Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-09-2002, 01:42 PM

<a href="http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0219/lerner.php" target="_blank">Far-Right Bush Delegates Ally With Religious Conservatives at UN Conference</a>

Note - even Catholic Latin America is not with the Vatican on this issue.

Quote:

The U.S. delegation to the summit, led by Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, is heavily weighted toward the extreme right. In addition to the government officials representing our country, four of five "special private sector advisers" to the U.S. chosen by the Bush administration are outspoken religious activists. The appointments have positioned the U.S., along with its new allies, against blocs of more socially liberal European and Latin American countries.

Even before the summit began, the battle over seemingly technical terms that both sides agree could have a profound impact on children's futures was raging. With the United States out front, a group of religious conservatives, including some from Muslim countries and the Vatican, are focusing their attack on language from the first child summit that called for youth access to "reproductive health services," a phrase they argue includes abortion. Other disputes include whether children should be directly taught not to have sex before marriage (U.S. representatives vehemently argue for abstinence), how the family should be defined, and how much control parents should have over children.

. . .

[M]any on the right-leaning U.S. delegation say children ought to be simply encouraged not to have sex instead of getting condoms. Abstinence "is just plain a healthier way to live," says Wendy Wright, senior policy director at Concerned Women for America, a group that will be represented by senior fellow Janice Crouse at the conference. Wright is concerned about granting children too much autonomy, which she fears could result in their suing their parents and otherwise "disrupting the natural order," as she puts it, adding: "When we go outside the order set by God, it's harmful to us."

Such a fundamentalist position is hardly surprising coming from Concerned Women for America, a pro-life group that supports what it calls the "biblical design of the family" and the teaching of creationism in schools. What's more startling is the presence of CWA and other extremely conservative groups on the official U.S. delegation—advisers that are far more strident than Bush's domestic counselors. "It's a good way for Bush to throw a bone to the right," is how Jennifer Butler, UN representative for the Presbyterian Church (USA), explains the makeup of the delegation. "Most media doesn't pay attention to these UN meetings, so this is an easy way for Bush to win points with the Christian right without alienating moderates."

Among the politically charged choices for the influential spots on the delegation is Paul Bonicelli, dean of academic affairs at Patrick Henry College. The two-year-old school in Virginia is "not just another Christian college," as its Web site will tell you. Indeed, Patrick Henry, which counts Janet Ashcroft (the wife of the Pentecostal U.S. attorney general) among its board members, prides itself on its ability to produce conservative political leaders. And, according to the Web site, each employee, board member, and student must believe, among other evangelical tenets, that "Man is by nature sinful and is inherently in need of salvation, which is exclusively found by faith alone in Jesus Christ and His shed blood."

Another delegate is John Klink, a devout Roman Catholic who has previously represented the Vatican at several UN conferences. Klink is so far right, he has opposed providing the "morning after" pill to rape victims in refugee camps and decried the use of condoms even to halt the spread of HIV. Indeed, he's come out against all birth control, with the exception of "natural family planning," also known as the "rhythm method" and, to its critics, "Vatican roulette." Klink will be joined on the delegation by Brother Bob Smith, who runs a Catholic high school in Milwaukee and has advised the president on his initiative to involve faith-based groups in social policy.

. . .

{This story is part of the Voice's ongoing coverage of the war on terror.}

Compare this understated article in the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-050902child.story" target="_blank">LA Times</a>, which seems to have found the lone moderate:

Quote:

Klink's advisory role here was seen by U.S. abortion rights activists as a signal that the administration planned to take a hard-line position on the issue. But Wade F. Horn, an assistant secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, said the U.S. team hopes to reach a compromise on a document that could be adopted by consensus.

"I'm a Presbyterian," Horn said when asked whether U.S. policy was being dictated by the fundamentalist right. "That is about as moderate as you can get."

hezekiah jones · 05-09-2002, 03:02 PM

What a bunch of sanctimonious, holier-than-thou assholes. Go out of your way to deny rape victims in refugee camps abortifacients? Jesus Christ. Why can't these insufferably pompous moralists mind their own fucking business. These people piss me off to no end.

You know, as much as the lunatic right purports to loathe the UN, it sure looks as if they've been scrambling like the bottom feeding vermin they really are to get on this little expedition.

Daggah · 05-10-2002, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Abstinence "is just plain a healthier way to live," says Wendy Wright, senior policy director at Concerned Women for America, a group that will be represented by senior fellow Janice Crouse at the conference.

Yup, abstinence is just a healthier way to live, which is why more socially liberal European countries have a much higher rate of STDs and teen pregnancies!

Oh wait, what's that, you say? They DON'T have a higher rate of STDs and teen pregnancies? Really, they, in fact, have a much LOWER rate of STDs and teen pregnancies? Wow, I didn't realize that America has a teen gonorrhea rate that was 73 times higher than that of France!

Well, gee, it would seem that abstinence isn't so healthy at all!

Captain Pedantic · 05-10-2002, 05:35 AM

Like I keep saying, it's nice to think that people might leave off having sex until they find their "one true love", but it's not going to happen.

Which is why people should be given access to information rather than just being told not to have sex.

Godless Dave · 05-10-2002, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain Pedantic:
<strong>Like I keep saying, it's nice to think that people might leave off having sex until they find their "one true love", but it's not going to happen.

Which is why people should be given access to information rather than just being told not to have sex.</strong>

And when they do find their one true love, they're still going to need to know how to use birth control.

livius drusus · 05-10-2002, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain Pedantic:
<strong>Like I keep saying, it's nice to think that people might leave off having sex until they find their "one true love", but it's not going to happen.</strong>

I don't find that a nice thought at all. I find it a dangerous and inhuman delusion, actually. Sex can be anything from a pleasant way to spend a couple of minutes to a profound voyage of self-discovery. Love can make it great and it can make it suck out loud, too. Linking the act with some vague gauzy notion of "true love" is a drastic oversimplification and a direct route to disappointment, imo.

Corwin · 05-10-2002, 02:43 PM

I'm with liv personally.

Besides.... sexual response and technique are learned skills. Nobody's born KNOWING how to do it beyond the level of 'tab A into slot B.'

'Saving yourself for marriage' is a lousy idea that's sure to make married sex boring and unsatisfying.

Berenger Sauniere · 05-10-2002, 09:34 PM

Why doesn't the government advocate abstinence to Jesus Christ's Catholic priesthood? It could be something along these lines: "You can't have sex with children before they're married."

Toto · 05-13-2002, 09:18 AM

More on this:

Quote:

Among the politically charged choices for the influential spots on the delegation is Paul Bonicelli, dean of academic affairs at Patrick Henry College. The two-year-old school in Virginia is "not just another Christian college," as its Web site will tell you. Indeed, Patrick Henry, which counts Janet Ashcroft (the wife of the Pentecostal U.S. attorney general) among its board members, prides itself on its ability to produce conservative political leaders. And, according to the Web site, each employee, board member, and student must believe, among other evangelical tenets, that "Man is by nature sinful and is inherently in need of salvation, which is exclusively found by faith alone in Jesus Christ and His shed blood."

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2467-2002May10.html" target="_blank">Patrick Henry College denied accreditation because it requires professors to sign a statement of faith including that they will teach creationism.</a>

Quote:

At issue is the school's Statement of Biblical Worldview, in which professors agree that all courses will be taught with the understanding that God created the world in six 24-hour days. In a letter, academy President Jeffrey D. Wallin told Patrick Henry that the statement conflicts with the requirement that "liberty of thought and freedom of speech are supported and protected, bound only by such rules of civility and order as to facilitate intellectual inquiry and the search for truth."

Patrick Henry President Michael P. Farris said: "It took us by total surprise. Apparently, there are some [AALE] board members whose views on diversity just simply do not allow them to believe that someone who believes in creationism should be in the big tent of academic freedom."

When the school begins offering biology in the fall, Farris said, professors will explain evolution but will ultimately teach that creationism is true, based on faith and science.

. . .

Several experts said the rejection of Patrick Henry's application illustrates an interesting debate about academic freedom in higher education.

"I think any institution that imposes an ideological test on faculty is going to have a certain difficulty with accreditation, perhaps a substantial difficulty," said Michael B. Goldstein, a lawyer who heads the higher education practice at the Washington law firm Dow, Lohnes & Albertson.

"Can you say you believe in the fundamentalist approach? The answer is, sure. But can you restrict a faculty member in pursuit of his or her academic area? And the answer is, that you're not supposed to."

. . .

KarlTennessen · 05-13-2002, 11:48 AM

I cant see the logic in waiting twenty or thirty years, have a romantic wedding, go on a honeymoon cruise, and then having (garunteed for the woman, maybe even the man too) no orgasm, no fun, and probably a lot of pain.

Besides, ive read that if one has few orgasms (self- inflicted or otherwise), the ones that one does have become stale and weak.

Chastity is a recipe for an anticlimax.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-09-2002, 03:02 PM	#2
hezekiah jones Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: WI Posts: 4,357	What a bunch of sanctimonious, holier-than-thou assholes. Go out of your way to deny rape victims in refugee camps abortifacients? Jesus Christ. Why can't these insufferably pompous moralists mind their own fucking business. These people piss me off to no end. You know, as much as the lunatic right purports to loathe the UN, it sure looks as if they've been scrambling like the bottom feeding vermin they really are to get on this little expedition.

05-10-2002, 05:35 AM	#4
Captain Pedantic Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: UK. Posts: 588	Like I keep saying, it's nice to think that people might leave off having sex until they find their "one true love", but it's not going to happen. Which is why people should be given access to information rather than just being told not to have sex.

05-10-2002, 02:43 PM	#7
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	I'm with liv personally. Besides.... sexual response and technique are learned skills. Nobody's born KNOWING how to do it beyond the level of 'tab A into slot B.' 'Saving yourself for marriage' is a lousy idea that's sure to make married sex boring and unsatisfying.

05-10-2002, 09:34 PM	#8
Berenger Sauniere Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: et in Arcadia ego... Posts: 406	Why doesn't the government advocate abstinence to Jesus Christ's Catholic priesthood? It could be something along these lines: "You can't have sex with children before they're married."

05-13-2002, 11:48 AM	#10
KarlTennessen Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 7	I cant see the logic in waiting twenty or thirty years, have a romantic wedding, go on a honeymoon cruise, and then having (garunteed for the woman, maybe even the man too) no orgasm, no fun, and probably a lot of pain. Besides, ive read that if one has few orgasms (self- inflicted or otherwise), the ones that one does have become stale and weak. Chastity is a recipe for an anticlimax.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.