Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   gay canaries
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 1 of 33 (98422)
04-07-2004 12:37 PM


Gay in the closet verses gay out of the closet means something that is irrelevant to the opportunity for gays to expand the scope of their activity.
Regardless of which side ot the gay issue one is on, the social significance of open gayness in the community is the sentinel warning for society that the dead canary represents to the miner. A catacylsm is about to happen according to the dead canary, regardless of arguments whether everyone smells gas continue or all run like hell to the mountain above them. Woe unto them that are pregnant with heavy loads and cumbersome tools. Flee, the warning is clear.
The hedonism of a society as a whole, gay and hetero, rises in tantum with the economic success of the community. This is undeniably from the record of history. The open outings of the gays in those societies are a canary warning that we are about as Hedonistic as a society can become, and the inference is that, whether or not we debate the smell of this sign, social cataclysm is upon us.
Rev. 17:3 So he carried me away (in the spirit of thought), into the wilderness (of my imagination) and I saw (as if) a woman, (those who have Instittutionized a system of sexual seduction into a failed matrimony), sit upon a scarlet coloured beast (of a brazen and corrupt sexually misdirected economic system), full of names of (Pagan) blasphemy, having seven heads (which existed in (1) Egypt, (2) Assyria, (3) Babylon, (4) Persia/Mede, (5) Greece, (6) Rome (7) the whole of Western Culture to follow) having ten horns upon these seven heads:
(1. Anarchy, 2. Lombard-Vandalism, 3. Papacy, 4. Charlemagne, 5. Holy Roman Empire, 6. Italy, 7. Spain, 8. France, 9. Britain, 10. Nazi Germany.)
Rev. 17:4 And the woman, (symbolizing those who have Instittutionized a system of sexual seduction into a failed matrimony), was arrayed in (recognizable hues of) purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls (of her courtships and divorces), having a golden cup in her hand, (a sacrimental place in the order of religion), full of abominations (of abortions, STD, gay marriage), and the filthiness of her (sins of adolescence of her numerous) fornications (before choosing the victim of her marriage):

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 04-07-2004 12:59 PM kofh2u has replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 2 of 33 (98424)
04-07-2004 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by kofh2u
04-07-2004 12:37 PM


This is undeniably from the record of history. The open outings of the gays in those societies are a canary warning that we are about as Hedonistic as a society can become, and the inference is that, whether or not we debate the smell of this sign, social cataclysm is upon us.
Yeah, look at the example of Imperial Rome! In the days of Claudius and Nero there was great debauchery, and only 380 years later the Empire fell! Prescient canary, that one was!
It's been 380 years since the English settled Massachusetts, no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 12:37 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 1:50 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 3 of 33 (98431)
04-07-2004 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Coragyps
04-07-2004 12:59 PM


Constantine, did you forget him?
Rome fell alright. Constantine became Christian because he realized that the moral decay was ruining the empire, the army in particular.
He Christianized the Roman world, but not soon enough to prevent the Fall which took place with the Edict of Tolerance of Christianity in 313AD and the de facto coming of the 1000 year reign of the Christ in Universal Catholicism.
Until the beast of economics fueled again with the awakening of the Paganism and sexual license of the Renaisannce, @313AD- 1313AD,the one thousand years of the Dark Ages stand as the only entity of social organization in Western Culture to last 1000 years. We can note that the Hedonism was gone, but we can argue with historians who see this relationship as a gay canary.
History:
"More important to the pagan majority in the empire, whose beliefs Constantine had rejected but continued to tolerate, were the secular problems that required new and vigorous solutions.
Meeting the invasions of the GOTHS and other tribal groups along the western frontiers; the attempt to secure the provinces by dividing the army, increasingly recruited from the barbarian population of the empire,...
... the reform of the coinage to prevent further inflation;
...the expansion of the bureaucracy to meet the real or imagined needs of an increasingly centralized government--
the "new Rome"...
In historical terms, though, these actions were less influential than his unexpected adoption of Christianity.
The founding in 324 of Constantinople (modern ISTANBUL), the "new Rome" that survived the collapse of the Western empire, was a less important innovation. Embellished with monuments pirated from pagan sanctuaries, Constantinople itself was not only the new capital of the empire but the symbol of the Christian triumph."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 04-07-2004 12:59 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by 1.61803, posted 04-07-2004 2:00 PM kofh2u has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 4 of 33 (98436)
04-07-2004 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by kofh2u
04-07-2004 1:50 PM


Re: Constantine, did you forget him?
The Goths sacked Rome and was the cause of it's ruin. Gays, straights and bisexuals alike all fell under the knife of the Goth Army. They could careless what your sexual preference was if you were Roman your ass was grass. So lets get the history lesson right. The Egyptians the Greeks the Romans all had Empires that lasted for centuries all of which were known for homosexuality and sexual promiscuity . Your argument is not convincing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 1:50 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 5:19 PM 1.61803 has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 5 of 33 (98486)
04-07-2004 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by 1.61803
04-07-2004 2:00 PM


Re: Constantine, did you forget him?
My argument? Gays?
I said that gays are only allowed out of the closet openly when the society itself is way overboard with the Hedonism that historically accompanies the end of the Empire.
As you say, from Egypt on, these canaries of Hedonistic excess have hearlder th coming end... by sword of Goth or Muslim today.
I did not say Homosexuality was bad, evil, caused the fall... only a red light that the whole society was going toooooo far with the devotion to the Id's cauldron of Pleasures available.
Gays are repressed in time of strict sexual mores. As the mores become loose and finally, wide open, gays can and always have become prominent and visible. That's the Canary Syndrome.
As regards how this impacts gayness, which seems to be the emotional response you answer to, it doesn't.
Hedonism of the larger and straight population is the problem that will bring us down. These people are not only sexual excessive, but they are Too fat from McDonalds hammbuies, they are draft dodgers with social responsibility, that is why Constantine need mercenaries to fight the Goths. Its the same as our paid army today.
And yes, we still have time. From the beginning of the excesses in Rome, @ 100 AD, until Constantine about two hundred years later, the problems of Rome multiplied. Whereas the date for the fall of Rome is often quoted as 475AD, the period of anarchy preceeding this date and the edict of Toleration available to Constantine in 313 AD is more the truth of the matter. Rome was then heading towards the 1000 years of Christian culture.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by 1.61803, posted 04-07-2004 2:00 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 12:45 AM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 7 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 1:00 AM kofh2u has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 6 of 33 (98596)
04-08-2004 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by kofh2u
04-07-2004 5:19 PM


Re: Constantine, did you forget him?
kofh2 writes:
gays are only allowed out of the closet openly when society itself is way overboard with Hedonism that historically accompanies the end of the Empire.
This statement smacks of homophobia. I personally could careless what someones sexual preference is. Hedonism was practiced as I had eluded to for centuries by the Greeks, Egyptians and Romans; how can you say it signifies the end of an empire when the empires lasted for centuries. Your argument is still not convincing. IMO. Those Empires lasted centuries Rome simply overextended its borders and collapsed from within. I contend it was increasing morality that screwed the Romans up. At they're peak they were as hedonistic as it gets, It wasnt until the Christian morality took root that the collapse occured. Think about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 5:19 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 7 of 33 (98599)
04-08-2004 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by kofh2u
04-07-2004 5:19 PM


Re: Constantine, did you forget him?
kofh2u writes:
a 1000 years of Christian culture.]
Yes but that was 1000 years of burning anyone who did not come into the fold. Destroying pagan culture, literature, and any one who spoke out against the church. You call this progress? The Holy Roman Catholic church ruled with an iron fist in a velvet glove. It was the Romans that perseved Greek culture not Christians. It was the Romans that instituted the model of government we in the USA call a Democratic Republic. All this from a bunch of hedonistc fags. Not bad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by kofh2u, posted 04-07-2004 5:19 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 2:12 AM 1.61803 has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 8 of 33 (98609)
04-08-2004 2:12 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by 1.61803
04-08-2004 1:00 AM


monasticism of monks = Dark History
1) The question of the cause of Rome's fall has been long debated by experts.
Debate is hopelessly deadlocked in the speculation of the experts, so WE need not mince words.
All HAS been said on both sides without resolving the matter one way or another. We are not concernedhere with just why Rome suddenly feel helpless to an anarchy,one followed by domination of Lombards and Vandal tribes.
2) Whatever it was that precipitated the Fall of Rome, itwas CONCURRENTt with excessive sexual license, divorce, gay freedom, and every hedonistc pleasure available in that day.
This is not to say here whether those pleasures themselves are to be the scapegoat for the Fall,... only that the Fall, as with all previous Falls, was CONCURRENT.
3) The period following the demise of Roman Empire which we call the 1000 years of The Dark Age had two well documented aspects historical, and little else, Hence, it IS called The DARK Age.
A) THE FIRST THING WE KNOW ABOUT THE DARK AGE IS:
It was a period of Monasticism or tge time of the monks and the monastery. Stoic self denial of sensuous physical pleasure was the rule. The sexual mores were diametrically the other end of the scale from the Hedonism of the previous culture.
B) THE SECOND THING WE KNOW IS:
Nothing.
Nothing, for the most part. This is why the 1000 year period was called the Dark Age,.... historically, it is dark and unilluminated.
4) Around 1300-1400, the darkness lifted, as evidenced in the art forms, nudity and realistic representations of the female figure returned in paintings and sculpture. This period is called the Renaisannce. It is also the same period where the Inquisition and the repression of the church begins.
It is notable that this was after the peacefulness of the 1000 years of darkness and, again, the new renaisannce was concurrent with a hedonoism, evidence in the Renaisannce art and a growing historical report of the times. The fall of the Universal Catholic Church followed.
Hence, the strange Canary Syndrome of Hedonism/Empire/Fall was re-visited once more, even in spite of an extensive power of priestly monarchy.
None of this pin points why. None of this implies that sexual license is the cause. None of this makes gays the reason.
All of this is symptomatic.
The Canary Syndrome is like temperature, it tells us the patient is sick. But, the thermometer is not the cause.
Do you follow me on this? Or, are you still so emotional that you just want to yell homophobia?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 1:00 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Asgara, posted 04-08-2004 2:19 AM kofh2u has replied
 Message 11 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 2:14 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 12 by Garf, posted 04-08-2004 3:58 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 9 of 33 (98612)
04-08-2004 2:19 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by kofh2u
04-08-2004 2:12 AM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
Hi kofh2u,
Whatever it was that precipitated the Fall of Rome, itwas CONCURRENTt with excessive sexual license, divorce, gay freedom, and every hedonistc pleasure available in that day.
One thing you are overlooking, and that Phi brought up, is that the centuries of prosperity and empire were ALSO CONCURRENT with sexual license, divorce, gay freedom, and hedonistic pleasure.
Since those things were part and parcel of both the empire and the fall...then they have no bearing and so no reason to even bring them up.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 2:12 AM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 3:15 AM Asgara has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 10 of 33 (98618)
04-08-2004 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Asgara
04-08-2004 2:19 AM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
What you report is that the culture of hedonism gradually grows up from roots of a much moral stoic beginning, increasing eith each generation along with a growing prosperity.
Yes, the sexual license isvimplicit in the culture. However, the hardvwork neede to buildvthe empire and the initial general poverty of the society does not suit tge conditions for hrdonism because the first ingredient must be freevtime. There is little of tgat when tgevrots of the empirr are first planted.
Here, today, in the Pan-American Empire we can see the same part of the syndrome. In 1776 there was no American money in circulatiin because everyine was badically self-sufficient and gounded in a farm economy. America gradually has become rich and many people have much free time and money. As we slowly improved in each generation economically and financialy, we can see in the Kilidoscope of time that tge sexual mores have gone from no divorce in 1900 to no fault break up all you want in 2000.
This isvwhat you see in Rome, albeit dlower becsuse the economic dustributiin, the free time and the whole smear was in a slower motuon. But each generation moved inexhortibly towards wide open sexual freedom.
Tge question is not whether this isvtrue, but rather what also is happening such that no empire could keep it going. Why? Sex does do it anymore than tge high temperature on a thermometer causes the illness of the patient.
The agrument among experts in the field of sociology who consider this problem isn'tabout the hedonism, but the things that happen during these two concurrences of economic success and hedonism.
Also, note tgat hedonism isn't confinded to sex. Any devotion to a PHYSICAL pleasure will fit the definition of Hedonism. Like today, in USA, the Surgeon General claims overweight kids are epidemic.
Drug addiction might be placed on the list, too.
Howevet, I still point out tge only when tge sicial mind-set is hedonistic enough for an safe outing by the d=ever present gay community do we see the warning light, the Canary is fluttering!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Asgara, posted 04-08-2004 2:19 AM Asgara has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 11 of 33 (98702)
04-08-2004 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by kofh2u
04-08-2004 2:12 AM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
kofh2u writes:
The question of the cause of Rome's fall has been long debated by experts. Debate is hopelessly deadlocked in the speculation of the experts,so We need not mince words.
I am not mincing words I am saying your argument is crap and has nothing but your own speculation to support it.
Your 2nd point is moot since Asgara and myself have pointed out that hedonism was concurrent with Roman domination of the world. Your 3rd point says nothing but to point out that Monks and clergy were celebate and monotheism was prevalent.
Your 4th point only shoots holes in your theory that hedonism is the beginning of the end of civilization in that the Renaissance was the end of the Dark ages. The expansion of Art, Science, And Literature was the beginning not the end. Please feel free to debauch your own argument.
kofh2u writes:
It is notable that this was after the peacefulness of 1000 years of darkness....]
Do I even need to comment on the stupidity of this statement? Thats like saying coming out of a coma is 10 years of peaceful slumber. The fall of the Universal Catholic church. was not due to hedonism it was due to people getting sick and tired of being repressed. Repression breeds the end of Empires not hedonism your argument still is lacking.IMO.
kof2u writes:
Do you follow me on this? Or are you still so emotional that you want to yell homophobia?
Well no I do not 'follow' you on this Gay canaries argument and I do not remember yelling or even adding an exclamation mark on any of my post. It seems to me that your ridiculous argument is becoming more and more like a example of how not to proceed with a debate. If your main point is Hedonism signals the end of empires then it is your job to present evidence that supports this claim. If you can not then please refrain from posting further personal assertions that are purely your own opinion. I do not have a problem with your opinion just your assertions. They do not convince. *edit to correct the spelling of coma
[This message has been edited by 1.61803, 04-08-2004]

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 2:12 AM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 4:20 PM 1.61803 has replied

  
Garf
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 33 (98726)
04-08-2004 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by kofh2u
04-08-2004 2:12 AM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
It is notable that this was after the peacefulness of 1000 years of darkness
Greetings kofh2u,
I'd be interested to know what you meant by "peacefulness of 1000 years".
You're not saying that the "Dark Ages" were peaceful are you? Other then Charlemagne's brief Empire, Europe was rather chaotic during this period of history.
Next, as was pointed out, the "Dark Ages" didn't really fall with reguard to being measureable by "hedonism". Instead the "hedonism" that you're attempting to portray (such as nudity in art, etc..) came about and stayed with The Renaissance, rather then leading up to it like your argument with the Romans. In fact the word 'renaissance' is a French word which means 'rebirth', and this is exactly what it was.
It's also important to note, with regard to the United States, that during the existence of the Articles of Confederation and the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist arguments it was often said that a Republic covering as vast a land as the United States would turn quickly into tyrannical rule, and it was supported using history such as the example of the Romans. Obviously this didn't happen and I feel it's rather weak to assume the same about open-homosexuality in the U.S. with regard to Rome.
In a contrasting example we could look at the fall of the Mughal Empire. The Mughal Empire was run by Islamic Turkish outsiders in Hindu northern India and had done well since Akbar's rather liberal approach to ruling over other cultures/religions without enforcing strict Islamic laws (He repealed things like the jizya, and heavily encouraged inter-marriage, etc.). However, Auregnzeb, in the 17th century, had wanted to instill Islamic values (as well as fight a multi-front war) and many "hedonistic" attributes of the indigenous population were to be out-lawed such as certain sexual activities, wine drinking, smoking dope, and any body polluting. Many of these activities had existed long before the Empire was even established. Eventually due to many Hindu uprisings, such as the Maratha uprising, the Mughal Empire effectively came to an end and was eventually given over to the British. Now if we had used your model for "measuring" the falling of an empire it would have been in complete reverse.
[Edit] Also, I'm not sure if you're having keyboard problems or if you're not a normal user of the keyboard but your last post has an extreme amount of typos. You're often hitting the letter 'g' instead of 'h', or 'v' instead of the space bar, etc.. I'm not doing this to belittle you but to make you aware of it as I'm having a hard time following your argument.
Thanks,
Garf
[This message has been edited by Garf, 04-08-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 2:12 AM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 13 of 33 (98728)
04-08-2004 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by 1.61803
04-08-2004 2:14 PM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
1) I will take you personal induendo and edifications concerning the proper rules of discussion as a sign that you are frustrated in civil responses because what I say really has had an emotional impact.
2) It is unanswered by your posting whether in fact we know nothing for the most part about the 1000 years of the Christian reign during the Dark Ages except that it was unique in its duration and piously moral/non-hedonistic.
3) You ignot my admission: that hedonism doesn't just suddenly appear from no were.
It is basically a culture recognized as Arian Paganism. It is a "seed" in the culture. It grows slowly at first in these consecutive states of economic empire we have experienced, which rise only to fall, and way sooner than 1000 years experienced without it.
4) The rather abnormal imposition of morality on the people in the Western Culture was superficial, that is, the superimposition of Christian morality during the Dark 1000 years was not deemed to last.
The people of our own time demonstrate that the impact and message of demonstrating a 1000 year reign of Universal Catholicism, as a proof, that Hedonism IS the cause of Falls (in much less time) also incorporates another prediction following from that sociological hypothesis.
5) Here it is:
A} The 1000 year Dark Age was a sociological demonstration to the people of Western Culture that, in fact, the fall of economically successful societies could be avoided.
B} The recommendation was/is to set intelligent restraints in the form of social normc as concerns the mores of the culture.
C} Sociological Proof:
I. FIRST, in setting up a reign that last for 1000 years, unique in the annuals of western Culture, the Dark Age instituted pious stoicism in the form of Monasticism, proving a society could in fact last 1000 years.
II. The result was 1000 years of Universal Catholicism. The longest reign of a political/Theocratic entity in our history.
SECOND:
EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL: The stoic norms would be removed.
1) The first prediction is the re-appearance and growth of Hedonistic devotion to excess in physical pleasure in what is The Renaissance.
2) The consequences predicted by this theory would state that a number of economically successful societies would again rise for short durations and fall.
Here is exactly what happened. The "dragon" of satanic libidinal lusting returned to the society and the manipulatation by sexual license in the feminine domain immediately marked the Renaisannce of the previous way of life before the 1000 years of Universal Catholicism.
Rev. 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven (in my thoughts); and behold a great red dragon, (Arian paganism, that system of sexual mores) having seven heads (of economic empire) and seven crowns (of political leadership) upon his heads:
1) Egypt, (2) Assyria, (3) Babylon, (4) Persia/Mede, (5) Greece, (6) Rome (7) the whole of Western Culture to follow having ten horns (of political leadership) upon these seven heads:
1. Anarchy, 2. Lombard-Vandalism, 3. Papacy, 4. Charlemagne, 5. Holy Roman Empire, 6. Italy, 7. Spain, 8. France, 9. Britain, 10. Nazi
Germany.
(note: From the creation of the Papal authority, in the Edict of Toleration: 313 AD, until the time of The Holy Roman Empire under the Hapsburgs ending @ 1312, the Pope during the Dark Ages established a 1000 years of Universal Catholic leadership and social control. He ordained the political and military institutions and his moral code was observed as law.)
Here we see the sociological hypothesis that Hedonism reaches a zinth with the moment of economic collapse, only to pass both on to other entities in our Western Culture. The seed of Hedonism slowly grows in the soil of success, like a dragon, its tail dragging through all history. Again and again, seen in the prediction of the Renaissance and the return thereafter of one rise after the last, beginning with Italy, only to fall in the fullest bloom of the Canary Syndrome.
[This message has been edited by kofh2u, 04-08-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 2:14 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 5:43 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 15 by 1.61803, posted 04-08-2004 6:57 PM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 16 by Garf, posted 04-08-2004 8:52 PM kofh2u has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 14 of 33 (98743)
04-08-2004 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by kofh2u
04-08-2004 4:20 PM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
Please refer to post #11 for my response. Because this post is more of the same nonsense I already refuted. In response to point 1.
I am curious why you keep refering to me as "emotional"? Did you perhaps watch "The dirty dozen" one to many times? Or do you perhaps fancy yourself as another version of Lee Marvin? What does my emotion have to do with your preposterous claims that Hedonism is the beginning of the end of Empires? You have still failed to support this claim adequately and I still think your argument is CA-CA. If your claim is that the Catholic church has had control longer than the Roman empire lasted I would say 'DUH'. But your not saying that, Your saying it was hedonism that leads to the end of Empires..You will have to prove that there was no hedonism during the Dark Ages. You would also have to prove that it was hedonism that caused the failures. You havent proved jack shit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 4:20 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 11:05 PM 1.61803 has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 15 of 33 (98764)
04-08-2004 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by kofh2u
04-08-2004 4:20 PM


Re: monasticism of monks = Dark History
link Also note on a google search I found The collapse of Mayan civilization was due to overfarming and overpopulation, The collapse of Mesopotamia was war and irrigation techniques caused salt to leach into soil.
The collapse of the USSR was economic ruin. The collapse of Rome was overextending its borders and internal ruin in addition to war.The collapse of the Huns empire was over extention of its territory and they were assimulated into the culture. Your Gay canary theory is an attempt to blame the ruin of civilizations on immorality. Because you are dogmatic in your views of morality and wish it so. Well guess what? your wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by kofh2u, posted 04-08-2004 4:20 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024