Fordham U rejects Coulter, embraces infanticide and bestiality....

[koshergrl]

No it doesn't, you nitwit.

He's open about his advocation of bestiality. What a lying twat you are.

 

[Ravi]

Then you should be able to link his actual words stating such.

 

[RosieS]

Institutions of higher learning used to encourage balance and diversity of thought; Fordham allowed the far left pov to be heard while they silenced the far right pov. Everyone should have a problem with this.

wtf is a Catholic university even entertaining the likes of Singer, someone who advocates the killing of newborns and disabled people? There is no 'discussion' to be had with someone who believes this shit is acceptable. This goes beyond far left anything, this goes beyond the pale. It is wrong. Period.

One pov should not be favored over another to promote intellectual diversity.

But if it is a pov I don't like, it should be silenced.

Got it.

Regards from Rosie

My second point went right over your head. Why is a Catholic institution entertaining someone who advocates murder at all? Has nothing to do with an 'extreme' pov, per se, but it does have everything to do with Catholic teachings, Catholic beliefs, #5, thou shalt not kill. It's morally wrong and completely goes against the Catholic church. In light of that, why in the world would a Catholic university even want someone who advocates this, in addition to the bestiality thing, through their front doors?

Because it is a Jesuit Catholic institution. Jesuits are the most educated, intellectual and inquisitive Order in the Church. They greatly influenced Pope JP II as to the acceptance of evolution. Pope Benedict has walked that back since he is not as much a Catholic academic.

No learning under the sun is off limits to the Society of Jesus.

The Society of Jesus in the United States

Regards from Rosie

 

[koshergrl]

He's a hero of the left, just as Alfred Kinsey is, and for the same reason. While Kinsey promoted the concept that all sex is good sex, and that children actually enjoy it...Singer takes it a step further and says all sex is good sex, including sex with animals.

"
But sex with animals does not always involve cruelty. Who has not been at a social occasion disrupted by the household dog gripping the legs of a visitor and vigorously rubbing its penis against them? The host usually discourages such activities, but in private not everyone objects to being used by her or his dog in this way, and occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop. Soyka would presumably have thought this within the range of human sexual variety.
At a conference on great apes a few years ago, I spoke to a woman who had visited Camp Leakey, a rehabilitation center for captured orangutans in Borneo run by Birute Galdikas, sometimes referred to as "the Jane Goodall of orangutans" and the world's foremost authority on these great apes. At Camp Leakey, the orangutans are gradually acclimatised to the jungle, and as they get closer to complete independence, they are able to come and go as they please. While walking through the camp with Galdikas, my informant was suddenly seized by a large male orangutan, his intentions made obvious by his erect penis. Fighting off so powerful an animal was not an option, but Galdikas called to her companion not to be concerned, because the orangutan would not harm her, and adding, as further reassurance, that "they have a very small penis." As it happened, the orangutan lost interest before penetration took place, but the aspect of the story that struck me most forcefully was that in the eyes of someone who has lived much of her life with orangutans, to be seen by one of them as an object of sexual interest is not a cause for shock or horror. The potential violence of the orangutan's come-on may have been disturbing, but the fact that it was an orangutan making the advances was not. That may be because Galdikas understands very well that we are animals, indeed more specifically, we are great apes. This does not make sex across the species barrier normal, or natural, whatever those much-misused words may mean, but it does imply that it ceases to be an offence to our status and dignity as human beings."

Heavy Petting, by Peter Singer

 

[koshergrl]

Ravi's heroes:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUG65I49bjw]Atheist Peter Singer Justifies sex with animals!!!! (gross) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Ravi]

He's a hero of the left, just as Alfred Kinsey is, and for the same reason. While Kinsey promoted the concept that all sex is good sex, and that children actually enjoy it...Singer takes it a step further and says all sex is good sex, including sex with animals.

"
But sex with animals does not always involve cruelty. Who has not been at a social occasion disrupted by the household dog gripping the legs of a visitor and vigorously rubbing its penis against them? The host usually discourages such activities, but in private not everyone objects to being used by her or his dog in this way, and occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop. Soyka would presumably have thought this within the range of human sexual variety.
At a conference on great apes a few years ago, I spoke to a woman who had visited Camp Leakey, a rehabilitation center for captured orangutans in Borneo run by Birute Galdikas, sometimes referred to as "the Jane Goodall of orangutans" and the world's foremost authority on these great apes. At Camp Leakey, the orangutans are gradually acclimatised to the jungle, and as they get closer to complete independence, they are able to come and go as they please. While walking through the camp with Galdikas, my informant was suddenly seized by a large male orangutan, his intentions made obvious by his erect penis. Fighting off so powerful an animal was not an option, but Galdikas called to her companion not to be concerned, because the orangutan would not harm her, and adding, as further reassurance, that "they have a very small penis." As it happened, the orangutan lost interest before penetration took place, but the aspect of the story that struck me most forcefully was that in the eyes of someone who has lived much of her life with orangutans, to be seen by one of them as an object of sexual interest is not a cause for shock or horror. The potential violence of the orangutan's come-on may have been disturbing, but the fact that it was an orangutan making the advances was not. That may be because Galdikas understands very well that we are animals, indeed more specifically, we are great apes. This does not make sex across the species barrier normal, or natural, whatever those much-misused words may mean, but it does imply that it ceases to be an offence to our status and dignity as human beings."

Heavy Petting, by Peter Singer

I'm not surprised you had that saved on your hard drive.

It appears to be a book review where he asks (or the author of the book asks) if sexual overtures from animals are wrong since the animal is the one that initiated it. Not seeing that he is advocating bestiality as you've claimed.

Those nutty Jesuits, though, who would have thought?

 

[koshergrl]

It's a quote from his own article, you fucking retard. In which he defends the idea of cross-species sex. Which he always has done.

I can see why you admire him.

 

[Ravi]

I don't admire him, I merely like to point out your logical fallacies and lies.

 

[koshergrl]

No logical fallacy here, dear. The lies and logical fallacy are all you, per usual.

Peter Singer is pro-bestiality.

Margaret Sanger is racist.

Those are the truths you are faced with.

We already know you're a racist, so I understand your defense of Sanger.

But I didn't realize your dog was in danger...

 

[Ravi]

I know she was racist. Never said she wasn't. She was against abortion, though, and as such is probably a hero of yours.

 

[koshergrl]

No, she was never against abortion. She promoted the pill as an alternative to abortion, but she was absolutely 100 percent pro-abortion.

Particularly for the black population.

 

[koshergrl]

The modern day abortion rights movement began as the American Birth Control League in 1921. Sanger was one of three of it's founding members.

 

[Ravi]

Sanger's family planning advocacy always focused on contraception, rather than abortion.[106][note 10] It was not until the mid-1960s, after Sanger's death, that the reproductive rights movement expanded its scope to include abortion rights as well as contraception.[note 11] Sanger was opposed to abortions, both because they were dangerous for the mother in the early 20th century and because she believed that life should not be terminated after conception. In her book Woman and the New Race, she wrote, "while there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization."[109]

Historian Rodger Streitmatter concluded that Sanger's opposition to abortion stemmed from concerns for the dangers to the mother, rather than moral concerns.[110] However, in her 1938 autobiography, Sanger noted that her opposition to abortion was based on the taking of life: "[In 1916] we explained what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun."[111] And in her book Family Limitation, Sanger wrote that "no one can doubt that there are times when an abortion is justifiable but they will become unnecessary when care is taken to prevent conception. This is the only cure for abortions."[112]

Margaret Sanger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[koshergrl]

Sanger was fine with the taking of life. It's why she was friends with both the Nazis & the KKK.

 

[Ravi]

hahahahahaha!

Lying is a sin.

 

[koshergrl]

Silly, you don't believe that or you wouldn't wrap yourself in lies as you do.

Hey check out what Jesse Jackson had to say about abortion:

"If one accepts the position that life is private, and therefore you have the right to do with it as you please, one must also accept the conclusion of that logic. That was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private."

 

[Plasmaball]

i bet Kosher has all of singers and sangers work saved....Looks like she worships them.

 

[koshergrl]

Sure it does, weirdo. Looks just like I worship them.

 

[AmyNation]

I've just stopped by to to if Coulters rejection in favor of animal sex guy is still funny...

....



Yup, funny as hell. I don't think this one will get old.

 

[Plasmaball]

Sure it does, weirdo. Looks just like I worship them.

you are the one with all theses links and such.