Would you believe that this was part of the curriculum of a radical feminist workshop sponsored by a Catholic University?
Marquette University in Wisconsin hosted this “FemSex” workshop last spring and, while the university has announced it will no longer sponsor “FemSex,” the fact that the administration at a Catholic university thought this course was acceptable tells you something about how far the advance of radical leftism has gone in our nation’s educational institutions. From the course syllabus:
FemSex provides a safe space for exploration, encourages honest dialogue, and facilitates collective learning. . . .
Evolving from the long-running, student-led courses at UC Berkeley and Brown University, FemSex seeks to bring the values of empowerment, diversity, and community to the university setting. . . .
Themes include pleasure, health, gender, consent, boundaries, privilege, power, body image, communication, race, class, orgasms, masturbation, sex, kink, and sexual identities. . . .Week 12: Empowerment, Final Projects, and Wrap Up
4/29
What is power and who has it? What does it mean to be empowered? What are the various sources of our personal powers? We will consider each topic in our curriculum as it relates to women’s empowerment. We will discuss community building and support amongst people, self-esteem, and confidence building.
Each FemSexy will present phe’s final project, a chance to either reflect on personal experiences of FemSex or further explore a top discussed throughout the season. In the past, some of these projects have taken the form of visual art, video, poetry, exploring a new source/form of pleasure, engaging in a difficult conversation around sexuality, and much more — whatever is most helpful to you in processing and concluding your experience. It’s up to you!
As we say goodbye to a season of FemSex, we will discuss where we wish to go from here, within our own lives and communities.
Take-Home Exercises may include:
• Cunt Coloring: Color an anatomical picture from The Cunt Coloring Book.
• Affirmation Assignment: Affirm someone in a manner of your choosing.
• Birth/Adoption Assignment: Talk to your parent(s)/guardian(s) about the experience of your birth, adoption, or how they came to have you.
• Erotica: Crate an anonymous piece of erotica exploring fantasy and desire.
• Pleasure Point: Find a new pleasure point or pleasurable activity, and write about (or express in another medium) the experience
• Empowerment Object: Bring in something that you find empowering to share with the group.
What is this about? It is about campus “Women’s Studies”/”Gender Studies” as programs as a political weapon, as an ideological indoctrination in radical feminism, as a lesbian recruiting operation, and as a campus base for gay-rights advocacy. Feminist leaders have been quite explicit about their belief that lesbianism is the ultimate form of women’s “empowerment”:
[University of California-Santa Cruz Women’s Studies] Professor Bettina Aptheker is the daughter of a famous American Communist, the late Herbert Aptheker . . .
Professor Bettina Aptheker is by her own proud admission both a Communist and a self-described “lesbian activist.” . . . Aptheker’s course syllabus describes lesbianism as the “highest state of feminism” . . . In other words, change in sexual orientation is an inevitable final stage in the development of the socially conscious individual.
Feminism’s relentless demonization of males as unfairly benefiting from discrimination (“patriarchy”) and the celebration of perverse gynocentric fetishes (“a difficult conversation around sexuality,” hint hint) are all about teaching vulnerable women that heterosexuality is inferior, that men are the enemy and that lesbianism is therefore the only way to escape the oppression of “male dominance.” This is feminism as distaff Marxism, as a revolutionary ideology to destroy traditional culture. And this is not an accident:
Allison Jaggar is professor of philosophy and a former chair of the Women’s Studies Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder . . . Integrating Marxism and feminist theory, Jaggar describes herself as a “socialist feminist” and “activist,” who seeks to combat “the male-dominant structure of everyday life.” . . .
“The political economy of socialist feminism,” writes Jaggar, “establishes that, in contemporary society, women suffer a special form of exploitation and expression. . . . The distinctive social experience of women generates insights that are incompatible with men’s interpretations of reality . . . The validity of these insights . . . must be tested in political struggle . . .”
To be true feminist, you must be a Marxist lesbian. It is difficult to say whether perversion or subversion is more essential to the radical project on America’s campuses, including Seattle University, a Catholic institution that has invited 1960s radical terrorist Angela Davis to speak to students there. Who is Angela Davis?
Angela Davis is the dangerous criminal who helped smuggle weapons into a courtroom, including the shotgun that was used to blow off the head of federal Judge Harold Haley. She is a lifelong Communist revolutionary who embraces America’s enemies and who — surprise! surprise! — is also an outspoken feminist:
An online campaign has been launched by a conservative Catholic group to oppose the upcoming scheduled appearance of Angela Davis at Seattle University, a Catholic institution.
“It would be difficult to find a speaker who contradicts the teaching of the Catholic Church on more levels than Angela Davis,” writes James Bascom for TFP Student Action. “Stalin maybe? She is a notorious feminist, Marxist, communist, socialist who engages in pro-abortion, pro-same-sex ‘marriage’ activism.”
Angela Davis advocates abortion as necessary to feminist revolution:
“Birth control — individual choice, safe contraceptive methods, as well as abortions when necessary — is a fundamental prerequisite for the emancipation of women,” wrote Davis in her book Women, Race and Class.
Angela Davis is anti-traditional marriage, but pro-gay marriage:
At San Jose State University, Davis stated: “Even those of us who are critical of the institution of marriage should be able to say if some people have the right to get marriage, then everybody should have the civil right to get married.”
Hey, Catholics: You have a problem here. Excuse me for observing that the problem goes to the very top of the clerical hierarchy.
There can be no compromise between Marxist radicalism and Christianity. Marxism is committed to the destruction of Christianity.
What are you, a Donatist?
Um yeah, your ‘reporting’ was false. Nowhere in the two linked articles, or the actual text of the Pope’s words does anyone mention the creation of a single world currency.
Also note that the actual reporting does include the quote from the Pope that any such order “should be the outcome of a free and shared agreement and a reflection of the permanent and historic needs of the world common good..”
Heaven’s to Betsy!
This Pope truly respects the dignity of all human beings. Part of that respect means not condescending, or speaking in small measures.
Unfortunately for him that makes his row a hard one to hoe, as the weak willed or weak minded are too willing, or too apt to hear what they want to hear rather than seek the fullness of meaning within his words.
Lucifer is the bringer of death. And, just as scripture says in Proverbs 8:36, “Pro 8:36 But he who sins against me wrongs his own soul; All those who hate me love death.”
It’s pretty clear that hate God, so all that is left you is death. I’m sure you’ll enjoy your ride on the long black train, but you will hate the destination. You will arrive because of your own willful obstinacy. I’d wish you luck, or a fond “farewell” but you are far beyond that.
People seem to forget that Popes, like all of the Church Fathers before them, are deeply steeped in Greek and Latin; and how these languages present themselves in Sacred Scripture.
Bluntly, they know eros from philia.
Heh! You haven’t been paying much attention. All of those people have caught hell for what they did or were doing. Haggard ended up put out of his Church for his actions. The others have caught it as well, so we are equal opportunity dissers, if you catch my drift.
The last part of your post is exactly the problem. The “Uncertain Trumpet” is a serious problem. You can’t pussyfoot around this stuff, and it looks like he’s trying to have his cake and eat it too.
I have dealt with the issue in Theological terms and you are attempting to syncretize Psychology and Theology. That effort hasn’t worked since Origen and Augustine tried it with Platonism and Neo-Platonism.
Everyone has a perverted mind. It’s part of the human condition. Some minds are more perverted than others. That’s one strong lesson taught by Scripture. It’s one reason why we can’t earn salvation outside of Christ, because we can not change ourselves. NO matter what we do, no matter how much effort we expend, we can’t save ourselves. It’s why Martin Luther ended up rebelling against the RCC, his monkery, as he expressed it, could not save him.
The rest is detailed by my dead friend Nixon, and he bears re-reading Alessandra.
If you have an issue with “false”, we’ll take “grossly misleading”, then. The Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace is the *opposite* of a major wing of the Holy See (which is what reporters usually mean when they spout “the Vatican”; either that or the Roman Curia). It’s a Council, which, in the roman curia, is second from the bottom in terms of importance. (Councils are below the Secretariat of State, Congregations, and Tribunals, but above Offices). So, really, as an organization, it’s small; largely, it’s only one step above “miniscule import”. The PCJP isn’t even top-of-the-list small. You want to talk the import of this document on the whole of the Holy See, you have to deal with the relative lack of significance of the council.
Secondly, the document, according to the people who *actually read it*, is hardly threatening a one-world-order. It argues that the IMF and various Bretton Woods organizations are too weak (dispute this if you’d like) and that there’s “the need for a minimum, shared body of rules to manage the global
financial market which has grown much more rapidly than the real
economy”. It’s an application of the principal of subsidiarity to the rejuvenation of the IMF, which is *hardly* a world government.
Last time I checked Pat and his fellow televangelists were still making millions despite controversial statements and fraud allegations.
That’s usually what happens when you rely on your own interpretation of scripture, questionable translations (e.g. KJV, NIV) and relatively-modern theology (the solas, calvinism, arminianism, the rapture, etc) rather than on tradition.
Out of over 30,000 variations of Christianity, the Catholic Church is by far the LARGEST and OLDEST, for a reason.
What I think is being missed is the fact of Satan’s dominion over this world. All of these negative thoughts, mental disorders, physical disorders, perversions, etc. are the work of the Evil One. He tempts and cajoles the venal part of man’s dual nature (Venal and Divine) to pervert and suppress the divine part (soul). Man is God’s creation and we are in his image. God allows Satan free rein on earth to purify the faithful. For if there is no personal cost to salvation, what is it worth? Salvation must be earned by taking up the cross daily and overcoming the wiles and traps of the Evil One. Persecution is a common thing for followers of Christ, often persecution unto the death. These martyrs have earned their place in Heaven. I count among them those who have, through the power of Satan mental perversions, homosexual ideations, addictions, etc., and have through God’s Grace, overcome and resisted these temptations and vexations of the Evil One. Through their resistance they have (with the Grace imparted by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit) literally earned Heaven. The average believer also must do as prescribed, reject the illusions of the world, confess and be truly contrite, resolving to avoid sin, emulate Christ in all things and make your life a living sermon (testimony) to the truth of God’s Word as well as the acceptance of Christ’s salvific act and all reverence and respect due Him for that act of expiation of our sins.
I’m not Roman Catholic, but I think you are being overly charitable. I think most of it is intentional and malicious.
What the Talmud says about the Goy does not bear repeating. Let’s just say it’s far worse than what Begin had to say.
There is a big difference between “going of the rails” and people simply falling away. That is not unexpected as Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,”
We are simply on the track scripture puts us on, so we’re hardly “going off the rails.”
That’s the biggest problem with scripture. God knows man’s evil heart and how he will react, and he sees the end from the beginning because he lives outside time. He even knows where you will spend eternity. I can guess pretty well that it will be in eternal separation from God, but God knows with certainty.
The Roman Catholic hierarchy is almost totally top down. It’s the way of the Magesterium. That fact is the biggest reason why I am not RCC. While you are free to disagree (and I intend no reply) there is simply too much in RCC doctrine that clashes with scripture for me to accept it. I don’t have any trouble with a doctrine that is unbiblical as long as it does not clash with scripture, but I must reject what contradicts scripture and there is plenty that does.
So what! Being old and big does not make you right. I have a copy of the current RCC Catechism. When I lay the Bible down next to it and make teh comparison, it sometimes does well, but when the accretions that started between the Nicene Council and Augustine, not to mention Augustine’s ecclesiology, there is plenty to dislike and reject.
As I said above, I have no problem with something is not biblical, that does not lead away from Christ, but when it contradicts scripture, Then I am compelled to reject it.
The idea that there is some magisterium that you can place blind faith in for doctrine and faith is simply not biblical and contradicts the position of scripture. I’m not going to enter into a theological battle on TOM’s bandwidth, but in a nutshell, that’s why I am not a Roman Catholic and can not become one. For yourself, your faith had better be in teh finished work of Christ and not a church, which is an organization of man no matter teh claims of the hierarchy, then you will have a rude awakening when you stand before Christ as your final judge.
While we accept the veracity of the Bible, we don’t believe the Bible is the literal be-all-and-end-all of everything, or that it has all the answers. Judaism understood that as well; that’s why they have the Talmud.
Unlike Fundamentalist Christians, most Catholics and Jews agree that the Bible is open to reinterpretation when new discoveries are made. That’s why we have little problem reconciling scripture with evolution, heliocentrism, an old Earth, genetics, new continents, etc.
Man, nobody calls me about these idiots until it’s all over. >:(
QUIT FEEDING THE TROLLS DAMN IT
Some of them, yes.
I’ll start flagging them for you.
I won’t flag Nixon even though his eyes creep me out, however.
Phileo.
Scripture has all the answers when it comes to Salvation and how we are to conduct ourselves if we are striving to be molded to the image of Christ. If you take another look at what I said, I reject those things that contradict scripture. God does not contradict Himself.
Sunday School, for example, is not Biblical, but I accept it for the good it does. Doctrines such as Purgatory, or that salvation is found only in the church, I reject. The first because it contradicts scripture, the second because the New Birth is what puts you into the Church, not the other way around.
Thanks. Would you prefer I wore Wayfarers?
Sorry Wombaticus, it was late, I flagged his comments and he kept on so I took off the kid gloves …
Tell that to Francis Collins.
He may be a proponent of “Liberation Theology” now…
Learned this from K-Bob last week.
I’m a Protestant, and I say watch every religious leader like a hawk. Every nonreligious leader, too.
InChrist72 – They’re not my leaders. (Never even heard of Long and Schaap, and I forget Haggard’s claim to infamy. Related to Merle?) But scroll up and read what I said. The logical conclusion is this: watch every leader, whether you’re a follower or not.
Academic PC at its worst makes libertarian atheists look Catholic.
[…] The mainstream media is reinterpreting everything Pope Francis says to fit is own agenda, and that it lives in the belief that it cannot only manipulate public opinion, but change fundamental Truth. (Stacy McCain has a post about a Catholic university that is the epitome of what liberals….) […]
Semantics……….
From the Foxnews link;
‘The Vatican
called Monday for radical reform of the world’s financial systems,
including the creation of a global political authority to manage the
economy.’
‘A’ global political authority….’A’ means ‘1’ (one)……’1′(one) government, ‘1’(one) currency!
Bona diagnosis, bona curatio
I think we disagree, but I’m not sure to the extent. If you need a brain operation, you go to a brain surgeon and hospital and you get your operation. You don’t go to your priest to perform the operation, because the priest doesn’t have the knowledge required to solve this kind of problem. The same is true for a vast range of mental and psychological problems. Clergy are not therapists and are not equipped to work with a lot of troubled people. Clergy can point to the right moral direction, but they lack the knowledge to work with deep psychological/mental illness problems. Now, having said that, their pastoral care and moral guidance can benefit people with various types of psychological problems. However, pretending that clergy and therapists have the same kind of knowledge is wrong, just as wrong as pretending that a priest can perform a brain operation. Individual sets of knowledge regarding human psychology can overlap, so it’s also true that clergy can have some knowledge about dealing with some types of psychological problems as other professionals.
In short, no person has to have any psychological or emotional problem. Our task is to resolve our problems, and, generally speaking, the right therapy together with other support resources (which can or not include any church involvement) is what can be effective in dealing with a large variety of perverted psychological issues. The goal is not for a pedophile to resist their pedophilic desires but to work out the underlying psychological problems they have that cause their mind to produce these desires in the first place. If you resolve the root issues, there is no perverted desire that is produced, there is no perverted desire to resist. That’s working with root problems. That’s a different ball game. The same applies to homosexuality and a bunch of other dysfunctional and disordered emotional and psychological dynamics.
Bona diagnosis, bona curatio
Much of trusting in God is knowing He will not give us a cross that we cannot bear with His help. His help often consists in getting help from the correct doctors to address the problems that confront us, the actions of the Evil One in this world. A coordinated therapy is needed, physician, psychiatrist, priest, all working in conjunction to overcome the underlying issues and the actions (sins) these cause.
Sadly, there are very few secular folks in the psychiatric field that have any religious belief and/or are willing to coordinate care with a minister or priest, viewing belief in God as an aberration in itself.
As an aside, I will note that a great majority of priests do have psychological training and that many in the Jesuit order are even licensed psychologists and psychiatrists.
You’re forgetting one small detail:
You can’t “cure” homosexuality.
The APA, World Health Org, AMA, and all other relevant scientific groups reject such attempts as ineffective and potentially harmful. It’s been restricted in two states already (CA and NJ).
Exodus International, the largest group that offered “cures” for homosexuality, ceased to exist due to lack of success. Another reorientation group, JONAH, is being sued for malpractice and false advertising.
You are very misinformed – obviously due to the very irresponsible work of the organizations you mention. The professionals who are relevant are the ones working with helping people resolve their homosexuality problem. The APA is completely ignorant regarding the etiology of homosexuality -they are not reliable at all. They are run by a “normalize homosexuality” mafia, so we can’t expect them to do science or any serious work. Just like when they tried to normalize pedophilia.
If the APA wanted to reject ineffectual and potentially harmful therapies, it would ban all therapy, because all therapy can be ineffectual and potentially harmful. And there are certainly professional members of the APA who don’t agree with the stated and irresponsible views of the organization.
the Exodus people mentioned on wikipedia are not psychologists or clinical therapists, and the organization itself had a stated purpose to be a *ministry*. Now while a ministry can be therapeutic (just as going fishing or winning on the lottery can), it’s definitely not therapy in the clinical sense.
Therefore, the closing of Exodus has no impact on “conversion therapy” or any other type of therapy practiced by any other psychologists and therapists.
Moreover, therapists are not “organizations.” The majority of therapists perform
individual work. Therefore I would think the number of therapists that work with homosexuality problems is much greater than the number of ministry organizations for this purpose.
Furthermore, any therapist can be sued, and this has no bearing on the work of all therapists. You are obviously ignorant of the fact that therapy is not a pill – and certainly the work of one therapist can have nothing to do with the work of another.
Many therapists continue to do work to help people resolve their homosexuality problem. And they aren’t being sued. Other researchers continue to investigate the etiology of homosexuality. And they are also not being sued.
You start with a false premise, support it with the delusion from groups that foster homonormative behavior and cite only 2 ministries that have had problems.
Boy, you are screwed, blued and tattooed! Pull your head out of your ass and look at reality, not the fantasy you’ve been fed and “feel” is true.
“You start with a false premise, support it with the delusion from groups that foster…” — rmnixondeceased http://t.co/dn81NvuKYb
“Many therapists continue to do work to help people resolve their homosexuality problem. And they aren’t being sued. Other researchers continue to investigate the etiology of homosexuality. And they are also not being sued.”
You mean like this guy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJXWFZz0Qjo
or this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fUU0evTWQI
I don’t know this Cohen, but I looked at his wikipedia page and it seems that’s the work he does. (To note: in his video, it shows him touching his client – something which I think should be banned for all therapies. But there’s another example of how different therapy can be: I would say few therapists engage in touching while many are against it as a matter of principle)
You can read about Nicolosi’s work with hundreds of men, or Lisa M. Diamond’s research (http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/not-born-lgbt/) and there are many others
RE: Lisa Diamond
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64A2HrvYdYQ&feature=player_embedded
And your proof is…
Diamond’s work says that several women have changed their sexual orientation. This goes counter to what ignorant homosexual activists claim: that no one can change their sexual orientation. She has interviewed many women who claim to have changed sexual orientation.
So Diamond is doing research that investigates somewhat the etiology of homosexuality and she is not being sued – by anybody.
She is also claiming that Cohen is lying about his own experience. And she is also stating that every other single person who claims to have resolved their homosexuality problem through any kind of therapy or using other resources with a therapeutic effect is lying . However, I don’t see her proving her claim in any way.
It’s a dogmatic claim with no basis. Where is her proof that every single person who claims to have benefited from therapy is a liar? She obviously doesn’t even know who the majority of them are, what their experiences are, what kind of therapy they did, etc.
Furthermore, the comments in this thread underscore that Diamond is claiming NARTH is distorting her work when NARTH really isn’t:
http://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/lisa-diamond-narth-distorts-my-research/
NARTH does mislead readers into thinking that the conclusion
is based in part on her work. Why cite her work if NARTH did not want readers to be influenced by it?
Marty replies:
But it’s NOT misleading. NARTH’s conclusion IS based in part on her work. But it’s NARTH’s conclusion — not hers. I find nothing in the PDF that would lead anyone to think the conclusion was hers.
She may disagree with the conclusion, which is fine. But the only thing I find misleading is your blog post, which makes it appear that NARTH is attributing their conclusion to her. No honest reading of the fact sheet could reach that determination.
It’s your assertion, it is up to you to prove it using neutral objective sources. Cite away.
No, not “one government”. Where does the article say government? The only one saying one government is you. Also, you are the only one saying currency.
The document is calling for a single — coherent — rule system for dealing with an international problem. How tightly are you wound to star screaming world government?
Alessandra – I want to collaborate on some work, please check your facebook page (I sent you a message), and Censored at First Things comments.
Many Blessings.
Define; political authority…..