Can anyone deny this history of persecution?

[elliott95]

The lack of historical context centers on the idea that the term homosexuality refers to a people who have existed through time. It is like creating an common identity and a common history for political reasons where none has actually existed. It is like, for example, people of Jordan finding their history in identifying with the Moabites, when there is no common ties between the current people of Jordan in terms of language, culture, religion, or anything else that is measurable.
There is no common identity between the way that homosexuality was practiced in the ancient world, and what is happening in modern Western society today. It is political 'nationalism' to use history in order to create that common history.

 

[Conscious Z]

Aaron Lindahl,
Few things on forums are more annoying than someone posting extremely long passages that have been copied and pasted from other sites, particularly when no credit is given to that site. It's plagiarism, and on a practical level, it's simply annoying.

 

[Conscious Z]

What inaccuracies? The history I posted is known by any student of classical or early church history. Are you honestly going to deny basic historical fact, and in addition to that, ignore the points I just brought up in the last post?

If that's the case, why did you feel the need to copy them word for word from another site?

 

[Thekla]

If that's the case, why did you feel the need to copy them word for word from another site?

Especially when he relies on now factually discredited sources (like, apparently, Gibbon who wrote an admirable work full of inaccuracies influenced not a little bit by his anti-eastern bias).

The Christians in the east preserved and utilized ancient Greek sources (like Plato) - how else were they able to bring them west in the 15th c. when Constantinople collapsed ...

And how, if knowledge of architecture was lost, was Agia Sophia constructed ?

These clear falsehoods (and many others ) in his post throw the entirety of his "list" into question.

 

[Conscious Z]

These clear falsehoods (and many others ) in his post throw the entirety of his "list" into question.

Well, he didn't write a single word of that list...

 

[Thekla]

Well, he didn't write a single word of that list...

and clearly didn't research/verify (or source) the items on the list.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Just a point you might wish to be careful on ... I do believe it is against forum rules to imply someone who self-identifies as Christian is not ...

Hi Kylissa, you are entirely correct. I apologize and have removed that portion of my statement.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Here are all the sources and credits:

Craig Williams,"Roman Homosexuality: Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity" (Oxford University Press, 1999)

Eva Cantarella, "Bisexuality in the Ancient World" (Yale University Press, 1992)

Thomas A.J. McGinn, "Prostitution, Sexuality and the Law in Ancient Rome" (Oxford University Press, 1998)

Amy Richlin, "The Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor" (Oxford University Press, 1983, 1992)

Jonathan Walters, "Invading the Roman Body," in Roman Sexualities" (Princeton University Press, 1997)

Martha C. Nussbaum, "The Incomplete Feminism of Musonius Rufus, Platonist, Stoic, and Roman", in The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Greece and Rome (University of Chicago Press, 2002)

Bernadette J. Brooten, "Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism" (University of Chicago Press, 1996)

Marilyn B. Skinner, "Introduction to Roman Sexualities" (Princeton University Press, 1997)

Diana M. Swancutt, "Still before Sexuality: 'Greek' Androgyny, the Roman Imperial
Politics of Masculinity and the Roman Invention of the tribas", in Mapping Gender in Ancient Religious Discourses (Brill, 2007)

Thomas Habinek, "The Invention of Sexuality in the World-City of Rome", in The Roman Cultural Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 1997)

Amy Richlin, "Sexuality in the Roman Empire, in A Companion to the Roman Empire" (Blackwell, 2006)

Jasper Griffin, "Propertius and Antony", Journal of Roman Studies 67 (1977)

Anthony King, "Mammals," in The Natural History of Pompeii (Cambridge University Press, 2002)

Ariadne Staples, “From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins: Sex and Category in Roman Religion” (Routledge, 1998)

John G. Younger, “Sex in the Ancient World: From A to Z.” (London and New York: Routledge, 2005)

Michael Brinkschröde, "Christian Homophobia: Four Central Discourses," in Combatting Homophobia: Experiences and Analyses Pertinent to Education (LIT Verlag, 2011)

Meyer, Michael J, “Literature and Homosexuality.” (Rodopi 2000)

"Summaries of General Synod Discussions and Actions on Homosexuality and the Rights of Homosexuals". Reformed Church in America. (2009-11-21.)

"Love, Hate and the Law: Decriminalizing Homosexuality" ; Amnesty International (2008)

Eskridge, William N.,"Gaylaw: Challenging the Apartheid of the Closet". Harvard University Press. (2009)

Codex Theodosianus

The Cambridge ancient history: Vol. XIII The late empire, A.D. 337-425. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2005)

"A History of The Inquisition of The Middle Ages"; volume I by Henry Charles Lea. (2012)

 

[Thekla]

Here are all the sources and credits:

Craig Williams,"Roman Homosexuality: Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity" (Oxford University Press, 1999)

Eva Cantarella, "Bisexuality in the Ancient World" (Yale University Press, 1992)

Thomas A.J. McGinn, "Prostitution, Sexuality and the Law in Ancient Rome" (Oxford University Press, 1998)

Amy Richlin, "The Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor" (Oxford University Press, 1983, 1992)

Jonathan Walters, "Invading the Roman Body," in Roman Sexualities" (Princeton University Press, 1997)

Martha C. Nussbaum, "The Incomplete Feminism of Musonius Rufus, Platonist, Stoic, and Roman", in The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Greece and Rome (University of Chicago Press, 2002)

Bernadette J. Brooten, "Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism" (University of Chicago Press, 1996)

Marilyn B. Skinner, "Introduction to Roman Sexualities" (Princeton University Press, 1997)

Diana M. Swancutt, "Still before Sexuality: 'Greek' Androgyny, the Roman Imperial
Politics of Masculinity and the Roman Invention of the tribas", in Mapping Gender in Ancient Religious Discourses (Brill, 2007)

Thomas Habinek, "The Invention of Sexuality in the World-City of Rome", in The Roman Cultural Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 1997)

Amy Richlin, "Sexuality in the Roman Empire, in A Companion to the Roman Empire" (Blackwell, 2006)

Jasper Griffin, "Propertius and Antony", Journal of Roman Studies 67 (1977)

Anthony King, "Mammals," in The Natural History of Pompeii (Cambridge University Press, 2002)

Ariadne Staples, “From Good Goddess to Vestal Virgins: Sex and Category in Roman Religion” (Routledge, 1998)

John G. Younger, “Sex in the Ancient World: From A to Z.” (London and New York: Routledge, 2005)

Michael Brinkschröde, "Christian Homophobia: Four Central Discourses," in Combatting Homophobia: Experiences and Analyses Pertinent to Education (LIT Verlag, 2011)

Meyer, Michael J, “Literature and Homosexuality.” (Rodopi 2000)

"Summaries of General Synod Discussions and Actions on Homosexuality and the Rights of Homosexuals". Reformed Church in America. (2009-11-21.)

"Love, Hate and the Law: Decriminalizing Homosexuality" ; Amnesty International (2008)

Codex Theodosianus

The Cambridge ancient history: Vol. XIII The late empire, A.D. 337-425. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2005)

Instead of requiring posters here to track the sources and read entire works, could you join the source to the claim in your list and quote from the source ?

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

Instead of requiring posters here to track the sources and read entire works, could you join the source to the claim in your list and quote from the source ?

Sorry but no.. I've just provided 'many' sources that back up all that I've said here. If you're going to deny the overwhelming historical evidence on this issue, then you're free to do so.

Just as if I had posted a thread saying that many cars run on combustion engines, and people denied that fact and wanted me to provide countless schematics, diagrams, and technical sheets before they would believe that statement... I'd tell them the same thing.

 

[Thekla]

Sorry but no.. I've just provided 'many' sources that back up all that I've said here. If you're going to deny the overwhelming historical evidence on this issue, then you're free to do so.

Just as if I had posted a thread saying that many cars run on combustion engines, and people denied that fact and wanted me to provide countless schematics, diagrams, and technical sheets before they would believe that statement... I'd tell them the same thing.

As before, I am asking for verification, appropriate sourcing, and context.

This is not the same as denying "overwhelming historical evidence"; it's actually asking for the evidence appropriately provided (ie in a manner that can be utilized by the participants in the discussion).

 

[Conscious Z]

Sorry but no.. I've just provided 'many' sources that back up all that I've said here. If you're going to deny the overwhelming historical evidence on this issue, then you're free to do so.

Just as if I had posted a thread saying that many cars run on combustion engines, and people denied that fact and wanted me to provide countless schematics, diagrams, and technical sheets before they would believe that statement... I'd tell them the same thing.

So first you're going to plagiarize virtually an entire post, then you're going to refuse to actually correlate the entire list of sources to the respective parts of your lengthy post to which they belong? You're lazy, and everything about the way you've constructed this post is poor form.

I get that you're claiming that it's obvious that homosexuals have been the subject of discrimination. But it's not obvious that the conversion of the Visgithic kingdom in Spain from Arianism to Catholicism in 589 led to the persecution of gays (for example). That is what people are demanding sources for, and they are making reasonable requests. You can't quote a massive block of facts, call those facts evidence, and then refuse to provide appropriate citations for those facts because there's so much overwhelming evidence that support isn't needed. That's akin to circular reasoning.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

As before, I am asking for verification, appropriate sourcing, and context.

This is not the same as denying "overwhelming historical evidence"; it's actually asking for the evidence appropriately provided (ie in a manner that can be utilized by the participants in the discussion).

I did exactly that, and if you're unwilling to research the issue by reading all the many many reputable sources that I listed, that's not my problem.

 

[Conscious Z]

I did exactly that, and if you're unwilling to research the issue by reading all the many many reputable sources that I listed, that's not my problem.

It is your problem because it's the author's job to organize information in such a way that it is at least reasonable for the reader to evaluate the arguments and evidence. Copying and pasting dozens of random facts and then just throwing out a bibliography with no correlation to the post itself is beyond lazy....it's academically irresponsible and disingenuous on your part.

What you've done here is copy and paste something for which you yourself haven't read any of the sources. You aren't interested in having a real discussion, and the justification for your claims is irrelevant to you because you see your central claim as being obviously true....and it may be. But if it is the case that it's obviously true that homosexuals have been discriminated against by Christianity for centuries, then why do you need to list all of these historical facts? To use your combustion engine example, no person trying to persuade us that a lot of cars use combustion engines would feel the need to construct a post like the one you've made here.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

So first you're going to plagiarize virtually an entire post, then you're going to refuse to actually correlate the entire list of sources to the respective parts of your lengthy post to which they belong? You're lazy, and everything about the way you've constructed this post is poor form.

I get that you're claiming that it's obvious that homosexuals have been the subject of discrimination. But it's not obvious that the conversion of the Visgithic kingdom in Spain from Arianism to Catholicism in 589 led to the persecution of gays (for example). That is what people are demanding sources for, and they are making reasonable requests. You can't quote a massive block of facts, call those facts evidence, and then refuse to provide appropriate citations for those facts because there's so much overwhelming evidence that support isn't needed. That's akin to circular reasoning.

Nope, and there's almost no plagiarizing going on here, since most of my original post are in my own words except for the quotes from Cicero, and references to Martial and Juvenal, and of course excerpts from the Theodosian laws. The only 'laziness' here is coming from people wanting to know my 'sources' and then being too lazy to buy or check them out from the library, and then read them.

 

[Conscious Z]

Nope, and there's almost no plagiarizing going on here, since most of my original post are in my own words except for the quotes from Cicero, and references to Martial and Juvenal, and of course excerpts from the Theodosian laws.

Hmm, that's interesting. Let's take a look at your 1945 fact.

You: Upon the liberation of Nazi concentration camps by Allied forces, those who were interned for homosexuality, and who miraculously survived.. are not freed, but required to serve out the full term of their sentences under Paragraph 175.

http://www.gayrightssite.com/tl5.html: Upon the liberation of Nazi concentration camps by Allied forces, those interned for homosexuality are not freed, but required to serve out the full term of their sentences under Paragraph 175.

Obviously you do not understand what plagiarism is. Rearranging a few words and making minor changes so that it is still "in your own words" is certainly plagiarism when you don't give credit where credit is due.

The only 'laziness' here is coming from people wanting to know my 'sources' and then being too lazy to buy or check them out from the library, and then read them.[/B]

There is a reason that any academic paper cites sources as it goes. It is of no value to throw out a massive bibliography to a massive post when there is no connection that has been made between each source and its respective claim.

You're lazy and dishonest.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

As I said, you're free to deny historical reality on this subject all you want, while completely ignoring the pure evil of all the many deaths, torture, and murder done to people in the name of Christ on this issue.

 

[Conscious Z]

As I said, you're free to deny historical reality on this subject all you want, while completely ignoring the pure evil of all the many deaths, torture, and murder done to people in the name of Christ on this issue.

I didn't do any of that. I simply said you should be more honest and less lazy as a poster. Deception and sidestepping normal protocol as it relates to sources makes your post less persuasive, not more.

Then again, your post wasn't really the product of your own intellect or creativity, so I understand why it might not be important to you to actually persuade the reader.

 

[Aaron Lindahl]

I didn't do any of that. I simply said you should be more honest and less lazy as a poster. Deception and sidestepping normal protocol as it relates to sources makes your post less persuasive, not more.

Then again, your post wasn't really the product of your own intellect or creativity, so I understand why it might not be important to you to actually persuade the reader.

It's a subject I've been studying in depth for many years, and the authors of all the many books I listed for you are well of aware of its truth. I'm sorry if you think sharing the story of millions of people who have been persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered in the name of Christ is only of note if it was 'the product of my own intellect'.

 

[Conscious Z]

It's a subject I've been studying in depth for many years, and the authors of all the many books I listed for you are well of aware of its truth. I'm sorry if you think sharing the story of millions of people who have been persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and murdered in the name of Christ is only of note if it was 'the product of my own intellect'.

I didn't say it was only of note if it was the product of your own intellect. I simply said that you shouldn't lie and claim it is your intellect when it isn't. You should also take the time to make proper citations so the reader can verify what you are claiming. You shouldn't be surprised when people doubt your un-cited claims when you've already proven yourself willing to be deceptive regarding the source of your material.