On a further note is that if you look at Babylon, Rome, and Greek civilizations the down fall started not by someone invading but internally and internally with moral decay. This is why I am somewhat against it.
I'm not sure why anything gay is "moral decay".
However, I find your examples weird.
Babylon fell not because of moral decay but because the Persians invaded and took it.
The Roman Empire fell first in the west, while the "moral decay" could be found in the decadent and rich eastern half, which survived for another 1000 years.
I don't know when Greek civilisation fell. But I can come up with three possibilities.
One was when Philip and Alexander of Makecon made the Greek world into a Makedonian-led Greek world. However, at that time the Macedonians revered Greek culture and wanted to be accepted as fellow Greeks. They also spread Greek (and not Macedonian) culture towards the east.
The second was when the Macodonian Greek empire(s) fell to the Sassanids.
And the third was when the Byzantinian Empire and ultimately Byzantium fell to the Muslims, first the Arabs and then the Turks.
Not sure how moral decay contributed to Greece's fall. In fact I find it difficult to imagine how one could possibly define how exactly "moral decay" shows in a society that is based on slavery, pedophilia and polytheism. Which moral system did "decay" and how could it go any worse?
First, let me clarify. I not just saying that homosexuality is going to cause the decline. For Babylonian Empire, there was a seismic shift in in the flow of the Euphrates which cause several key northern cities to be completely abandoned. In Twilight of a Great Civilization, shows the influx of these cities to other cities caused there to be individualistic, most of these people were trying to get back to the lifestyles they were accustomed to, which caused a decay in values because they no longer cared about the fellow citizen and were going to back at whatever means possible. Most of these people were trying to get back to the lifestyle that they were accustomed to back in their home cities that they abandoned. This shift in attitude and shift in northern cities caused the Babylonian empire to weaken.
Edward Gibbon (The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire), Pitirim Sorokin (Crisis of our age, Social and Cultural Dynamics, Power and Morality), and J.D. Unwin (Hopousia: The Sexual and Economic Foundations of a New Society), each show a massive decline and correlative pattern of family in Roman empire (the latter three show it in the ancient Greece). Each go into the decay of the family and the sexual practices. This caused a decay not just in the family unit but in values as well. Causing internal strife.
Not sure how moral decay contributed to Greece's fall. In fact I find it difficult to imagine how one could possibly define how exactly "moral decay" shows in a society that is based on slavery, pedophilia and polytheism. Which moral system did "decay" and how could it go any worse?
There have been a lot of studies that show that pedophilics don't wake up and decide to have sex with little kids. These studies have shown that they have been exposued to hardcore porn at a young age. Eventually want that sexual release at any cost and are drawn to the innocence and virgin that a child has. Man's eyes are bigger than his stomach in other words people crave more than what they actually need. Your point goes well with my following statement:
Since history has a tendancy to repeat itself, societies that have had an anything goes attitude (these three societies exhibited this) causes everything to go.
Sorry ID, didn't mean to get off the topic. I shouldn't have brought it up.
I'm not sure if you were disagree or conferring here.
Conferring mostly. I think we are saying the same things, but with different slants.
If you look at the U.S. history, our behavior has generally been reactiontory (is that a word?).
Reactionary is. And I agree. We rarely start, but usually finish.
Eventually, a U.S. elected offical will have the same fate. Once this happens, that is when the U.S. will finally do something.
I agree. But if a 3rd party - running on that platform, becomes a spoiler, it will also move one side or the other (probably republicans) to actually put some muscle behind their talk.
The drug cartels already have hits out on a couple of sheriffs in AZ. If any of them succeed, that may be the impetus that moves the issue onto the front burner as well/
I figured you were conferring. I don't think a sheriff being taken out would do this unless a lot of sheriffs are being gunned. Last week, several border guards got shot and I think one was killed.
The rest may not have been when elected, but they did have one thing on those 2. Advisers who were.
The reality is that most presidents are world knowledge poor. What makes a good one different from a bad one is who they pick to help them learn on the job.
Presidents aren't expected to know everything but they are expected to hire people that do. Its hard to be a politician and to be world knowledgeable. You've got your own constituents to worry about, then how to escape paying taxes, while fooling around with several people on the side, making sure that you're back in DC in time to vote for your own pay raise, and every once in a while throw the bone to the media.
