From: pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Buchanan's speech
Date: 20 Aug 92 00:31:06 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Aug19.134553.9460@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
 
>Don't confuse Buchannan's cultural supremism with racism.  There is a big 
>difference.  How could he be racist if he embraces black republicans, the
>many that we have seen the past two convention days?  No, he thinks that
>Western ideals (the good, the honest, the eternal) are what everyone in
>America should strive after.  Sometimes he makes crude analogies, such as
>the one about the English immigrants and the Zulu, but such arguments are
>not against a people because of their race, but because of their culture. 
>
So culteral rascism is ok ? If your culture is not what my culture
thinks it should be you are wrong and evil ? Again, are we going to
judge people on what they are or what they represent ? It seems that
Buchanan's idea of reedom is limited to the cultural elite. As long
as one embraces the ultra conservative interpretation of the bible
and one refuses gay and lesbian people the same rights as everyone
else, as long as one ridicules women for wanting to play an active
role in combat, equal pay. As long as one is a member of the
cultural elite, you have all the priviliges that come with it. If
one does not think like them you are an outcast and freedom does not
apply to you.


>The Bible clearly says that homosexuality is wrong.  If others take  this as
>an excuse to hate, then surely they are walking further in to the darkness. 
>Hating people is never encouraged in the Bible;  although, hating particular
>actions that people do is encouraged, for the simple reason that certain
>actions are understood to go against the divine will.
>
But how literally should the bible be taken. I argue that the bible
teaches love and understanding, the fact that some people have added
their own ideas about women, gay people etc should not deter us from
the real message of the bible.>


>So, there has to be some judgments, it just happens that Biblical judgements
>are quite piercing.  There is a difference between judgment within a group
>of believers and  without, but that would take us down a path for another
>time.

But isn't the only one to hudge a person the same person who wrote
all these rules. Only he would be knowledgeable enough to weigh this
persons actions. We however tend to judge on appearances, behavior
or anything we don't like.
>
>Yup, Pat's speech was tough and stirring, exactly what he wanted.  He wants
>to stir up divisions so radical  groups scream and holler on tv and the
>American  people see who these  groups are.  And, what Buchannan (and
>privately Bush) hopes for is that Clinton will make the grave error of
>coming to the rescue of these infuriated groups.  Such will be the demise of
>Clinton.  Although I don't think he is that dumb.

Aha so Pat is for stirring up divisions. Divisions between us and
them. The ones deserving freedom and the ones deserving judgement.
It's even worse that he does not do this out of conviction but just
out of cheap political motives.
>
>tk

Pim van Meurs
-- 
Pim van Meurs  UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Mail Code A-030  	 UUCP : ...!ucsd!ssurf.ucsd.edu!VANMEURS
UCSD La Jolla  CA 92093  ARPA : VANMEURS@ssurf.ucsd.edu
(619)-458 9729 Home	 Bitnet : VANMEURS%ssurf.ucsd.edu@sdsc