Man Identifies as Semi-Sexual

 Local man Frank Higgins recently came out to the shock of literally everyone as "Semi-Sexual." The term basically means that Frank defines himself by larger constructs than his mere sexuality and identified gender.  He prefers to identify as a Christian father and husband and lover of wisdom rather than by how often and with whom he copulates. After all, one can only have sex perhaps .05% of one's whole life. But Frank has frankly not done the research on this, but he is nevertheless proud of the dad joke. 

"I think that sexuality is important and all, but it seems to me that it constitutes only a small fraction of how I want to be known and what I actually do. I mean, I am a Christian and I like great books and big ideas and I love to make my kids laugh and I want to learn wisdom and travel and discuss important things with friends."

These radical and controversial ideas were uttered in open space where others could hear Frank, causing a major backlash. 

Said one transgender bystander whose ear holes were violated by Frank's ignorance and heteronormativity, "It is offensive and insensitive to the LGBTQ community to even know that such people exist. I thought by now that everyone agreed with us that sexuality is everything and should be discussed everywhere and that there is nothing else interesting about human beings. First we were hated, and now we are being dismissively ignored. Things have obviously only gotten worse for us!"

The good news is that activists were able to cancel Frank and ban his various utterances on social media, so that they wouldn't have to know about him living out his balanced and deeply fulfilled life. 

Man Who Claims Humans Make Up Morality Morally Outraged by Christians

Saratoga, CA

Podcaster, Blogger, YouTuber, Entrepeneur, Motivational Speaker, Social Media Influencer, Lifestyle Expert, and public intellectual Tad Ryerson went viral recently, again. In a Ted Talk shared more than that cat video where the cat grabs the cord to the ceiling fan and is flung into the wall, Tad charismatically asserted that Christian morality is curiously inferior and "only another subjective view" of how to organize human communities.

In a passionate Jeremiad against Christian morality, Tad argued, "Christians pass themselves off as moral paragons, but their nationalism, homophobia, environmental obliviousness, and dark-ages sexual ethics are utterly ruining the spirit of equanimity and generosity required to sustain a forward-thinking and cosmopolitan society."

He continued, "The reason Christians can't see the inferiority of their view is that they think they are correct and have been running rough shod over various cultures since the inception of Christianity. If they could see that, in a diverse world, morality is ever evolving, ever changing, as we evolve and change, then they wouldn't be on the wrong side of history, stuck in the dark ages. They would help us advance women's rights, LGBTQ rights, and do other things that align with our superior morality."

We made contact with Dr. Ryerson (his doctoral degree is an honorary doctorate from George Fox University in Portland) and asked him about what he thinks of Muslim morality in America?

In reply, he wrote, "That is a great example of what I'm talking about in my Ted Talk that was shared a few million times and received with thunderous applause and which I am now sharing in a nation wide tour of college campuses. Hegemonic Christians in America are behind all this dreadful intolerance of Muslims. Muslims should be free to express their moral views as freely as anyone. They enrich the conversation. It is unfair to simply shut them down, as Christians no doubt would have us do."

Of course, we had to press a bit, and wanted to know how Dr. Ryerson could hold that the absolutist claims of Muslims in America on these topics are to be graciously heard and seen as equal to other views and that the Christian view is "inferior" and should be silenced through evolutionary "advancement" and even legislation. It seemed to us that there were at least two layers of contradiction in Dr. Ryerson's arguments.

Unfortunately Dr. Ryerson had to end our discussion, saying abruptly that he has chosen to take a different line with racists who are not "global thinkers" and wish only to "put people into oversimple compartments for ease of judgment," and also that he had to finish his research on activating chakras through CrossFit and developing these ideas into a new wellness program.

Christian Philosopher Finally Yields to Superior Argument of Pop Princesses

La Mirada, California

Dr. William Lane Craig has finally seen the emptiness of his life's work.

Like a foolish lamb led to slaughter, he walked right into an argument in which a young person simply quoted the devastating cultural genius embedded in the lyrics of a few pop princesses. He was utterly taken off guard. He was so deeply owned by the power of their ideas that no mansplaining could navigate him out of the layered depths and sophistication of their words.

In an open letter, Dr. Craig repented of his ways:

"I've spent so many years taking on the toughest unbelieving intellectuals in American life, but I never realized that Taylor Swift, Katy Perry, and Lady Gaga have so wrecked me. As soon as I read the lyrics of songs like You Need to Calm Down and Born This Way and Firework, I instantly regretted my whole career and every paper thin argument I've ever ignorantly written."

"For example, I didn't realize that people aren't sinners; they are Fireworks. I thought they needed redemption, but that song has made me realize that what they need to do is express themselves in all their depravity because sin is colorful, like the fourth of July."

"And oh boy was I wrong about gay people. I used to argue syllogisms and other foolish nonsense, like: If something works counter to teleological function, then it can be considered unnatural. Homosexuality works counter to teleological function. Therefore, homosexuality is unnatural. But now I know that that syllogism is just shade throwing. And 'shade never made anybody less gay.'"

"I surrender the argument to the probing depths of these songs and vow to throw no more shade upon my fellow human beings. And to anyone on whom my microagressive shade throwing has caused injury, I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me. I only was mistaken because I haven't really thought much about these things."

Lady Blah Blah

I know... really clever title to this blog, right? What I'm interested in discussing today is the argument in Lady Gaga's new song, "You Were Born This Way."

The key line is, "... you're on the right track, baby, you were born this way..." And it goes on to talk about gays, bisexuals, transvestites, etc. Real shocker that she has this kind of message and agenda.

But here is the latent argument within the song:

Premise 1: If you are born to do ... X , then it is acceptable for you to do X.
Premise 2: You were born to do ... X.
Conclusion: It is acceptable (morally) for you to do X.

My response here is a simple question regarding premise 1: Why should we believe it is obvious that if we are born a certain way that it must be morally acceptable for us to be that way? Does it really follow?

Let's play with a few examples:

Premise 1: If you are born to be a pedophile, then it is acceptable to be a pedophile.
Premise 2: Some people are born to be pedophiles.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is acceptable to be a pedophile.

Or...

Premise 1: If you are born to be a sociopath, then it is acceptable to be a sociopath.
Premise 2: Some people are born to be sociopaths.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is acceptable to be a sociopath.

Or...

Premise 1: If you are born to be homophobic, then it is acceptable to be homophobic.
Premise 2: Some are born to be homophobic.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is acceptable to be homophobic.

Now, of course Lady Gaga is no professional philosopher, but that doesn't mean we should accept muddle headed nonsense simply because it is accompanied by a driving beat.