Bisexual: What does it mean?

Most people think that bisexuals are promiscuous. This is a bit like the opinions some have that all homosexuals are pedophiles, or that all priests are. True, there are promiscuous people of most orientations, and there are sexual predators of all orientations, but orientation alone does not determine morality. We can talk about the need of some to believe they are more moral than others due to their orientation some other time. Fact is that most Bisexuals do not think of themselves as bisexual and try to conform to being either straight or gay. Most have things to think about in life other than sex.

Relationships are not all about sex, either. How about love? It is not so impossible to love and admire a person of ones own gender and for that to lead to a desire for greater intimacy. Many bisexuals say, "We fall in love with the person, first. Gender is irrelevant."

The probability is that not all people who say they are 100% straight or 100% gay really are at the extremes of the Kinsey scale. The liklihood is that there are vast numbers of people who are bisexual and either do not realize it or will not admit it.Well, part of the reason that I make a point of expressing my bisexual orientation is because others need to know they are not alone. They need to know that one can be bisexual and still enjoy a monogamous relationship, especially if love is the foremost desire. They can accept their nature of their orientation and still consider themselves good people.

I believe it is the case that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of nature and nurture. The gay person has no control over the fact that he or she find their own gender most attractive. Neither does the heterosexual. This, precisely, is the reason that sexual orientation is not a matter of virtue. The orientation of our sexual desires, where we are on the scale, is something pretty much beyond the individual's control. Probably, the notion that it is a matter of virtue is driven entirely by people for whom it is a matter of choice: bisexuals who are insecure about their same-sex feelings, presume all others face the same choices and are perpetually at odds with those who state that their orientation is not a choice, thinking all to be like themselves.

This is unfortunate as orientation is irrelevant. The struggle of virtue is not about sexual orientation. People of all orientations must decide the extent to which they will govern their passions or be governed by their passions. Virtue is created not by orientation, but by what the human being brings to and adds to their own human condition. Can one govern ones passions so they are not a distraction to the need to help others? Certainly, passions can lead us to predatory behavior hurtful to ourselves and others if they are not managed well.

Many do not like such thoughts because they require work. Beneath them is the hint that you are not more virtuous just because you like to sleep with the opposite sex, even by becoming a parent you are not automatically more virtuous as we can find many examples of bad parents. Yes, participating in birth and parenthood can lead one to become more virtuous, but it requires us to respond appropriately. It is that response to our human condition accomodating the needs of others among the demands of our own desires that is the beginning of virtue.

Should Men Marry?

Brother Walter connected me with this story about men's rights.

Should Men Marry?

Scoop: American Cassandra - Susan Lindauer’s Story

New Coverage of Susan Lindauer

Scoop: American Cassandra - Susan Lindauer’s Story

Good news. Mukasey is GOOD news...

...for America. Why do I think this?

Here's the answer:

This from the New York Times, this morning:

LINK

Ex-Judge
Is Said to Be Pick At Justice
Democrats Likely To Accept Him as
Attorney General
By Michael
Abramowitz and Dan EggenWashington Post Staff Writers

Monday, September 17,
2007; Page A01
President Bush has selected retired federal judge Michael B. Mukasey as his new attorney general, sources said yesterday, moving to install a law-and-order conservative at the Justice Department while hoping to avoid a confirmation fight with Senate Democrats.

This was the judge that so pinned the ears back on the prosecutors for wanting to forcibly medicate Susan. Known as a tough guy. A stickler for the law. He was able to protect an individual who politicians were ready to throw away or dispose of as was done with Martha
Mitchell during Watergate.

I wrote about the experience of being in his courtroom. I was quite thrilled with our nation to see such a judge on the bench and felt that way even before I knew how he was going to decide anything regarding Susan.

I knew she was getting one of the best for a judge. My pointing that out to her might have been one of the things that helped to calm her down a bit. She had to admit that in many other countries a judge's permission would not have been necessary.

In contrast, it is the unfortunate case in Pakistan that the ruler has been able to render their court powerless. That is a problem that even given fears of terrorism in a courtroom in New York City a few blocks from the cavity of the former World Trade Center Judge Mukasey did not permit. And that the culture of our nation did not permit... at least, not yet.

Nice to see one of the good guys win, once in a while.

Judge Mukasey Said to Be Pick At Justice

Can anybody tell me why this news would be good... no, thrilling, on a personal level?

See the story that prompts this Monday-morning excitement in the Washington Post:

Ex-Judge Is Said to Be Pick At Justice
Democrats Likely To Accept Him as Attorney General
By Michael Abramowitz and Dan EggenWashington Post Staff WritersMonday, September 17, 2007; Page A01

One of Collin Powel's friends

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/16/AR2007081602745.html

Politics in the Church

Something I found that I wrote a while back that reiterates what I learned reading Bertrand Russel:

Politics are inescapable. Sometimes they arrise from healthy motives -- the desire for self improvement. We see someone else who is successful. We try to emulate what that person does, follow their example, listen to what they say and learn. Sometimes another person comes along and says something different. We don't listen because it doesn't sound like our leader. As the organization grows, leaders become more powerful and the tendency to resist other voices creates a kind of informal censorship that discourages creativity and critical thinking. Understanding how some faults arrise out of human nature, it is easier to forgive and more difficult to villify or bear a grudge.

Spiritually, we must find a balance between "listening for the voice inside us," listening for voices in the wilderness telling us about the voices they hear, and the need to have community to discern truth.

Perhaps I'm radical, but I prefer quiet, reflective meditation to a lot of the hubbub of group attempts at group praise. St. Francis said to "preach the Gospel and to use words if you must."

The need of the churches, politically, to engage the young results in language that, to me, sounds condenscending. The pedestal on which marriage and baptism of infants have been raised, I find inappropriate. It is the choice of adults to follow a ministry that needs to be celebrated and recognized. My reading of the Christian faith does not instruct me to marry and increase the population. I understand the need to accomodate human needs, but am aghast that one group of sinners so accomodated so violently fall upon other sinners seeking the same accomodation.

That the creation of new souls, new humans, children is a miracle of life and something to be held in awe, I do not deny. However, I do no find it to be particularly enobling. It is not right that so many think parenthood itself is a sign of virtue and I therefore dislike the center stage given to parents at the baptism of infants. Better to see how they do as parents and honor them later--or let us each honor our own father and mother by how we conduct our lives.

There, now I've gone and become pedantic.

The church needs a diversity of ministries. Children would find the services I most enjoy dreadfully boring, I imagine.

if life were a thing that money could buy...

...all the rich would live and the poor would die.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/29/nz.lifesupport.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories