Gay History in School Textbooks

Post Reply New Topic

Saul's son Jonathan and David were friends, possibly from when they were both young kids, that doesn't mean there was any homosexual relationship to it. That is just self-serving supposition.

Well, they did kiss every now and again. And David, who was very fond of women, did consider Jonathan's love to be even better.

Rhetorical Question: Why do I get the feeling you are taking pieces of scripture here and there that don't go together and fitting them together in a way you wish to support your stance, rather than what it actually says?

Answer: Because it fits with your track record.

Still wondering (okay, maybe I am obsessive) about homosexuality in America during the colonial/early independence period.

It depends a lot on your source.

According to this Catholic source:

http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/20 ... ality.html

sodomites would have had to have been very discreet. Since historians would have depended upon records, those committing sodomy would have tried not to let on.

If you look up sites that are more sodomy-friendly

http://www.bilerico.com/2009/12/the_oth ... athers.php

you get some names.

And, if you've watched Deliverance, there must have been some pig-squealing going on from early times.

Now THAT makes the cat laugh.

Jews get assigned family names. You get Goldberg, and Silberberg, and you get the occupational names - Schreiber, Bobby Zimmerman.Christ is just Josh's business.

pandabear, again that is all just supposition, and heresay.

Read I Kings and I Samuel again. What I said was quite accurate.

David and Jonathan did hug and kiss once in a while. David was quite fond of women. He had a personal copulation cabinet consisting of a great number of wives and concubines, and he still felt compelled to commit adultery against Uriah the Hittite. And, David did regard Jonathan's love for him to have been even better than the love of women.

Josh was Jewish, wan't he. How about this? Josh Saver. That has a ring, yes?

ruveyn

If you look up some of their biographies--it turns out, for example, that James Dean, who played manly men in movies, was able to avoid military conscription on account of his homosexuality.

It occurs to me. Depending which style Church organization you got, we get to celebrate almost every recorded action. we get birth, circumcision, footwashing, the last seder, you name it.

Are we SURE the Bar Mitzvah bit was not instituted early enough? That would make a great commemorative Mass, the Pope in St Peter's Square proclaiming "today I am a man".

The question is whether or not he was an actual homosexual though, a lot of people came up with various things in an attempt to avoid being drafted.

I am a nice guy and even to the perniciuously obnoxious I will toss a crumb. Not simply so you can get your jollies, but when you seek stimulation in data on the colonial period, I will be nice.

I have an ancestor who was - yes he was - a judge in Salem. THAT Salem.

Herself has an ancestor who [I suspect for reasons of professional competition] was accused of witchcraft. So was his wife.

She had a brother who had a few problems with the theocratically minded Salem administration because he had this problem with moving on young guys in the neighbourhood.

There. You can die happy.

That still doesn't mean that they were gay or having a homosexual relationship, they considered each other to be brothers (siblings).

Not exactly brothers. David didn't get along very well with Jonathan's daddy.

And siblings are NEVER sexually involved, of course.

No, I do not suspect David - who whatever may have happened to the facts of the stories is a very realistic portrait - of being THAT way. The bulk of the evidence says no - not that that stopps some folks saying things.

But we need to talk straight. Not misstate. You can argue from the detail on character. Don't argue from being like brothers.

I suspect we'll learn about homosexuals in Texas history some time after they teach kids about the labor unions. Seriously, my college history class basically skipped that chapter.

Just because we were mostly taught only about the straight white men and their books and accomplishments doesn't make them the only important ones. The way we were taught indoctrinated us, as well. Our culture has changed, deal with it.

I, for one, welcome our new black lesbian overlords.