Comments on: A Recipe for Tyranny

By: David

David — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:12:57 +0000

Teem,

Perhaps you should read the post more closely. It is not about fashion, much less my thoughts on it. The post is about the explicit, anti-human attack on the recognition of sex difference and its fundamental meaning for the human person.

I apologize if this point was not more evident in the post.

By: Teem

Teem — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:37:02 +0000

This is such gobbledy-gook. What is your point? Maybe you could compile a laundry list of “man clothes” and “woman clothes” so we know what you deem it acceptable to wear?

By: Donna

Donna — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:43:00 +0000

Poor dears, they think wearing certain fabrics, and having detailed tailoring, is ‘feminine’ ? How historically blind ! For instance, Louis XIV wore a lot of silk, with various frills, (not to mention a long-haired wig !)but somehow I doubt anyone saw the Sun King as ‘feminine’ !
These people come across as ‘upscale cousins’ of some of the idiots I’ve run into who think cassocks and kilts are ‘feminine’, just because they are skirted garments…

By: David

David — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:46:48 +0000

Karen,

Follow the embedded link in that reference for the specific examples.

By: Karen

Karen — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:22:13 +0000

Can you give a specific example of “feminized” fashion?

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:46:30 +0000

David,

This tyranny is all the more potent in a society that believes everything it hears and does not examine for themselves claims made. Also, I have met several people in the last few years who have turned away from the Catholicism because a family member has chosen an “alternative lifestyle”. Many times this is merely an attempt to avoid confronting the truth that someone we love is living outside of God’s design. It is easier (immediate gratification) to align with the loved one and deny the truth. Ah, the media and our laziness!! Just my two cents. Peace, CLS