With Bill outlined by the distinguished Nadine Morano, the establishment of a status of "good parent" non-sexual back on the front of the media stage debate on the institutionalization of the couple and the "family" homosexuals.
Like every time he comes to homosexuality, an argument that comes up all the time is the "nature". Nature is a man and a woman. The commentators Figaro.fr much emphasis on this point, adding that " where's the sense? .
" As qu'écolo and consumer of bio, I see a child having a father and a mother like many things in nature and any other abnormal situation is unnatural, a synthetic pesticide or some sort of gmo ... "
responses to naturalistic speech are simple:
1) The" nature "(a concept which, in every way, has no tangible definition) includes among its homosexual relations.
2) Comply strictly to the "nature" is not desirable (persons live together naked and spend their time fornicating, they communicate by signals and devour raw food
...). One can speculate that the current glorification Nature (consensus green) allows a return to favor of naturalistic ideology in all its inertia. The coincidence of the conservative groundswell (If not fascist ) that gripped Europe and the ecological consensus should not surprise. These two projects are converging to a return to nature, work, land. Both projects aim to return to the "true values". Preserve that which comes from ancient times.
It is tempting to analyze the arguments conservatives as symptoms of an archaic world that tends to disappear, as the last throes of a violent society backward and ugly that is fighting for its survival with the energy of despair. But this is not the truth. These people have the wind in their sails. And if right now is favorable with minimal changes in the field of morals, because it has many supporters of capitalism hallucinated nomadic hardcore and fluidity of human which is consubstantial. But this pseudo-liberal capitalism defeated conservatism in one hand and builds on the other hand, a huge project regressive, which vies with the ugliness and misfortune. Other
punchline, the idea that the law did not save human practices or to correct situations. In this case, usually adds the commentator in Le Figaro, why not legalize bestiality?
This argument, traditional style, is very common and found in the writings of the thinker Petainist para-Pierre Legendre. The right is responsible for individuals to raise the moral to the property, and not basely to register their practices. Wanting to legalize the existing return it in a hedonistic sense irrational in any way similar to that prevailing under the Nazi regime, "said Pierre Legendre (who, in Nazism, it actually knows).
Gold, 1) yes the law is a body built, moving and adapted over millennia to human practices. 2) legalize a situation does not mean we will legalize the heels all situations of the world (though the absurdity implies that the argument!).
It is sad to see how our pseudo-European companies are actually paid corporate ultra-conservative, puritanical and biofascistes.
Like every time he comes to homosexuality, an argument that comes up all the time is the "nature". Nature is a man and a woman. The commentators Figaro.fr much emphasis on this point, adding that " where's the sense? .
" As qu'écolo and consumer of bio, I see a child having a father and a mother like many things in nature and any other abnormal situation is unnatural, a synthetic pesticide or some sort of gmo ... "
responses to naturalistic speech are simple:
1) The" nature "(a concept which, in every way, has no tangible definition) includes among its homosexual relations.
2) Comply strictly to the "nature" is not desirable (persons live together naked and spend their time fornicating, they communicate by signals and devour raw food
...). One can speculate that the current glorification Nature (consensus green) allows a return to favor of naturalistic ideology in all its inertia. The coincidence of the conservative groundswell (If not fascist ) that gripped Europe and the ecological consensus should not surprise. These two projects are converging to a return to nature, work, land. Both projects aim to return to the "true values". Preserve that which comes from ancient times.
It is tempting to analyze the arguments conservatives as symptoms of an archaic world that tends to disappear, as the last throes of a violent society backward and ugly that is fighting for its survival with the energy of despair. But this is not the truth. These people have the wind in their sails. And if right now is favorable with minimal changes in the field of morals, because it has many supporters of capitalism hallucinated nomadic hardcore and fluidity of human which is consubstantial. But this pseudo-liberal capitalism defeated conservatism in one hand and builds on the other hand, a huge project regressive, which vies with the ugliness and misfortune. Other
punchline, the idea that the law did not save human practices or to correct situations. In this case, usually adds the commentator in Le Figaro, why not legalize bestiality?
This argument, traditional style, is very common and found in the writings of the thinker Petainist para-Pierre Legendre. The right is responsible for individuals to raise the moral to the property, and not basely to register their practices. Wanting to legalize the existing return it in a hedonistic sense irrational in any way similar to that prevailing under the Nazi regime, "said Pierre Legendre (who, in Nazism, it actually knows).
Gold, 1) yes the law is a body built, moving and adapted over millennia to human practices. 2) legalize a situation does not mean we will legalize the heels all situations of the world (though the absurdity implies that the argument!).
It is sad to see how our pseudo-European companies are actually paid corporate ultra-conservative, puritanical and biofascistes.
0 comments:
Post a Comment