GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Coincidence or Synchronicity & the Meaning of Life

by

A few days ago, the employer of a close friend asked him to buy a digital camera. Instead of asking the firm to reimburse him for the camera, thus making it the company’s property, my friend decided to pay for it himself so he might keep it, observing that it would allow him to capture images of his friends and family. For, he noted, he found his greatest happiness in time spent with others.

And he came to this wisdom despite his refusal to read Silas Marner, one of George Eliot‘s great novels. The power of human relationships is one of Eliot’s great themes.

At the same time as my friend offered his pearl of wisdom, I’ve been reading Anthony Kronman’s Education’s End: Why Our Colleges and Universities Have Given Up on the Meaning of Life. (I learned about this book one day while perusing Instapundit.) As I began to read it, I learned that Mr. Kronman is a graduate of American’s finest liberal arts college. No wonder he can offer such important insights.

I expect to have more to say about Kronman’s book as a later date, particularly about what the abandonment of the study of the meaning of life means for gay people. So far, I have really enjoyed the first third of the book. The author, the former dean of Yale Law School, provides a good background on the conversation about life’s meaning and the history of colleges and university curricula in America. He may be a little repetitive at times, but that repetition does not detract from the book’s strengths.

It stuck me as interesting synchronicity that the same weekend my friend would offer his insight on the moments of true happiness that I’m reading a book about the meaning of life. It seems to me that it is in large part through the human relationships we establish that we discover life’s meaning. Perhaps that reading has put me in a philosophic mood these past few days, hence the slow blogging.

I do hope to blog a little more for the balance of the week, as I have a few followup posts in mind on the controversy I excited in speculating about the MSM’s Disinterest in the Anti-Conservative Attitude of some gays, a piece wondering about the President’s screwups, a few ideas about men and (gay) marriage and some thoughts on the upcoming release of a movie supposedly inspired by the most important literary work in a European vernacular language between the fall of Rome and the publication of The Divine Comedy.

Oh, and in line with my thoughts on the misundertanding and loathing that some on the left, particularly the gay left, express toward conservatives, I should note that the friend whose comment inspired this post is a Democrat who has never voted for a Republican in his life. He may rib me for my politics, but it doesn’t diminish the quality of our friendship. Indeed, in some ways, our political differences strengthen that friendship.

Comments

  3. I avoid adaptations of verse epics and, w/ the rarest exceptions, of Shakespeare. It’s bad enough the epics as well as troubadours’ lais etc. aren’t recited orally anymore, and it’s difficult to find hearty Shakespeare production companies, with troupes who confidently execute the dramas. Reading the epics, even in the original, is just a lonely echo of their majestic power.

    Maybe that’s why organized religion has such force – whether holy rolling Christian sermonizing or Muslim imambo-jumbo….

    Am reading Beyond Queer: Challenging Gay Left Orthodoxy, Bruce Bawer, ed.

  4. Education is seriously effed up right now. Too much theory, not enough actual reading of original sources. They are taught opinions and deconstructions of works they have never actually bothered to read. And to make matters worse, they have college degrees and don’t know the difference between there, their and they’re.

    As for gays having a negative opinion of conservatives, gee I wonder why that would be? It couldn’t be that conservatives and Republicans go on anti-gay tirades on a regular basis?

  6. They are taught opinions and deconstructions of works they have never actually bothered to read.

    I sat through the longest meetings in my life when I was bunched in with a group of English professors who were arguing: 1) should there be a literary canon for the University English major; and, 2) what works should be included.

    It was a side show of insufferable twits assigning points to the classics and filibustering for their own favorite works that have been “obscured by fate.” They were particularly hostile toward Shakespeare and the over emphasis of his works.

    Politically, these men and women were at least Trotskyites, and their basic concern was that the “canon” be made up of works that would inform the student of the power of cooperative enterprise and the common good.

    Being taught opinions and deconstructions is hardly where the breakdown in higher education begins.

  7. Heh. My University English requirements were essay, persuasive and technical writing. (NDSU is an Ag. and Engineering school.)

    The problem is that there’s too much and choices must be made. Anything included excludes something else. Those sorts of choices end up being ideological or manipulative. They just do. Because they can’t not.

    (Dan, I sent you e-mail recommending a post I just put up at my blog. The e-mail bounced. It’s probably not something you’d link and most people would probably think it was duller than snot, but it’s about people behavior and inter-relationships, which I know interest you.)

  8. This was just last week v/k:

    “Hello friends this is Pat Boone a fellow Kentuckian by descent from grandaddy Dan’l. I’ve always been proud of Kentucky’s stance on patriotic, military and moral issues; a great heritage. Now, as an American and a Christian I am very conservative about the upcoming governor’s election. Ernie Fletcher is a typical Kentuckian, he’s worked long and hard for the state, its people, and its traditions. And, of course, he has come under attack by political opponents and now he faces a man who wants his job who has consistently supported every homosexual cause: same sex marriage, gay adoption, special rights, to gay, lesbian, bisexual, even transgender individuals.
    The problem (inaudible) gay advocacy groups (inaudible) enthusiastically endorse Bashear, knowing he’s their guy. Kentuckians have already voted to amend the state constitution to prohibit same sex marriage. Now, do you want governor who’d like Kentucky to be like another San Francisco? Please reelect Ernie Fletcher.
    This message paid for by the Kentucky Republican Party.”

  9. Weak tea. Opposing gay marriage is not an attack on gay people. I don’t see any incitement to violence or any foaming at the mouth invective that would constitute a “tirade.” But since you choose one statement by Pat Boone to apply to all conservatives, I suppose you’ll have no objection if someone applies the insane rantings of Rosie O’Donnell to all liberal Democrats.

  12. That was official message from the Republican party. Did that accurately reflect the Democratic candidates views? Can you imagine someone attempting to turn Kentucky into San Francisco (or even wanting to)? It was gay-baiting. You asked for a recent example and I gave you one. There was another one in Dallas recently. I’m sure there are more. I’m not finding any anti-ENDA speeches online. Surely someone spoke against it?

  13. I guess my current reading is pedestrian in comparison, Dan, but 182 Days in Iraq looked interesting after meeting the author at the veterans event last weekend. Eh, at least I got it signed by him. I look forward to your post on Beowulf because to be perfectly honest, I may be gay but poetry tends to make my eyes glass over. Beats me why…

  14. I asked for a recent example of a “tirade,” which you claim conservatives engage in on a “regular basis.” So, it should be easy for you to find one.

    tirade: A long angry or violent speech, usually of a censorious or denunciatory nature; a diatribe.

    And, anyway, why is it “gay-baiting” to accurately portray that a Democrat agrees with gay activists on marriage, adoption, trans-gender rights, and so forth. I mean, you agree with all those things, don’t you?

  15. Oh good Lord. You really are impossible. That’s was gay-baiting and a gross distortion of the candidates goals. But you don’t have a problem with it because you are blind to any faults on the right just as you claim Democrats are blind to any faults on the left.

  16. No, my problem is that it in no way constitutes a “tirade,” which you assure me come from conservatives on a “regular basis.”

    And if it were a tirade (which it isn’t), I could, using your example, cite Rosie O’Donnell to prove that “liberals rant that 9-11 was a conspiracy by the Bush Administration and fire can’t melt steel” on a regular basis.

  17. Did that accurately reflect the Democratic candidates views?

    Yup.

    Can you imagine someone attempting to turn Kentucky into San Francisco (or even wanting to)? It was gay-baiting.

    Now Houndentenor, why on earth would people in Kentucky be upset with being like San Francisco?

    Again, you keep acting like there’s something to be ashamed about when a politician supports every homosexual cause, is endorsed by homosexual groups, and wants to make a state just like the homosexual capital of the universe.

    Why shouldn’t Kentuckians know, as V the K so aptly put it, that the Democrat Party’s view of Main Street is that it should be like Folsom Street?

    After all, opposing Folsom Street and the behaviors that take place therein IS ANTIGAY, according to gay leftists, gay Democrats, gay organizations, and Nancy Pelosi.

  18. #13 John, I have two translations of Beowulf (I bought a box of my cousin’s books from her English classes). One is somewhat lyrical prose, the other has been forced to resemble a poem. Reading the first one was a joy. Reading the second was a brick wall.

  20. After all, opposing Folsom Street and the behaviors that take place therein IS ANTIGAY, according to gay leftists, gay Democrats, gay organizations, and Nancy Pelosi.

    H-m-m-m. I wonder if Houndentenor is on to something here.

    I always tread lightly when the “gay issue” comes up. As a hetero, I have no issue with people’s private lives unless they are molesting, cannibalizing, enslaving or being deceitful lowlifes.

    I oppose gay marriage. I am not unwilling to take that stand or to explain why I hold that view. I would not hold a difference of opinion on that subject against any friend, co-worker or employee.

    So, for all of my otherwise good intentions, perhaps I am ANTIGAY and “in the closet.” Perhaps I need to “come out” and put a sign on my door that says: “Antigay, good luck.”

    I would stand and fight any effort by gay activists to introduce their sex lives or fantasies to the public square. (I oppose heteros who grope one another in public.) I assume that gay bars are not meant to include heteros, although I have successfully navigated Key West.

    If Houndentenor insists that supporting gay marriage is a litmus test for being antigay, then I plead guilty….but only to Houndentenor, because I have too many gay friends to walk away from.

  21. I never said marriage was the litmus test. Ever. I have also never been to the Fulsom Street Fair, East or West.

    And how did Rosie O’Donnell and the 9/11 Conspiracy Wingnuts come to represent mainstream Democratic views. Rosie is a comedienne and TV personality. She’s never been elected to anything. She’s no more representative of my views or opinions than Ann Coulter is to a moderate Republican’s. But if you are going to play the game that way, V/K, the Ann Coulter has had plenty of tirades including saying that 9/11 widows were “dancing on their husbands graves” and “I can’t talk about John Edwards without using the word faggot”. Forgive me if I misquote slightly. I haven’t committed Coulter’s venom to memory.

    So don’t act like the radical fringe is representative of anyone’s views but their own. I didn’t do that to you.

    What Boone did is claim that because gays supported a candidate that he was going to give us everything we wanted, which has never been true of any candidate for governor in the past and isn’t now. It was a scare tactic. I’m scared of the Fulsom Street fair myself. That doesn’t represent me or any gay people I associate with. So stop pretending that the radical frings (S/M, circuit parties and the like) represent most gay people, even gay liberals. It’s a lie, and you know it is.

  22. “Antigay, good luck.”

    Bastard. You made me laugh with this line and I almost had to explain why to my co-workers! 😉 Eh, I disagree with you on civil marriage but am pragmatic about it. I’m fine with some kind of civil union for now and let matters develop from there. What I have serious problems with are the amendments that disallow everything in that department.

    I’m scared of the Fulsom Street fair myself. That doesn’t represent me or any gay people I associate with. So stop pretending that the radical frings (S/M, circuit parties and the like) represent most gay people, even gay liberals. It’s a lie, and you know it is.

    I disagree with NDT about Boone, it’s clear what the intent was behind that robocall. Yet I will say that while things like FSF do not represent all or perhaps even most gay people, this fringe is allowed to flaunt themselves in public with impunity. I don’t think that is necessarily a gay or even gay liberal thing, but it does reflect the mindset in Frisco where a public orgy can be held and the law doesn’t step in to make arrests. I find that to be reprehensible and such hedonism regardless of sexuality is NOT what I want in my part of the country.

  23. OK, HT, I see you’re a really slow learner, so I’m going to explain this one more time. I can’t draw you a picture because GP doesn’t support graphic links.

    If 1 phone call from Pat Boone represents all conservatives having “anti-gay tirades” (your words) on a “regular basis” (you words), then it must be equally fair to say the demented rants of Rosie O’Donnell represent the views of all left liberals.

    Now, are you really this dumb, or can you just not admit that you can’t back up your accusation about conservatives engaging in “anti-gay tirades” on a “regular basis?”

  24. I’m fine with some kind of civil union for now and let matters develop from there.

    I’m with you 50%. I do not oppose civil unions for the purposes of clearing up some of the legal problems. I do not want it to “develop from there.” If that is half a loaf, then it is half a loaf.

    I reviewed a case some years back that involved a lesbian couple who separated. The daughter went with the partner who was not the birth mother. (I forget the details.) That partner took the daughter into the Roman Catholic Church. The birth mother sued to regain the daughter based on the fact that she didn’t want her genetic offspring participating in homophobic religion of any type and the RC’s in particular.

    Forget the rest. This is cruel and unusual punishment for a child of God. However, the liberal courts and the lunacy of our Springer/Wimfrey society cause us to think we can deliver the “wisdom of Solomon” by sound bites, opinion polls and a word from Dr. Phil.

    Without question the case I have cited could have involved a hetero couple and it would have been as messy and tragic for the child. But, everyone is pretty clear about the “whys” and “wherefores” of the traditional family. When you add the gaylesbianbisexualtransgender aspect to the equation, you find that the ground has turned to quicksand.

    If gays ever hope to achieve marital parity with the traditional society, they will have to dispel any stigma of perversion that adheres to their behavior. I seriously doubt that wearing clown wigs and nuns habit’s and crashing communion is much of a start.

    To be clear: I am saying that liberal gays are way too far out in front to do gays in general any particular good.

    I am quite reluctant to hit the submit button on these comments. But, I can not forget a great friend who lost his life to AIDS. He was a much admired and valued member of our community. He served as mayor, was active on important boards and a terrific intellect. Socially, we all accepted his partner as well. His partner was a charming and enjoyable accessory, but nothing more. In the aftermath of the tragedy, we discovered that the partner was a bit of tramp. This happens in the hetero world, too. But statistically, it is an epidemic in the gay world. I can not see how to lead the general society to be indifferent to the sexual differences and the tragic costs of those differences. That is too big an order.

    I will give anyone my Christian love. But please don’t take up a lot of my energy by repeating dumb stuff over and over. My momma didn’t raise no stupid children. We all have our vices and differences. But it is true that when you always do what you have always done, you will always get what you have always gotten. A little concern for common respect and a sense of community will go a long way to blending in with the greater society.

  25. I’m scared of the Fulsom Street fair myself. That doesn’t represent me or any gay people I associate with.

    Then you may wish to talk with them about it.

    “Folsom is the one time of year where the largest number of leather folk from around the world are able to come together,” said Demetri Moshoyannis, executive director of Folsom Street Events, who expects hundreds of thousands of people to attend.

    “I think it would be sad if you didn’t try to invigorate some politics into what we are trying to do here: the personal is political,” he said.

    Moshoyannis added, “We are proud of who we are and what we stand for and in no way do we want it ever used against us. We’d rather come out in full support of what exactly San Francisco values are, what they mean to us, why we love living here, and why we welcome so many people from around the world and hope that they share in our values.”

    Don’t yell at the Republicans for telling the truth about what Democrats and gay organizations support. Yell at the Democrats and gay organizations who support it.

  27. I’m with you 50%. I do not oppose civil unions for the purposes of clearing up some of the legal problems. I do not want it to “develop from there.” If that is half a loaf, then it is half a loaf.

    Trust me, in places like Virginia a half a loaf is a feast when you have nothing. Same-sex marriage isn’t a priority in my mind and focusing on it right now is a distraction from other things I believe are more important. Repealing DADT is top priority for me as far as these issues go.

    I reviewed a case some years back that involved a lesbian couple who separated. The daughter went with the partner who was not the birth mother. (I forget the details.) That partner took the daughter into the Roman Catholic Church. The birth mother sued to regain the daughter based on the fact that she didn’t want her genetic offspring participating in homophobic religion of any type and the RC’s in particular.

    It no doubt sounds cruel: but too bad for the birth mother. She gave up the right to make such decisions when she gave up responsibility of raising her child to former partner. Also, homosexuality isn’t the only thing many Catholics part ways with the leadership on so it’s not exactly correct to claim that the Church is “homophobic”. Heck, even if one believed what the Catechism teaches about this hatred of gays isn’t part of it.