I agree with what you say. "demand that no one hurts another person
or has sex with another person against his or her will, and that the
other person be mature enough to give full consent."
And that is all people need. Unless they are old fashioned or
insecure...like me. Then they need a piece of paper and a judge or
minister to make it final...until it isn't.
I've been married by a minister and two judges, once in a church, once
in my parents living room and once in Cathy and my house in Renton.
That last one was at my insistence(whining and begging). That was in
February of 1982. We'd been in our home for 13 months and another 11
months in my house in Skyway(Seattle).
Cathy was 29, and absolutely beautiful. She had been sought after by
every single man in the Agency, and a number who were married.
Although I'd known many very nice women, I had never been lucky enough
to have won the hand of the Fairy Princess. Once when we were first
dating, the Agency had a meeting at the Ben Franklin Hotel, in
Seattle. As Cathy entered the lobby, decked out in her finery, the
entire Houston Oilers burst into the hotel. Everyone of these huge
mammoths zeroed in on Cathy, saying things like, "Hello, little
darling", and "Don't I know you from San Francisco?"
When we bought our house in Renton, I proposed marriage. Cathy could
care less. She said she didn't need a piece of paper and a bunch of
mumbo jumbo to know that I was her Life's Mate. She only agreed
because she was still using her previous married name, and she did not
want to go through the rest of her life being reminded of some very
hard times. In brief, she said that she told her husband that he
would have to choose between her and the bottle. "The bottle won",
she said. Over the forty years we've been together, I finally have
begun to believe I really did win the brass ring.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/16/18, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There was an interesting person on Flashpoints yesterday, and I listened to
a good part of what he said today. He pointed out that these reports on
sexual abuse in the Catholic Church appear periodically, and that no member
of the church hierarchy is ever held accountable. He said that this is
because when the reports are released, it is after an agreement has been
signed that the Church will be indemnified, not held accountable legally for
the abuse. The victims are paid reparations with an agreement not to discuss
the abuse anymore. Within the church, the abuse is a sin. However, reporting
the abuse to outside authorities is considered to be a crime according to
church law. Members of the church see the law of the church as being higher
than the law of the countries of which they are citizens. Until the
structure of the institution is changed and the power relations are
rearranged, and chastity for priests is no longer required, we will continue
to have these periodic scandals. He also said that Pope Francis is a
figurehead whom we like because of how the media represent him, in the same
way that Obama was a figurehead. In each ase, we expected changes when this
benign appearing leader appeared, and in each case, nothing really changed.
The guest on Flashpoints pointed out other examples of how the Catholic
Church, as an institution, is corrupted and has harmed people. One of these
is that the Church operated the schools for First Nations children in Canada
where children were abused and died.
I feel like there are gradations of evil. If one looks at how celebrities
have abused women, and compare that to the sexual abuse of children by
priests, I think that the abuse of children is worse. The women who were
abused by celebrities, had some agency. Often, they were building careers.
They made choices related to building those careers. The behavior of those
male celebrities was bad, but it was almost never forcible rape, although
some of it came very close. Some of it was viewed differently in the past
than it is now.
I recently started reading a book by Daniel Mendelsohn. He wrote a current
book about how his father began attending a course he was teaching on the
Odyssey. I became interested in him and found another book that he wrote
earlier in his life about being a gay man in New York. He writes about being
a man and how gay men were free to live their sexual lives without the
pressure of marriage and fatherhood. He's intelligent and sensitive. Yet, he
revels in a lifestyle which glorifies, casual, temporary, impersonal sexual
encounters. It seems like, whether gay or straight, what is natural and most
comfortable for men is lots of sex with lots of people. Even where there
were gay men living together for years, each of them had continuous brief
encounters with other people.
So if that is what is natural for men, what kind of moralizing can we do
about people's sexual behavior except to demand that no one hurts another
person or has sex with another person against his or her will, and that the
other person be mature enough to give full consent?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 11:54 AM
To: blind-democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy]
The articles coming out of Pennsylvania regarding misconduct of a large
number of Catholic Priests, coupled with the on-going exposee of sexual
abuses among celebrities and political leaders, raises a troubling question.
Is Moral Integrity nothing more than an unreachable Dream?
What do you think? Is this behavior so ingrained that it will always be
with us? What do you believe is the underlying cause(s)? What solutions
can you envision working?
Carl Jarvis
