to use the upcoming Winter Olympic games in Sochi as a platform to condemn the homophobic policies of President Putin and the Russian parliament.



Mr. Fierstein noted in his op-ed:

...just six months before Russia hosts the 2014 Winter Games, Mr. Putin signed a law allowing police officers to arrest tourists and foreign nationals they suspect of being homosexual, lesbian or “pro-gay” and detain them for up to 14 days. Contrary to what the International Olympic Committee says, the law could mean that any Olympic athlete, trainer, reporter, family member or fan who is gay — or suspected of being gay, or just accused of being gay — can go to jail.

Earlier in June, Mr. Putin signed yet another antigay bill, classifying “homosexual propaganda” as pornography. The law is broad and vague, so that any teacher who tells students that homosexuality is not evil, any parents who tell their child that homosexuality is normal, or anyone who makes pro-gay statements deemed accessible to someone underage is now subject to arrest and fines. Even a judge, lawyer or lawmaker cannot publicly argue for tolerance without the threat of punishment.

Mr. Fierstein pointed to a recent case of a 23 year old gay man murdered in Volograd. When the man stated he was gay, he was beaten, his body violated with beer bottles, his clothing set on fire, his head crushed with a rock and his genitals removed. The crime was so ghastly, it's an example of homophobia being described as the motivation of the attack (most Russian authorities deny there are such attacks).

Recalling how the world largely ignored Adolf Hitler's treatment of Jewish citizens during the 1936 Olympic Games in Munich, in addition to a call on the International Olympic Committee, and political leaders to vocalize their concerns about the curbing of human rights, there is also a movement to have Olympic atheletes condemn the Russian policies by wearing gay right emblems on their uniforms, and speaking out when ever it's possible. I don't know how effective such a campaign would be, some in Russia already seem to have persecution complex, reminiscent of the Soviet era, or the Politburo in China complaining about Western interference regarding civil rights within their own country. But the moral imperative to speak out against brute bigotry, and discrimination against an entire class of a country's citizens demands action.

Four Dutch nationals who were making a film on gay rights were recently arrested and interrogated by authorities for "promoting homosexual propaganda," which is the first known instance of the new law being implemented.

The original Op-Ed piece that ran in the New York Times.

Harvey Fierstein's Wikipedia entry.