GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Do Democrats’ Long For a New Dark Age?

by

In the past decade, there has been a spate of books with titles of the year, their authors believe, was seminal in national or world history.  Perhaps, their attention to the significance of dates is in response to the trend in the 1970s to de-emphasize dates in studying the events of the past.  On book, April 1865, even goes so far as to define one particular month as significant.  Other important years become books include 1066*, 1421, 1434, 1453, 1776 and 1948**.

Last year, Charles Freeman came along with A.D. 381, suggesting that events of that year led to the dawn of the Dark Ages.  And while Freeman makes a strong case that Roman Emperor Theodosius’ decree defining Christian orthodoxy and so ending a spirited debate on divinity and the trinity, he spends fare more time discussing events in previous years (and subsequent ones) to convince that 381 was indeed as seminal as he claims.

That said, he distills a lot of information to make an important point about the end of debate and the decline (and eventual collapse) of the Roman Empire:

The tragedy of Thoedosius’ (sic) imposition and its aftermath lay in the elimination of discussion, not only of spiritual matters but across the whole spectrum of human knowledge.  ‘Pagan’ thinkers shared with many Christians a belief that freedom of debate was an essential part of a healthy society.  The Nicene debates themselves show that intellectual progress was being made, because the participants were continually revising their positions in response to each other.  From 381 onwards, Theodosius and his successors eliminated the tradition of free speech.  By deriding the opponents of Nicaea as ‘demented heretics’ and threatening them with the weight of the law and eternal punishment, they destroyed the possibilities of continuing debate.”

Emphasis added.

Deriding opponents?   Hmm. . . . . where else do we see that going on?  Eliminating discussion, you know like that leader telling us “the time for talk is through,” that Democrat who told us that he doesn’t want certain folks doing a lot of talking.

Like those Romans who brought us the Dark Ages, Obama and his Democrats have derided their opponents so as to discredit their opinions and speak longingly of silencing us as well.  Let’s hope they don’t succeed, lest history repeat itself.

*There are multiple books abut the tragic events of that year which led to the destruction of the language of Beowulf.

**Another year with multiple books.

Comments

  2. We the People Say No to Socialized Healthcare
    We the People Say No to Something that isn’t even on the table! But don’t you dare touch Medicare! Or the VA! Cause government shouldn’t be involved in health insurance! Or something!

    Bring your Obama-dressed-as-Hitler pictures! And if they tell us there’s something wrong with that, they’re trying to silence us! There’s nothing demented about yelling “Heil H_tler” at a Jewish man (from Israel!) It doesn’t “destroy [any] possibilities of continuing debate;” not at all! We’re just trying to have a rational discussion about phantom death panels; even though today’s insurers ration care far more than a public option would!

  3. We the People Say No to Something that isn’t even on the table!

    Wrongo.

    He also got House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to agree to allow a full House vote on the single-payer reform that more than 85 House Democrats have endorsed.

    Congressman Anthony Weiner, D-New York, worked with Waxman to get the deal on single-payer and declared a sort of victory Friday, saying that: “Single-payer is a better plan and now it is on center stage. Americans have a clear choice. Their Member of Congress will have a simpler, less expensive and smarter bill to choose. I am thrilled that the Speaker is giving us that choice.”

    And if that’s not enough, here’s a whole slew of Obama Party members making it clear that socialized medicine is the goal.

    So torrentprime, when are you going to stop lying about being a “registered Republican” and simply come out as a complete and total Obamabot?

  6. ‘Deriding opponents? Hmm. . . . . where else do we see that going on? ”

    Oh gee, lets see. Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, Beck, O’Reilly, etc. etc. etc. plus every single rightwing blog in existence, including this one. On a daily basis.

    Lets face it – the deriding of opponents seems to be the single most consistent aspect of rightwing discourse.

  7. Rome had freedom of speech and religion? That would be news to folks living back then. All Theodosius did was implement what had been longstanding Roman tradition among the emperors: pick a side and attack those who stand in opposition. Pagans, orthodox Christians and Arians all had no desire for “free speech” or freedom of religion – except when it benefitted their own group. Anything that would weaken or destroy their opponents they were all in favor of. Freeman appears to be slipping in an anachronistic attitude in viewing ancient Roman history.

  8. Violence from all sides in zealous defense of their beliefs was very common back in the 4th-6th centuries. Read the accounts of the early Church Councils. For example, here is an account on Nicea I from Maruta of Maiperqat:

    Of the 318 fathers, only 11 were free from such marks, whose name were Absalom, Bishop of Edessa, and son of Mar Ephrem’s sister, Jonah of Raikson, Mara of Dora, George of Shegar, Jacob of Nisibis, Marouta of Mepairkat, John of Goostia, Shimon of Diarbekir, Adai of Agal, Eusebius of Caesarea and Joseph of Nicomedia. But all the others were more or less maimed in their persecutions from heretics. Some had their eyes taken out; some had their ears cut off. Some had their teeth dug out by the roots. Some had the nails of their fingers and toes torn out; some were otherwise mutilated; in a word there was no one without marks of violence; save the above-named persons. But Thomas, Bishop of Marash was an object almost frightful to look upon; he had been mutilated by the removal of his eyes, nose and lips; his teeth had been dug out and both his legs and arms had been cut off. He had been kept in prison 22 years by the Armanites [Armenians] who used to cut off a member of his body or mutilate him in some way every year, to induce him to consent to their blasphemy, but he conquered in this fearful contest to the glory of believers and to the manifestation of the unmercifulness of the heretics. The fathers took him with them to the Council and when the king saw him, he fell down upon the ground and worshipped him saying, “I worship thee, O thou martyr of Christ, who art adorned with many crowns.”

    Notice in here that the Emperor Constantine I was largely responsible for calling this first council to bring peace. What was the result of the Council, besides the Nicene Creed? Arius was condemned and exiled as well as two bishops who refused to approve the Creed.

    Violence can been seen in many other Councils during this era, including the Robber Council of Ephesus, 2nd Council of Constantinople, etc. Pagans were violent towards Christians, orthodox Christians towards heterodox Christians and vice versa, etc.

  9. Readers, do any of you have any recollection of torrentprime faulting left-wingers for comparing Bush to Hitler?

    Oh, and Tano, did you note that none of the people you name hold elective office or political power whereas Obama, Reid and Pelosi, just like Theodosius once did, do. And deriding political opponents is their stock in trade.

    Let’s face it — the deriding of political opponents is the single most consistent aspect of the left-wing congressional leadership and their echo chamber in the White House. 🙂

    Oh, and John, Rome did have freedom of speech and religion. Yep, there were persecutions, but not until the decline of the Empire did they become the norm. For the better part of Rome’s history, a Jew could lively freely in the republican, later imperial, capital. Indeed, in the most difficult years First Century of the current era, a Jew was better off in the City of Rome than in the Province of Judea.

  10. Readers, do any of you have any recollection of torrentprime faulting left-wingers for comparing Bush to Hitler?

    None.

    Do Democrats’ Long For a New Dark Age?

    First, not all Democrats are hardcore leftists and I will concentrate my comments on the latter.

    Next, some hardcore leftists are medievalists at heart, which would take us pretty close to the Dark Ages (perhaps minus all that ‘icky’ religion). Others are Rousseans, Marxists and/or post-Modernists, believing they are ‘progressive’ but having principles and practices that would inevitably regress us to a new Dark Age. Can the latter be said to ‘long’ for a new Dark Age? How about, subconciously longing? (or unconsciously?)

  11. Right now, I’m drinking a beer named “1554” – far more important than any of these other years!

    More seriously, I’d say many people long either for Utopia, Rapture, or the 1950’s. All of which are silly, and potentially dangerous longings.

  12. #6: “Lets face it – the deriding of opponents seems to be the single most consistent aspect of rightwing discourse.”

    Of course it is, Tano, because you and all of the other muppets on The Obama Show define the criticism of worthless, liberal ideas as “the deriding of opponents.” Every response to the criticism of Obama’s policies is that it’s a “smear,” a “personal attack,” or racism. Liberals can’t defend their ideas, so they characterize the questions being asked as “going to far,” “underhanded,” and of course, “unworthy of a response.”

  14. Oh, and John, Rome did have freedom of speech and religion. Yep, there were persecutions, but not until the decline of the Empire did they become the norm. For the better part of Rome’s history, a Jew could lively freely in the republican, later imperial, capital. Indeed, in the most difficult years First Century of the current era, a Jew was better off in the City of Rome than in the Province of Judea.

    Dan, there was no freedom of speech or religion in ancient Rome. The latter wasn’t really a problem anyways since most were polytheists and as long as the emperor cult was recognized the Romans didn’t mind adding another pagan god/goddess to the pantheon. The exception was the Jews and much later after the Edict of Milan, the Christians. A deal was cut with the Jews by Rome to keep the peace, but again this didn’t mean there was freedom of religion in ancient Rome. Gotta hand it to the Jews, they were stubborn about the Shema even willing to die en masse for their belief in God. This made an impression on the Romans who gave them a special exemption. As a Christian myself, I thank God for their stubbornness.

  16. Readers, do any of you have any recollection of torrentprime faulting left-wingers for comparing Bush to Hitler?

    Nope.

    Nor have I seen TP fault Chairman Obama for coddling Palestinians, funding Hamas with taxpayer dollars, giving the finger to Israel, liberals suggesting Jews get back in the ovens etc. etc. etc.