@moonbus saidReading certain kinds of literature encourages people to believe that homosexuality is ok and is not a sin. It is a sin, regardless, and a perversion and an abomination. God hates homosexuals. Now if you do not believe in God, that is your choice. That changes nothing. Your opinion is worthless regarding this issue.
Are you suggesting that reading Plato turns college boys queer? Or that banning Plato will prevent them from becoming queer?
@Rajk999 saidI get it that you think non-heterosexuality is an affront to God and nature, and that, in your vision of a perfect world, there would be no such thing as. However, that is not the topic of this thread.
Homosexuality is as old as the road, long before Plato. The critical difference, between those early days and now, is that in those days it was a sin, but now it is celebrated. The decent world who are not perverted, are forced to celebrate their perversion.
Homosexuality remains a sin and a perversion of human nature.
The topic of this thread is: explain how banning Plato from a university philosophy curriculum will improve society.
It is an affront to freedom of education which makes as little sense as banning Euclid from a mathematics syllabus.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI get it that you think non-heterosexuality is an affront to God and nature, and that, in your vision of a perfect world, there would be no such thing as. However, that is not the topic of this thread.
I’m asking you a question you don’t want to answer!
You suggest these people with chromosome anomalies as normal.
I asked…can a person like this readily be reproduced? I know it happens, but it’s not normal as you suggest.
What is normal is when a child is born you can bet on it being male or female…can you bet on it being mixed?
The topic of this thread is: explain how banning Plato from a university philosophy curriculum will improve society.
It is an affront to freedom of education which makes as little sense as banning Euclid from a mathematics syllabus.
@Rajk999 saidThis is just a prelude--where people ban books, they will ultimately burn them too.
Reading certain kinds of literature encourages people to believe that homosexuality is ok and is not a sin. It is a sin, regardless, and a perversion and an abomination. God hates homosexuals. Now if you do not believe in God, that is your choice. That changes nothing. Your opinion is worthless regarding this issue.
“It was just the prelude… Where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people too.”
Heinrich Heine (1797-1856)
@moonbus saidNot necessarily. Dont extrapolate into the unknown. People ban what is clearly divisive or perverted.
This is just a prelude--where people ban books, they will ultimately burn them too.
“It was just the prelude… Where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people too.”
Heinrich Heine (1797-1856)
@Rajk999 said😆
Homosexuality is as old as the road, long before Plato. The critical difference, between those early days and now, is that in those days it was a sin, but now it is celebrated. The decent world who are not perverted, are forced to celebrate their perversion.
Homosexuality remains a sin and a perversion of human nature.
@moonbus saidOk .. got the point. If it is the case that Plato is condoning homosexuality then there was a time when studying that in college was fine, because it was not celebrated then.
I get it that you think non-heterosexuality is an affront to God and nature, and that, in your vision of a perfect world, there would be no such thing as. However, that is not the topic of this thread.
The topic of this thread is: explain how banning Plato from a university philosophy curriculum will improve society.
It is an affront to freedom of education which makes as little sense as banning Euclid from a mathematics syllabus.
Now, things have changed and people do not need more support for their perverted lifestyle.
Education is fluid... not gender, and Mathematics in particular does not change with every generation
@moonbus saidYOU went there, not me
I get it that you think non-heterosexuality is an affront to God and nature, and that, in your vision of a perfect world, there would be no such thing as. However, that is not the topic of this thread.
The topic of this thread is: explain how banning Plato from a university philosophy curriculum will improve society.
It is an affront to freedom of education which makes as little sense as banning Euclid from a mathematics syllabus.
@moonbus said
Several genders have been recognized by other societies and cultures, for thousands of years before Puritans settled America. Banning people from talking about it won’t make it go away.
@Rajk999 saidHere is a further excerpt from the article linked above
Ok .. got the point. If it is the case that Plato is condoning homosexuality then there was a time when studying that in college was fine, because it was not celebrated then.
Now, things have changed and people do not need more support for their perverted lifestyle.
Education is fluid... not gender, and Mathematics in particular does not change with every generation
quote
Kristi Sweet, the chair of the philosophy diepartment, emailed Prof. Peterson on December 19 informing him that his Philosophy 111: Contemporary Moral Problems course could not include material relating to gender ideology, race ideology, or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity.
Peterson replied, describing the submission of his syllabus as “mandatory censorship review," and adding, “Please note that my course does not 'advocate’ any ideology; I teach students how to structure and evaluate arguments commonly raised in discussions of contemporary moral issues.” He also added that “the U.S. Constitution protects my course content,” as do norms of academic freedom.
end quote
How are people supposed to think critically about contemporary moral issues if they can't even read about real contemporary moral issues in the classroom?! Do you honestly think banning a book is going to make this issue just go away?
PS Mathematics most certainly does change. Just look at what is going on in quantum computing and AI right now.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-top-10-math-discoveries-of-2025/
@Rajk999 saidReading certain kinds of literature encourages people to believe that homosexuality is a sin and not ok. It isn't a sin, regardless.
Reading certain kinds of literature encourages people to believe that homosexuality is ok and is not a sin. It is a sin, regardless, and a perversion and an abomination. God hates homosexuals. Now if you do not believe in God, that is your choice. That changes nothing. Your opinion is worthless regarding this issue.
See, it depends which way you look at it, and what you believe, the point here being that all literature, opinion, philosophy and so on must be available, in order that people may form informed, rational opinions.
@Rajk999 saidAre we only talking about certain literatures of Earth here?
Reading certain kinds of literature encourages people to believe that homosexuality is ok and is not a sin. It is a sin, regardless, and a perversion and an abomination. God hates homosexuals. Now if you do not believe in God, that is your choice. That changes nothing. Your opinion is worthless regarding this issue.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidNo idea whether @mike69 has read Platon's "Republic" -- but to be fair, neither have I.
If the woke mind virus was a thing in Platos writings, maybe you need to reevaluate or clarify what the heck you're talking about.
Was he some kind of political idealist? (Star Wars joke)