|
|
|
October 04, 2010
Making freedom "greater"
Senator Jim DeMint recently spoke at an event billed as the "Greater Freedom Rally." The goal of the rally was "to close the chasm between 'economic and social conservatives.'" If what he said constitutes "closing the chasm," I'd hate to think about what he would say if he wanted to open it: DeMint said if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn't be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who's sleeping with her boyfriend -- she shouldn't be in the classroom.What rights is the government purging? The right not to have a homosexual or an adulteress teaching? And why did he single out females? What about adulterers in general? Are they OK? What is the "greater freedom" we are talking about here? If there is a right not to have a gay or adulterous teacher, then don't cab drivers also have a right to refuse to transport gay passengers? Who holds these rights, and under what theory of freedom are they found? Freedom of religion? Does that mean that religious people have a right not to have their children taught by an atheist? Do Christians have a right to demand that Jewish, Hindu, or Muslim teachers be fired too? I'm not quite following what DeMint means. I do not doubt that homosexuality and adultery are considered sinful according to his religion, but so is not honoring the Sabbath, worshiping the wrong gods, and many other things. Do people who believe certain things have a right to not have their children taught by people who don't? I think they do if they are willing to pay for schools that uphold such beliefs. For example, I would not compel a religious school to hire a homosexual, an adulterer, an atheist, a Sabbath breaker, or a Hindu. But on what basis can the government require government employees to conform themselves to certain religious dictates? Presumably, though, DeMint thinks schools should fire all gay teachers and all women who sleep with boyfriends, in order to uphold freedom of religion. Is that what freedom of religion means? The First Amendment is supposed to restrain the government from "prohibiting the free exercise of religion." How is the right of any parent to freely exercise his religion violated by the existence of a gay teacher or by a woman who has somehow been discovered to have been sleeping with her boyfriend? What right to free exercise of religion has been forfeited by that? Unless the parents are prohibited from expressing religious disapproval of such teachers' lifestyles (which is not what DeMint complained of), I don't get it. It hardly endears me to Senator DeMint and his concept of freedom. If people like him keep trying to limit sexual freedoms according to the religious dictates of others, they're just begging for the hedonists to start their own religion. You know, something like the Pan-Priapic Temple for the Advanced Worship of Human Sexuality. Then they could demand the schools fire all teachers who engage in celibacy, so that the government wouldn't be able to purge their rights and their freedom of religion. (Worshiping together in the filthy church of your choice? That freedom thingie really sucks, doesn't it? Fortunately for me, this is just a blog post and I'm not a priest....) posted by Eric on 10.04.10 at 12:37 PM
Comments
You make a good point, but had DeMint said that "their social/sexual/political convictions should not be part of the classroom" I wouldn't have bothered with this post. He said "openly homosexual" as opposed to "openly heterosexual." So I would assume he thinks admitting to being gay should be disqualifying, but admitting to being straight should not. And that "an unmarried woman who's sleeping with her boyfriend" should also be disqualified -- whether she admits it or not. That is not quite the same thing as telling teachers not to discuss their sex lives in class. Eric Scheie · October 4, 2010 03:06 PM How do you do it? I posted my latest before reading this. How do you know what I'm going to post about? I know. It is a miracle. You have my vote for Sainthood. M. Simon · October 4, 2010 03:11 PM Pan-Priapic Temple for the Advanced Worship of Human Sexuality Michael Valentine Smith. M. Simon · October 4, 2010 03:15 PM
As long as a curriculum meets the minimum standards of a state required education, the state should not be permitted to demand anything further. Each parent should be given a voucher for the money the state spends on each child, and the parents should then decide where they want their children educated, be it in public, private, or religious schools. You speak of the First Amendment, but the Freedom of Association comes with an axiomatic corollary: The Freedom of Disassociation. DiogenesLamp · October 4, 2010 03:20 PM Eric, My comment was not intended to defend or explain Demint's comment, but simply to point out that if a teacher makes his/her personal life part of the teaching regimen, they have made a mistake. A math class should be just that, not math as taught by a homosexual, an adulterer etc. T · October 4, 2010 03:30 PM You make a good point, but had DeMint said that "their social/sexual/political convictions should not be part of the classroom" I wouldn't have bothered with this post. He said "openly homosexual" as opposed to "openly heterosexual." So I would assume he thinks admitting to being gay should be disqualifying, but admitting to being straight should not. And that "an unmarried woman who's sleeping with her boyfriend" should also be disqualified -- whether she admits it or not.
Your attitude is just another example of the current fad of "mainstreaming" homosexuality. Many people regard the issue as nothing but a bunch of mentally ill people engaging in sick and perverted behavior while defenders try to convince the rest of us that they aren't sick and their is nothing wrong with the unnatural (and often deadly) things that they do. Mainstreaming homosexuality has become the new "Politically correct" attitude. DiogenesLamp · October 4, 2010 03:32 PM DL, And what is the most important tenet of nearly all religions? "We will kill you." http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2010/10/the_eternal_tru.html M. Simon · October 4, 2010 03:37 PM DL, You ignorance of the history of sexual fashions is astounding. But I'm going to start a religion to fix that. So watch out or we will kill you. M. Simon · October 4, 2010 03:43 PM Diogeneslamp wrote: "Your attitude is just another example of the current fad of "mainstreaming" homosexuality." I didn't get that impression at all. Diogenes, you are conflating a moral judgement with tolerance. You are certainly w/in your right to make any moral judgement you want. You comment, however, strikes me as intolerant. To say one shouldn't be able to determine . . . is not the same as mainstreaming or approving of mainstreaming. Furthermore, that you should zero in on homosexuality rather than adultery or womanizing or any number of other issues is telling. T · October 4, 2010 03:49 PM I didn't get that impression at all. Diogenes, you are conflating a moral judgement with tolerance. You are certainly w/in your right to make any moral judgement you want. You comment, however, strikes me as intolerant. To say one shouldn't be able to determine . . . is not the same as mainstreaming or approving of mainstreaming. Furthermore, that you should zero in on homosexuality rather than adultery or womanizing or any number of other issues is telling.
I wonder how many of you who defend\accept the practice have ever actually studied it? The homosexual component of the population is a vast reservoir of disease and probably always has been. It is for THAT reason I believe it was ostracized by many religions. Syphilis today can be cured. Syphilis beyond 80 years ago was fatal. DiogenesLamp · October 4, 2010 04:03 PM DL, You ignorance of the history of sexual fashions is astounding. That's funny. I often think the same thing about you. The Victorian age came AFTER the Georgian Age, and was a consequence of the rampant and fatal debauchery of the Georgian age. Sexually transmitted diseases were wiping out the population of England. The Victorian era was a self defense mechanism against a libertine driven extinction.
There is a REAL penalty to be paid by the innocent for sexual promiscuity, just as there is for stealing or murder. In such cases, often times the most reasonable solution is to kill the malefactors. I suggested giving Deadbeat fathers a vasectomy as a compassionate alternative to the way the problem would have been handled in the past. DiogenesLamp · October 4, 2010 04:12 PM Wow... I decided I was going to comment when I first read Eric's post, but after reading the other comments, I think I'll refrain. This one has gone WAY off the rails. John S. · October 4, 2010 05:20 PM Wow... I decided I was going to comment when I first read Eric's post, but after reading the other comments, I think I'll refrain. This one has gone WAY off the rails. It is reality which has gone of the rails. (at least some people's perception of it has) My comments are simply attempts to steer it back on again. By pointing out the ugly truth, I hope to get people to confront their cognitive dissonance. DiogenesLamp · October 4, 2010 06:30 PM Diogeneslamp, I was implying nothing of the sort. T · October 4, 2010 06:38 PM Your attitude is just another example of the current fad of "mainstreaming" homosexuality. "Mainstreaming homosexuality"? I couldn't care less about what is mainstream. I'm talking about freedom, which includes the freedom to engage in homosexuality or not, the freedom to condemn it (as DL has) or praise it (which I have not, although I suppose I could). To say that there is a right to be gay (or be into S&M;, or whatever activity might occur between consenting adults) has nothing to do with what is in "the mainstream." I guess those who are into S&M; should be glad DeMint did not say they shouldn't be allowed to teach, or else I would have had to defend them too, (and probably be accused of "mainstreaming sadomasochism"). DL, I understand that you find homosexuality repellent. But please bear in mind that I will defend to the death our mutual right to make each other vomit. http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2007/12/post_545.html I have been doing so for years, too! http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2005/03/i_will_defend_t.html However, I think it is just as unreasonable for you to expect me to puke along with you as it would be for me to expect you not to be sick! Sorry if I sound as if I'm mainstreaming vomit. I'd hate to be accused of following the latest fad. Eric Scheie · October 4, 2010 11:58 PM DL, I understand that you find homosexuality repellent. But please bear in mind that I will defend to the death our mutual right to make each other vomit. http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2007/12/post_545.html I have been doing so for years, too! http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2005/03/i_will_defend_t.html However, I think it is just as unreasonable for you to expect me to puke along with you as it would be for me to expect you not to be sick! Sorry if I sound as if I'm mainstreaming vomit. I'd hate to be accused of following the latest fad.
Nowadays it gives people a warm fuzzy feeling to think they are defending someone's "rights", but not so much if the consensus is that the practice you are defending is a form of mental illness. That your righteous indignation is contrived is obvious because of the lack of adherence to principle. Again, Necrophilia, Coprophilia, Apotemnophilia, Pedophillia, and Beastophilia are all exactly the same side of the same coin as homosexuality. That all such disorders have historically been regarded as a "mental illness" is irrelevant to your belief that people have a right to engage in them even if they are mentally disturbed! You might as well support conjugal visits between asylum inmates, and perhaps you do. After all, it's about FREEDOM! DiogenesLamp · October 5, 2010 11:39 AM When you deign to note the discussion, the moment it turns to defending Necrophilia, Pedophilia,Apotemnophilia or Beastophilia, you suddenly go silent. The notion that from the perspective of the participant, the issues are identical simply doesn't seem to occur to you. When you say I "go silent," you are implying I have not discussed these issues. I have specifically discussed the false comparison of homosexuality to bestiality, pedophilia and cannibalism in a number of posts. They simply are not comparable to consenting acts between adults, and your saying they are does not make them so. True, I have not written posts about eating shit and amputating limbs, but are you demanding I do so on your say so? Whose blog do you think this is? I suspect that what you meant by "go silent" is that I do not reply to your comments to your satisfaction. I don't have to. This is not a debating club. You can repeat ad infinitum that "Necrophilia, Coprophilia, Apotemnophilia, Pedophillia, and Beastophilia are all exactly the same side of the same coin as homosexuality" but that does not make it true. All that they have in common with homosexuality is that they are sexual practices. Something they have in common with many heterosexual practices and sexual fetishes. But that does not make them the same. BTW, your list includes non-consensual activities (pedophilia and bestiality) which I do not defend and never have. Beyond that, defending the right to do something is not an endorsement of it. In any case, why would defending the right to engage in homosexual conduct oblige me to defend all other sexual variants any more than would defending the right to engage in heterosexual conduct? I'm sure there are guys who get off on torturing cats, but I would send them straight to prison. And why the concerns about conjugal visits between asylum inmates? Are they something to be prevented? Why? What would make their sexual acts be of special concern? Eric Scheie · October 5, 2010 02:15 PM When you say I "go silent," you are implying I have not discussed these issues. I have specifically discussed the false comparison of homosexuality to bestiality, pedophilia and cannibalism in a number of posts. They simply are not comparable to consenting acts between adults, and your saying they are does not make them so. You're saying they are not doesn't make it so either. I've seen your arguments. They are weak, and can not stand up to a logical challenge. True, I have not written posts about eating shit and amputating limbs, but are you demanding I do so on your say so? Whose blog do you think this is? I am not demanding you do anything. I am just challenging your contention that things are as you say, rather than as they are. Obviously it is your blog, and you are free to ignore any data that does not fit your narrative.
If it is not, it's only because you chose not to allow it. I don't mind a bit when people challenge MY ideas. I can defend them from their foundations of basic principles all the way up to the pinnacle of their conclusions. Where I run afoul is when emotion trumps and people refuse to think outside their usual rut. Cognitive dissonance is a serious problem with many people. You can repeat ad infinitum that "Necrophilia, Coprophilia, Apotemnophilia, Pedophillia, and Beastophilia are all exactly the same side of the same coin as homosexuality" but that does not make it true.
This is like saying that Chinese, Indians, Africans, and Europeans are not the same. Sure, they're not the same on one level, but on the basic level (human) they are exactly the same with less than 1% difference in their DNA. It is simply a question of scope. If you define the criteria narrowly enough, then you can assert they are different. That's what you're trying to do with these various mental conditions.
You see, this is exactly what I mean. You refuse to accept that BOTH conditions can be consensual. You use the "consent" excuse to avoid dealing with the obvious reality that you find these practices abhorrent and accept that they are rightfully banned. Because this creates a dichotomy in your principle, you have to use the "Consent" rationalization to square that circle. You can hide behind your "Legal" fig leaf, or you can face the fact that "legal" has no place in a philosophical argument. Beastiality WAS legal in the Netherlands until this year, and the Dogs DID consent! If you insist on clinging to this fiction, I can find a link for you to PROVE animals consent!
Sophistry. Try that logic on the issue of slavery. In any case, why would defending the right to engage in homosexual conduct oblige me to defend all other sexual variants any more than would defending the right to engage in heterosexual conduct? Because heterosexual conduct is natural and necessary for the survival of all species. Homosexuality (and other dangerous fetishes) are not necessary, they are in fact unnatural and detrimental to the survival of the species.
Only under the laws of today. The laws a century ago? Not so much. You suffer from a modern zeitgeist and seemingly cannot visualize life according to the rules of previous ages. It would give you more insight if you could.
Yes. You see crazy people cannot consent. Since you are so interested in the consent issue, I don't see why you want to discard it in this particular instance, where it is in fact, legitimate. Why? What would make their sexual acts be of special concern? Really? You Really don't know the answer to this? Well, first of all they lack the judgment to consent, they lack the judgment to prevent, they lack the judgment to take care of offspring or the ability to pay for them, and lastly, passing on "crazy genes" is considered to be not in the best interest of the offspring or society. It is STILL standard procedure to sterilize people suffering from mental retardation in state run homes. ( I know this to be true because I know one individual to which this was done.) The concept was adjudicated by a Supreme Court ruling: Buck vs. Bell with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stating that "Three generations of imbeciles are enough." DiogenesLamp · October 5, 2010 03:27 PM I've seen your arguments. They are weak, and can not stand up to a logical challenge. What logical challenge? I have already addressed the issues you raised, and you just want to make your points over and over. I have simply argued that freedom includes sexual freedom -- the right of consenting adults to have whatever sex they want in the absence of direct harm to others. I grant that they may harm themselves, and that might be stupid, but what is the difference between that and consensual boxing in which combatants can sometimes seriously hurt or kill each other? You have a problem with consenting homosexual acts, and I don't. I see it as a matter simple human freedom for adults to be allowed engage in conduct that does not harm others, and you are trying to compare it with conduct that is nonconsensual and does harm others. You are saying that animals and children can consent, and I am saying they cannot. (Can they intelligently sign binding contracts? I don't think so.) You cannot persuade me and I cannot persuade you. Yet it seems that you want to persuade me, while I do not want to persuade you. That is not why I am here. My blog does not exist to persuade anyone, and it is only interactive because I don't want to turn off comments. The blog is for me to write about what I want, when I want. It is not here for you to argue with me. There is no resolution of this argument. You assert that homosexuality is a form of mental illness. I don't know how are you defining mental illness, but you also say that "crazy people cannot consent." Does that mean consenting homosexuals do not consent? If so, then our argument is indeed hopeless, and is just going in circles. You also say I "suffer from a modern zeitgeist and seemingly cannot visualize life according to the rules of previous ages" and that "it would give you [m]e insight if [I] could." Thanks for trying to help give me insights from the past. I should probably visualize life according to the rules of the Greeks and Romans. Were they mentally ill too? Oh, and how are "homosexuality (and other dangerous fetishes)"... "unnatural and detrimental to the survival of the species"? What do you mean by "natural"? Not occurring in nature? No. Not done by animals? No. Then what? And if we assume that exclusively homosexual people never reproduce, if homosexuals are as you say "mentally ill," then why isn't the species better off if they don't reproduce? (As you say, "passing on 'crazy genes' is considered to be not in the best interest of the offspring or society.") Eric Scheie · October 5, 2010 04:13 PM Oh I forgot something. To my "defending the right to do something is not an endorsement of it" you replied: Sophistry. Try that logic on the issue of slavery. No, that is not sophistry. I do not think there is a right to own slaves, nor do I endorse slavery. So what would obligate me to "try that logic on the issue of slavery"? However Abraham Lincoln did defend the right of pre-war slaveholders to own slaves while not endorsing slavery. You missed my point -- which is that defending the right to do something has nothing to do with endorsing it. We see this in the case of free speech all the time. I would defend the right of Nazis to march, to use the N word, and so on, but never in a million years would I endorse such conduct. To defend the right to say or do that which you disapprove is not sophistry. It goes to the heart of our tradition of freedom. Eric Scheie · October 5, 2010 05:51 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
October 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
October 2010
September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Booze vs Pot
• Can You Guess Which Party? • Hard work is the glue that holds society together! • KKKrugman • Liberal? Or conservative? Dream on! • Letters to Scalzi: Atlas Snickers • I'm A Swinger • Find Another Way • Alcohol, Tobacco, And Firearms • The Eternal Truths Of Religion
Links
 Alphecca (My Blogdaddy)   Puff the Protector 
Gays in Military Site 
Middle East Media Research Institute 
Gay Libertarian Site The Bitch Girls Join the NRA! 
 SECOND AMENDMENT VIDEO! Shooters' Carnival 
Tammy Bruce Gun Owners of America 
 
David Hackworth 
Hell In A Handbasket Matt Welch The Volokh Conspiracy Virginia Postrel PseudoPsalms The Light of Reason The Anger of Compassion Anger Management Dustbury.com Rachel Lucas Shadow Government reflections in d minor JustOneMinute Boone Country Catallarchy 
Agenda Bender Mike Silverman Steven Malcolm Anderson Walter in Denver Impearls Donald Sensing Howard Owens Loco Parentis 
Colby Cosh VodkaPundit Radley Balko Dean's World The Queen of All Evil baldilocks Joe Gandelman Dave Tepper Begging to Differ Kesher Talk Jeff Jarvis Doc Searls Little Green Footballs Captain Ed Oh, That Liberal Media! ICANNfocus.org God of the Machine Sandefur's Freespace Wizbang Robert Prather LawPundit  The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Amygdala bilious young fogey MadLab On the Fritz why dave bergman is neat Skiplog Clowning Glory Dispatches from the Culture Wars Where in Washington, D.C. is Sun Myung Moon? Anti-Socialist Tendencies Of Interest WICKED THOUGHTS Setting The World To Rights doubleplusgood infotainment It Can't Rain All The Time Scrutineer Nick Danger, International Man of Mystery seldom sober TRITICALE Random Jottings Graham Lester point2point Shark Blog Gene Healy Discount Blogger Six Foot Pole Dodgeblogium Across the Atlantic The Imperialist Dog Lex Talionis Mind Of Mog Say Uncle CAMPVS MAWRTIVS res gestae dionysii Annika's Journal & Poetry A :{FRUSTRATED}: ARTIST Yet another weird SF fan Lincoln Cat The Meatriarchy Who is Ronald? Short Daddy Punch Drunk Mookie Riffic On The Third Hand MatthewEdgar.net ZenPundit Jennifer's History and Stuff 
argghhh!!! Modulator D.C. Thornton Centerfield Asymmetrical Information Airline Pilots Security Assn Relapsed Catholic PAPADOC Abraca-Pocus The Pryhills Winds of Change Daily Pundit The Speculist Regnum Crucis The Elfin Ethicist Classics in Contemporary Culture elephant-rabbits A Perfectly Cromulent Blog allied Parableman Southern Musings CALIFORNIA YANKEE Allen's Arena Ex-Gay Watch Jonno Michael Moore doesn't love me! Eschaton Clayton Cramer Letters From a Strip of Dirt Oliver Willis Hesiod Theogeny Dr Zen JunkYardBlog Orcinus Andrew Sullivan Ideofact Letter from Gotham Oraculations INCITE Positive Liberty ALLAH IS IN THE HOUSE Tiny Little Lies My So-Called Penis Keith Devens Jason Holliston W(h)ine Country Straight White Guy Ken MacLeod Lawrence Lessig 
PaleoJudaica.com EdCone.com Common Sense and Wonder Who knew? Daily Howler James Landrith Chief Wiggles L.T. Smash damnum absque injuria Daniel W. Drezner OxBlog Reason of Voice Steven Den Beste Wonkette! Cranial Cavity Gibberish in Neutral DramaQueen vivalabloog Classics in Contemporary Culture The LLama Butchers 
HobbsOnLine ACIDMAN Sector 7-G Zogby Blog mtpolitics.net Horologium Civic Dialogues Practical Penumbra Right Wing News Stranger in a Strange Land Ambient Irony Tiger: Raggin' & Rantin' Read My Lips Jay Solo The Alliance The Smallest Minority Wrong Side of Happiness Wince and Nod One Little Victory Fishbucket suburban blight Sketches of Strain Boi from Troy Being American in T.O. Outside the Beltway One Fine Jay Bill and Kent's Place on the Web Burton Terrace This Book Stinks The Happy Carpenter Political Correctness Watch GREENIE WATCH Resource.full This Liberal" Brainville BLAMBLOG Ordinary Galoot QandO Josh Cohen Extra Ordinary Ideas brykMantra Croooow Blog Old Right commiewatch 
Proculian Meditations UggaBugga Dustin the No-Longer-Blogless Les Jones Blog Temporal Globe Postcards from Nowhere Tarazet Unfogged Synthstuff Riba Rambles Mitch Berg The National Debate scha-den-freu-de Ocean Guy Topic Exchange CELESTIAL OFFERINGS Texas Native Somewhere over the Rainbough Why read this? End NPR Bias Ace of Spades HQ Web Dawn GANGSTORIES Sheila Astray's Redheaded Ramblings Alan Sullivan (Seablogger) hobbyblog 
FuturePundit.com Tim Blair A Voyage To Arcturus HipperCritical BarlowFriendz Jihad Watch Kin's Kouch Bad Money The Campblog News Junkie Canada De Doc's Doings Bigwig Eject!Eject!Eject! Tom's Nap Room A Coon Cat's World The sexual adventures of Woodie and Peaches Crystalline Ceramics Web Resource Heh. Indeed. NakedVillainy.com Andrew David Chamberlain The Karmic Inquisition Adam Smith Institute Weblog Andrea Harris Hi. I'm Black Banana Oil Jim Miller on Politics Who Tends the Fires Ranck and File MOLOTOV COCKTAIL FRANK NOLI IRRITARE LEONES Miss O'Hara deadmaus Coffee With Rhoads robot guy Travelling Shoes Admiral Quixote's Roundtable danm.us The Argus Dissecting Leftism Dissecting Leftism -- OLD Site Aaron's cc Commentariat The Argus - Registan INDC Journal Pundit Ex Machina DeMythology Peppermint Tea Gilly's World Beyond the Black Hole La Shawn Barber" 
Perverse Access Memory Invisible Adjunct Photon Courier Intel Dump Junkscience.com The SmarterCop Laban Tall Banagor Peeve Farm Rand Simberg camedwards.com Kim du Toit Mrs. du Toit Dancing with Dogs Two--Four Heretical Ideas Astonished Head Outlandish Josh Central Oregon for Dean 
The White Peril 白禍 (Sean Kinsell) www.blktlr.com Subterranean Bungalo DFMoore Dave Halliday Well Versed Qoheleth 60: Joel Moody's Repository quo vado jonrowe.blogspot.com yellopad Sticks of Fire Dissecting Leftism ByteMagick Blogs of War PRESTOPUNDIT Of Interest The Meatriarchy Bernhardt Varenius The Forager Miller?s Time Blogs of War painting to stay (?) sane Blue Goldfish | Surface Clowning Glory House of Payne International Last Chance Caf馬t;/a> Psychology of Leftism a_sdf CONSERVATISM/RIGHTISM Taylor & Company The Vicious Circle Leftists as Elitists Eye of the Storm A scratch area Wicked Thoughts Filtrat The Bayou City Perspective The Belfry Blogger Setting The World To Rights Ljonn.com Oddly Normal Varifrank Jamie Jamison on Technology GayPatriot A New York Escorts Confessions jamescalvin.com The Eleven Day Empire Dr. Rusty Shackleford Eric's Grumles Before The Grave Belmont Club Gumbo Pie BeldarBlog MooreThoughts Blind Adherence Last One Speaks Logic Monkey Bird's Eye View DIRTY WATER Forgadring precision-guided cowboy Punditmania Minor Thoughts Just Askin' HispaLibertas Let's Try Freedom Megan McArdle Ann Althouse Beautiful Atrocities Sean Hackbarth Power and Control Professor Bainbridge Power Line Dialogic Darleen's Place I'm N.O. Pundit! Done With Mirrors AMERICAN FUTURE CodeBlueBlog Gay Orbit Urthshu Zacht Ei Interested-Participant blake taylor The Anchoress Freespeech.com Spiked Decision '08 (Mark Coffey) White Lightning Axiom: Redux The Big Picture Rachel Lucas BEI John Cole Haight Speech evolution: on the loose Moderates of all Nations, Unite! Jeff Gannon THE GLEESON BLOGLOMERATE Pajama Pundits Centerpiece The Radical Centrist Lab-Tested FreedomSight AmbivaBlog evolution Marx & Friends in their own words Elective Application Religion Research Islam Blog YOUNGPUNDIT.COM {finding peace in the chaos} IQ & PC -- By Chris Brand Classics in Contemporary Culture Morse's Code A&W; Bench Marx Julie Neidlinger Shades of Gray The Daily Lion: NeoLibertarianism on a Stick Miller's Time Centerpiece This Liberal Coming Anarchy Lay Lines that'sRich the blog eclectic booklore Yankee Madmen Jesusland Expatriate Amazing Motor Girls Spiced Sass Decline and Fall of Western Civilization Modern Crusader MaroonBlog Skriblerier, etc. I am partially fused with infinity Eros Colored Glasses Bill Peschel: The man comes around The Twins Tell the Truth wickens.ca The War of Ideas ConsterNations EaglesUp Blog Vitriolics Anonymous DIRTY WATER Mean Mr. Mustard 2.0 EDUCATION WATCH THE RIGHT SCALE AIS Knight Hammer SOCIALIZED MEDICINE The Argus DON'T BE DUMB! Blue Goldfish | Surface GUN WATCH De Docs Institute for Memetic Engineering And Polymaths... Wordpress Test Weblog Kapowie Zone Political Theory: Weblogs You know, they say... all blogged down Harkonnendog Big Dirigible GeoPoliticalreview.com Coyote Blog Blog Retrofuturistic VietPundit JasonColeman.com Logical Meme Bloggledygook Discursive Recursions Bird's Eye View Right Wing Nut House ELEMENOHPEE Locusts and Honey Moonbattery The Everlasting Phelps Mythusmage Opines The Cassandra Page Of Arms & the Law The Daily Bork Strange Stuff Another Gay Republican Libertarian Man of Mystery Liberty Just In Case TalkLeft Joe's Dartblog Iowa Hawk The Common Room Darth Vader Gay Bipolar Republican Boxing Alcibiades Baby TrollBlog Strange Fictions Urban Hermit The Eye of Polyphemus Toe In The Water Bryan's Basement Fishkite Right on the Left Coast Beltway Buzz pike speak Scared Monkeys The Mudville Gazette Matt Sheffield Undercaffeinated Trey Jackson NashvilleFiles.com Moonbat Central Dust my Broom The Cliffs of Insanity Riding Sun The Modo Blog Philly Future philly Off In The Tall Weeds Doug Petch.Com Gays for Life the True Nature of Reality Spinning Clio Mike Huckabee President 2008 A.E.Brain that rogueclassicist guy A M㯠Invis�l Constantly Risking Absurdity Laurence Simon Notes & Musings A World of Speculation Weird Events Pit Bull Wars New World Man Mark in Mexico The Palmetto Pundit All Things Jen(nifer) Generic Confusion Justus for All iHillary Michael Totten Don Surber Maggie's Farm Unpaid Punditry Corps The Counter Hippie Kicking On Doors FunnyBusiness Restless Mania Mark Tapscott nobody sasses a girl in glasses Letters from the Bostonian Exile The Education Wonks Diana Hseih just muttering Right-Wing of the Gods Michelle Malkin Inside Larry's Head Ballpoint Wren A Blog For All The Liberal Wrong American Outlook Splog Reporter From the Grand Stand Tinabell Affordable Housing Institute mudphud Living In The Past Searchlight Crusade Gus Van Horn Ian Schwartz One Billion Red Chinese and a Dog Named Liberty Suburban Bourgeois The Metropolis Times DR. HELEN Philadelphia AIDS Thrift Sir Humphrey's Birth Story The Simplest Thing Blue Star Chronicles One Stack Mind Cathy Young Neocon Express A A R D V A R K World Climate Report Apartment 604 Yelling at the Windshield Kimdergarten/ ShrinkWrapped The Bear Cave X marks the blogspot CARRY ON AMERICA Jim Rose Kiril, The Mad Macedonian Signal 94 Pseudo-Polymath The International Libertarian Gates of Vienna California Sojourn The Liberty Papers Barcepundit A. Jacksonian Jon Swift Tim Maguire Three Sticks Asymmetric Dog Politics OregonGuy Little Miss Attila Buuuuurrrrning Hot AGENT BEDHEAD Tygrrrr Express David Harsanyi Snowflakes in Hell Earnest Iconoclast Eternity Road Musings of the GeekWithA.45 Total Survivalist Libertarian Rantfest Argue With Everyone Political Forum Nathan J. Winograd Assistant Village Idiot Parkway Rest Stop Grouchy Old Cripple Technicalities Coalition of the Swilling TigerHawk Mary Madigan Sad Old Goth Erica Sherman Joated Ezra Levant
 Pssst! Wanna get on the Classical Values blogroll?  Don?t bang your head!
Please send me an email and let me know, because although I try to keep up, sometimes I have trouble finding every last link.
Site Credits
  (Link buttons) 
|
|
If they're doing their job as a teacher, the response should be "How would I know if they were?"
Their social/sexual/political convictions should not be part of the classroom. If they choose to make it an issue, then perhaps they should not be there in the first place, not because of what they are or what they do, but because they've permitted non-academic behavior to become an issue in an academic environment.