[QUOTE]Many historians, those who are objective, would look back and recognize and give some credit to the fall of Rome to not only the deprivation of the society and the loss of morals, but also to the rampant homosexual behavior that was condoned by the society.
Recent remark from Mike Johnson, now the Republican House leader.
The North Hertfordshire Museum is about 40 miles north of London, and its scholars have just announced that based on the historical evidence (in their view), one of pagan Rome's emperors should no longer be regarded as cisgendered and male. These worthies of academia say that Marcus Aurelius Antoninus—known more commonly as Elagabalus—identified as female, and so the museum will change its Elagabalus exhibit to reflect that, using the pronouns "she" and "her" instead of "he" and "him."
Elagabalus landed the coveted title of Princeps (emperor) in 218 AD, but lasted just four years, falling victim to assassination in 222 AD.
Given what House Speaker Mike Johnson said not too long ago, about homosexuality and Rome, you have to wonder how this might "sit" with him... assuming he learns about it.
222 ace was 100 years before the christians were legalized
yes he was a tran nut so what
by 380 less the 60 years one life time after christians were legal they had taken over and banned gays and enfarsted the laws with christian sex hang ups and 25 years after that the first part of the fall rome was sacked a few more in-complaint christian rulers and the western empire collapsed due to bad christian rulers low taxes on the rich the whole nut con god bothered BS is what did them in
btw the other JC the julius caesar was bi and he set up the empire he was called ''every woman's man and every man's woman '' one hell of a warrior who never lost a major battle was a poof
Interesting, there are a few folks that just can't get past that "Sexual/Rome" thing. Per that side topic, I couldn't care less. Speaker Johnson is a Fiscal Conservative and just in case you miss it, I like him and his Conservative approach to governing.
Interesting, there are a few folks that just can't get past that "Sexual/Rome" thing. Per that side topic, I couldn't care less. Speaker Johnson is a Fiscal Conservative and just in case you miss it, I like him and his Conservative approach to governing.
Rams
just like rome
NUT-CON'S FAIL AT LEADERSHIP
WHEN THE TAXES ON THE RICH AND POWERFUL ARE PUT ON THE WORKERS INSTEAD THE STATE FAILS
''his Conservative approach to governing'' IS A PROVEN TO FAIL IDEA
ONCE THE GOD BOTHERED TOOK OVER THE END WAS NEAR THE GOD BOTHERED ARE BAD FOR A NATION AS THEY CARE MORE ABOUT A MYTH THEN TRUTH
[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 11-22-2023).]
Originally posted by cliffw: Why would he like to help it by believing in Global Warming, trying to stop evolution?
Evolution does not require that humans create a radically warmer climate for the planet—that's ridiculous.
Human societies have evolved in ways that are bringing about a radically warmer climate.
Human societies have the potential to evolve even further, by finding ways to satisfy human needs and desires without bringing about a radically warmer climate.
What cliffw seems to be saying is that the pursuit of Climate Mitigation, by reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, is somehow "wrong" or "illogical," because it would offend the ghost of Charles Darwin. The ghost of Charles Darwin wants us to evolve by adapting ourselves to higher sea levels and all the other aspects of a radically warmer climate, and the ghost of Charles Darwin is offended by the idea that we would look for alternatives, via the pursuit of Climate Mitigation.
That seems to be what cliffw is saying with his phrase "trying to stop evolution." (I don't know what else to make of it.)
That's as ridiculous as it would be to say that the pursuit of Medicine and Public Health is wrong or illogical (and offensive to the ghost of Charles Darwin) because it works against the possibility that a virus, or a bacteria, or some other microscopic pathogen could evolve biologically in a way that would bring about a plague or pandemic of deadly human illness that would relegate our species to the long list of other species that have become extinct. The ghost of Charles Darwin would be offended if we humans used Medicine and Public Health to try to prevent that evolutionary possibility—which would bring about our extinction—from becoming a reality.
That remark from cliffw is just a real "head scratcher."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-23-2023).]
