Comments for In The Agora

Comment on Sin, Humility, and Compassion by J

Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:46:47 +0000

You’re kind of on the right track. The difference between homosexuality (actually homosexual act) and other sins is that nobody is arguing that the other sins aren’t really sins, and there are plenty of people, including clergy, making precisely that argument about sex with someone of the same gender. In terms of commission, homosexual acts aren’t even a speck compared to adultery, but nobody is arguing that adultery isn’t a sin.

Comment on Why Not? by Spartan

Spartan — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:46:02 +0000

Jason has a good point; just as in the previous thread, this woman is most certainly an unrepentant sinner, like almost all homosexuals. Strangely, I don’t think that she will be on the receiving end of the hostility that some Christians show towards homosexuals (and by ’some Christians’ I do not include the blog owners nor anyone posting here just to be clear).

This woman is more the poster child for why heterosexuals should not be allowed to marry, again if we’re going to be mostly consistent.

Comment on Why Not? by Jason Kuznicki

Jason Kuznicki — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:10:52 +0000

Are you objecting that no one pointed out she makes her living from some kind of fat fetish pornography? I noticed that, but didn’t think it was directly relevant to Josh’s point about her being eligible for free health care. But just so we’re clear, I think how she makes her living is (quite literally) sick.

It’s certainly relevant. But why stop with health care? Why not deny her right to get married, too? Indeed, shouldn’t that be the first thing you think of?

It’s obvious that the relationship she has with her husband is based on gluttony. This is every bit as serious a sin as homosexuality, if not more. It’s also equally obvious — just look for the hugely fat people, and deny them the right to marry. Consistency demands no less!

Comment on Why Not? by CJ

CJ — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:00:36 +0000

I love this post! Post picture of very large woman who makes horrible decisions, then use that to generate disgust about health care. Very high brow there

Comment on Why Not? by Eric Seymour

Eric Seymour — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:08:23 +0000

Jason,

I don’t understand what you’re arguing. No one here has condoned this woman’s lifestyle. Josh, David, and I all strongly implied (and I’ll go ahead and make it explicit now) that her lifestyle is destructive.

Are you objecting that no one pointed out she makes her living from some kind of fat fetish pornography? I noticed that, but didn’t think it was directly relevant to Josh’s point about her being eligible for free health care. But just so we’re clear, I think how she makes her living is (quite literally) sick.

Comment on Why Not? by Jason Kuznicki

Jason Kuznicki — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:26:22 +0000

This story makes an interesting contrast with the one just previous, about how all people are sinful and broken, not just homosexuals.

If you read the 9News piece, it’s entirely obvious what’s really going on — she “makes money by running a website where men pay to watch her consume fast food.”

Uh-huh.

And yet this woman, who fits many plausible definitions of being a prostitute, is also married, and a mother, and no one mentions it! Not one person. Not even Eric Seymour, when he had the opportunity.

This woman is out there living the destructive heterosexual lifestyle, and no one complains. Very interesting, that’s all I’m going to say.

Comment on Why Not? by DMD

DMD — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:38:12 +0000

Perhaps the government should pay for her psych evaluation before anything else.

Comment on Why Not? by Eric Seymour

Eric Seymour — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:28:05 +0000

As I understand it, if she lives to Medicare enrollment age (or qualifies for Medicaid) she’ll get free health care at taxpayer expense under *current* law.

But this brings to mind a larger problem. Currently, private insurance companies are able to charge higher premiums to smokers, alcoholics, obese people, etc. Obamacare will make it illegal for companies to charge higher premiums for pre-existing conditions like obesity, forcing those who control their weight to pay for the additional health care costs of those who don’t. But will it also prohibit higher premiums based on behavior like smoking and drinking?

Comment on Why Not? by Doug

Doug — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:05:18 +0000

Yes, because she’s representative of the people who get sick in this country and die because they can’t afford health care.

The world would be nicer if the folks who suffer did so because of their vices and moral failings, but that’s just not how it works.

Comment on Sin, Humility, and Compassion by DMD

DMD — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:50:57 +0000

I agree with your reasons why Christians seem to single out homosexuality as a worse sin than others. I might add the fact that homosexual relationships also tend to run afoul of traditional gender roles, which while not as important as they used to be in the general populace are still big among evangelical Christians (just read any Christian relationship book), is another part of the issue. Same sex relationships don’t fit within a traditional gender role framework, even the ones that seem to copy traditional roles, like butch/fem lesbian couples. Gay marriage pushes boundaries even further. If you’re in the Focus on the Family school of gender theory, you’re totally going to be uncomfortable with what gay activists want to do.