Long time reader, first time poster. As a Catholic, I was appalled at the comment.

"2) you and nembegi have extreme love for Debbie schlussel"

Well, yes, I think nembegi does love her (fool!). As for myself, I only wish that she would stop posting such raw filth. It doesn't bother her because she got used to it by working with a couple of real losers who make their living off of such filth. She has a very good sense of humour and is quite intelligent but she seems rather addicted to shocking readers with her vile language. Her purpose may be to infuriate Muslims. It does. But it also sickens many other readers who have the same cause that she does. Namely, various religious people (Protestant or Catholic or Jewish etc) and other people with some level of moral standards. One can make their point quite clearly without divolving into such gutteral language.

"...this high probability also means that you are trying to spread hatred...."

No. I am not. I do not hate her. I just want her to realise that she may be causing anti-Semitism herself. When so many millions of Christians support Israel, why would you want to speak of them in such vile terms? Why, for example, would you call a Jewish person who realises the needed friendship of Christians a "Bacon-eating Jew" or some other such names? Does Benjamin Netanyahu qualify for such terms? I think not.

"3) why would debbie write on other site, instead on her free blog?"

In a word - hypocrisy. This also shows that she knows it is wrong. Her main website contains comments that lead to other websites. She obviously knows that. When one follows the links they will find some rather sickening material. The question is: who are those commenters on her main website? She obviously approves of those comments and the links they lead to because she allows them to remain on her website. An observant person can quickly conclude that she herself made the comments in question.

In the words of E.B. White, "All writing is communication; creative writing is communication through revelation - it is the Self escaping into the open. No writer long remains incognito."

This is very true. For example, there are 5 people who make nearly all of the comments at JW. I know all of them. Some of them are here too.

Anyway, I wish Debbie no harm and I believe in free speech to a great degree myself. I just wish that she would stop posting comments that are specifically designed to offend, not just Muslims, but most other people as well. In fact, I would have never even mentioned this at all had it not been for this disgusting comment:

"Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!!"

Any decent person, Catholic or not, should be repulsed by such language. Please stop it Debbie. Thank you.

With regard to my comment on child pornography, notice I used the words "seems to". I *could* be wrong about that. I hope I am wrong about that. I do not consider child pornography a "free speech" issue.

My purpose here and at all other websites defiled by Debbie Schlussel's commentary is not to defame nor offend. I simply think she should take full credit for her vileness which has obviously become sport for her. Her hypocrisy is astounding. Her hatred of Muslims, while largely justified, is matched only by her hatred of Christians, true conservatives, and anyone possessing a minimum of moral standards.

The key to understanding her is to understand the sick SOB she used to work for. A fellow pervert.

But don't bother, I'll do my best to keep everyone informed. Truthfully, I might add.

She hurts the cause most of us stand for. If she would only realize that.

Amsterdamsky: "Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!!"

How amusing. Slutssel continues...
I suppose she intends on perverting this website with her never ending filth. Yes, do catch her commentary at Jihad Watch too.

Let's see here, how would I know this is the one and only (I-learned-it-from-Stern) pervert?

Well, I've read her "stuff" for a l-o-n-g time and know most of her websites. Her hatred of Catholics is boundless.

Want to see for yourselves how Debbie Schlussel can make comments like: "Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!!" ?

See it for yourselves here before she erases it:
http://www.xanga.com/NYCJOYCE

You will need a credit card to view the site but it will NOT be charged.

Go ahead, see for yourselves. She also seems to support child pornography under the guise of "free speech". Quite sick IMHO.

PS

Debbie, I copied EVERYTHING (including the vile pics of gay Catholic priests you posted) from that website - pics and everything you wrote.

I will be the first to "respect" someone's opinion..as long as it is "defined" in a "civil" way.. It seems that some posters here have adopted an attitude that "Everything goes.."

Thanks for responding..

As far as I know, Amsterdamsky is not Dutch even though he is by all accounts a resident of the Netherlands. Therefore, I would not look on his opinions as being representative of the Dutch people.

Secondly, I agree that his post was highly offensive. Indeed, while my earlier posts indicate an aversion to homophobia on any grounds (religious, etc.), Amsterdamsky is implying that Catholicism supports pedophilia, that the Poles are pedophiles because they are largely Catholic and finally that the altar boys enjoy their own abuses. Aside from offending Catholics and Poles, his post was most offensive to victims of pederasty and to those fighting to rid Catholicism of such abusers.

Amsterdamsky: "Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!!"

Another who lost all my respect...I am sure that this forum is not the only place where you can spew all your filth..
Shame on you !!! 

Well may be that's why you live in Holland.... 

Amsterdamsky: "The problem with Pol***s is then they come here and want to push this same crap on us."

In that case, I would highly recommend that the cheeseh***s instruct their representatives to ban Polish immigrants on three grounds, namely that: (a) Poles look nothing like the Dutch and thus visibly standing out, causing aesthetic consternation; (b) Polish culture is different than and diametrically opposed to Dutch culture, in particular the latter's liberalism; and (c) Polish immigrants conspire to and are complicit with all attempts to Polonize the Netherlands.

Amsterdamsky: "Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!!"

I could respond to this comment, however, its stupidity and vulgarity is self-evident.

Amsterdamsky: "Maybe it is the consentual [sic] part that their backwards religion can't deal with."

I was not aware that the Poles had "their own" religion. I was under the impression that Poles were staunch Catholics, however, Catholicism is a universalist creed...Apparently I was misinformed.

Amsterdamsky: "If you can not deal with your own homophobia/pediphilic twisted compulsions PLEASE DO NOT COME TO THE NETHERLANDS!  Thank you."

My condolences to you and the Dutch people for having to accept these primitive and barbaric Polish pedophiles who seek nothing else than to conquer the Netherlands through immigration. I suggest that the Netherlands seek out immigrants from elsewhere who would complement Dutch culture rather than destroy it; in particular I recommend countries such as Morroco and regions such as sub-Saharan Africa.

Question of the era ?

Just like Mark Lepine in Montreal Quebec, here is one more incident of a prolific serial killer... A serial killer, which had broken records of all Time....

Salim slaughter 250 Humans in 4 months(previous scores still missing....)

I think you noted well the rate of 2 Infidels per day ....

but the story goes unheard...

Now the Question....

What is really promoting all those Taxi cab mens, who are converting into those funky-mentalist

KEEP tight with Laws, don't use words like “jihad”, “Islamic” or “fundamentalist”.

Lets check who can answer!

The problem with Pol***s is then they come here and want to push this same crap on us. Lets see, ass-fucking alterboys-good or at least tolerated. Consenting adult homosexuals-EVIL!!!!! Maybe it is the consentual part that their backwards religion can't deal with.   If you can not deal with your own homophobia/pediphilic twisted compulsions PLEASE DO NOT COME TO THE NETHERLANDS!  Thank you.

@ KA

.....continued

4) You are certainly right that "human rights" by their very nature are "universal", i.e. they must in principle apply to all humans, irrespective of whatever....including sexual orientation.   However, the inclusion of specific subject matter in school curricula has absolutely nothing to do with fundamental "human rights". 

5)  You are not very serious when you claim that "American human rights activists" should not concern themselves with European affairs.   Precisely because they claim to be "human rights activists" and because human rights are universal by definition, should they concern themselves with such rights regardless of national borders.  However, also precisely because most of them are so ideologically biased and naive about the world, will they misguidedly focus on such nonissues (w.r.t. human rights) as this Polish case.   Also, you know perfectly well that the real issue here is the actions of European politicians in the European parliament instead of ideologically-biased and naive American so-called "human rights activists".     

@ KA

1) It would seem common sensical to assume that the "draft legislation" concerns the curriculum of schools, and not anything that might be said by anyone during recess or wherever in school.   I suspect that the EU Observer's choice of words ("disturbing proposals to outlaw DISCUSSION of homosexuality") is deliberately vague in order to slander the Polish authorities and to hide the fact that the issue is the curriculum and not any particular comments by students or their teachers.

Your three objections to the legislation are misguided.

--  A school setting is not a proper venue to exercise 'free speech rights' in terms of political speech.   If anybody could say anything in a class room regardless of whether it is relevant to the subject or fits into the educational program, then the educational process would be undermined.  It could easily become a free-for-all in which nothing seriously gets learned.   A school setting is a 'guided activity', with an 'instructor' and 'students'.  Precisely because of the inequality that is inherent to the teacher-student relationship, it is imperative that teachers adhere to a high moral standard.  This entails among other things that they concentrate on teaching the curriculum, that they 'control' the discussion and treatment of the curriculum, and that they do not abuse their position to promote personal agendas nor their personal ideological adherences. One should never forget that students are not in the classroom in a voluntary capacity.

-- The proposal does NOT "deny students access to information".  It only limits students access to SPECIFIC information in the SPECIFIC setting of the class room.  The proposal does however imply that it considers the subject of "homosexuality" as not 'appropriate' for the (primary and/or secondary?)class room.  That is a debatable proposition, but there could be many reasons for that: reasons of curriculum 'prioritisation', the subject may be deemed to be too 'open' to ideoligisation by teachers, objections by parents and the 'community', etc...   

-- Any school action, any curriculum, will be "discriminatory", because every human action and choice is inherently discriminatory.  Laws governing school curricula have nothing to do with "free speech" nor with the provision of "public fora for discussion".   It is laws that 'criminalise' speech (any political speech) that do so.  I repeat, it is ironic that European politicians like Buitenweg, who actually advocate 'criminalising' unpopular political speech in the public domain (not a school setting) and who have actually passed laws to that effect, are precisely the ones who want to prescribe to local/national governments what they can and cannot include in their school curricula.  If the Polish government wanted to include courses on past environmental alarmist nonsense (e.g. Club of Rome), then she would sing a totally different tune.  

2)  Perhaps, "freedom to discuss homosexuality in school does not equate 'promotion' ".  Indeed, it does not necessarily do so.  In practice, it almost always will lead to either some form of "promotion" or, perhaps in Poland, to the opposite (i.e. to "condemnation").   Neither is advisable in a public school educational setting.

3) You are probably right in asserting that "the Polish state wants to "reinforce traditional values etc...".  On what rational grounds should 'Brussels' be misused to substitute Buitenweg's values for Polish traditional values? 

.......

Peter: "What if Poland had draft restrictions against discussion of problems caused by immigration in Polish schools in an attempt to curb wide spread xenophobia. Would that be a violation of the freedom of speech?"

If that were the case, these poster would all be codemning Poland. This reminds me of that article Comfortably Numb: The Politics of Roger Waters (weblink feature not working), where Dmitri Cavalli claims that "ideologues on the right and left...think democracy works only when people who agree with them win elections."

What if Poland had draft restrictions against discussion of problems caused by immigration in Polish schools in an attempt to curb wide spread xenophobia. Would that be a violation of the freedom of speech?

I fully support your opinion..

KA's reply is typical Secular Progressive spin..

siegetower: "How about the Human Rights of regular Polish people who don't want their children educated or in contact with homosexuals?"

I assume this is an argument towards some form of segregation between heterosexuals and homosexuals in Polish schools. However, it is impossible to identify which students are homosexual, and it would be impractical to segregate them, given that their educational requirements are the same. Moreover, what is a "regular" Pole?

siegetower: "Human rights are not universal."

How so? What are their boundaries then?

siegetower: "Giving gays the freedom to do whatever they want under a gay banner..."

Brussels is not suggesting that homosexuals should be 'above the law.' Secondly, allowing discussions on homosexuality in schools is quite different from promoting homosexuality or placing schools under a "gay banner."

siegetower: "...impinges on the Human Rights of people with children, or who believe the gay lifestyle is immoral."

If the legal system reflected each individual's view of what is moral or immoral it would collapse. Nor is Brussels suggesting that individuals with those opinions of homosexuality be 're-educated' or anything of the like. If people are terrified that even discussing homosexuality is somehow going to convert themselves or their children into homosexuality, then these people are sexually insecure. Homosexuals are bombarded by heterosexuality on a regular basis, yet this does not change their orientation, nor are they terrified of transforming into heterosexuals. Indeed, even Dick Cheney has a homosexual daughter, so unless a parent is willing to suppress their child's sexual orientation to save face, they must accept the possibility that their child might be homosexual - irrespective of their personal views on the matter.

How about the Human Rights of regular Polish people who don't want their children educated or in contact with homosexuals?

Human rights are not universal. Giving gays the freedom to do whatever they want under a gay banner impinges on the Human Rights of people with children, or who believe the gay lifestyle is immoral.

Defend Christendom. Defend Jewry. Oppose socialism in Europe.

EU Observer: "The European Parliament is poised to investigate the legality of draft restrictions against discussion of homosexuality in Polish schools, […] “The disturbing proposals to outlaw discussion of homosexuality raise serious concerns about the commitment to fundamental rights in Poland,” said Dutch green MEP Kathalijne Buitenweg […].

Such legislation if passed by the Polish parliament would be clearly problematic because:

1. It curtails freedom of speech within schools by prohibiting "discussion of homosexuality." It is not clear, however, whether this prohibition would be limited to the curricula and to teachers or whether students could publicly discuss homosexuality amongst themselves
2. It denies students access to information, in particular information related to homosexuality
3. By denying homosexuality a public (and possibly private) forum for "discussion," and denying information to students who may identify as homosexual or 'questioning,' such legislation thus discriminates against those students who might benefit from the discussion of homosexuality being allowed

EU Observer: "The committee would like the EU parliament’s legal services to probe any Polish bill on two grounds, firstly to see if it is compatible with European anti-discrimination norms and secondly to see if it violates European norms on freedom of expression."

Though I am criticial of the European Union, I have no problem with such an investigation.

EU Observer: "[…] “There is no discrimination against homosexuals in Poland,” government spokesman Jan Dziedziczak told Polish daily Rzeczpospolita on Tuesday. “But promotion of homosexuality in schools is another matter. There is no mandate for that,” he added."

The freedom to discuss homosexuality in school does not equate with "promotion."

EU Observer: "[…] Buitenweg […] went on to say that “there is a dark undercurrent in Polish politics and society at present, which seeks to promote discrimination of minorities and the disregard of civil rights” touching upon wider concerns over Poland's political drift."

I disagree. Polish society and the Polish state are reinforcing traditional values, especially national unity, Catholicism and conservatism.

EU Observer: "[…] [A] recent open letter from US activists Human Rights Watch [stated] that the law “would violate freedom of speech and impede free access to information” putting youngsters at risk of HIV infection through ignorance."

I fail to see why American human rights activists are concerning themselves with Polish or European affairs. Perhaps allied societies are so critical of each other because they care about one another; no one really bothers with North Korea's command economy or China's growing socio-economic inequality on the same level as Europeans and Americans nitpick one another, simply because it is assumed that non-Western states are not even on the radar...just a thought.

@ KA

1) Did anybody claim that Brussels is "promoting" homosexuality?  No, they did not.  So what is the point of raising this false strawman?

2) The real point was NOT that you should see a fake strawman.  The point was that you should see that 'Brussels' (European Parliament), i.e. a distant 'aspiring' federal government, is trying to impose what 'local' (national) governments should include in their school curricula.   This is ironic, particularly since you often claim to advocate for the distinctiveness of Europe's diverse nations and ethnicities.

3) It is doubly ironic that you cast this in terms of "curtailment of free speech and access to information".  This is utter nonsense.   It has nothing to do with "free speech".  Free speech has to do with the freedom of expressing political opinions in the public sphere.  It can only be curtailed by legislation that criminalises a particular type of 'speech' (i.e. particular opinions).  What is included in a school curriculum, and what is not, has absolutely nothing to do with that.  You cannot possibly think that everything could be covered in any realistic school curriculum, so if something is not covered in school that does not mean that there is no "free speech".   Only a law that would criminalise the expression of certain opinions about homosexuality (or about anything else) would be a violation of "free speech".  It also has little to do with "access to information".  If you think that all information has to be included in a school curriculum for that information to be "accessible" then you are living in a fantasy world.

4) I have personally no objection to some modest form of FACTUAL "sex education" in any school curriculum, although I doubt that it would be easy to get much agreement on the content of such "education".  But, it is ridiculous to claim that that would be "a necessary part" of any school system's curriculum.  That may well be your personal opinion, but it certainly does not justify interference from 'Brussels' in Polish (or any other national) educational curricula. And, it is almost laughable that you could think that getting some lectures from some (probably naive-left) teachers on homosexuality has anything to do with "one's freedoms".

5) The sad reality is that a number of European parliaments have passed certain pieces of legislation that directly and explicitly undermine freedom of (political) speech, and that the population goes along with this (just like they did in past episodes of emerging intolerance and totalitarianism).  It is even sadder that people like yourself do not understand what "free speech" means.  How else could one explain that you could interpret the imposition of 'pensee unique' (via school curricula) as a form of promotion of "free speech"?  In fact, it is almost the opposite.  It is dogmatic imposition of an 'orthodoxy' by a political ruling elite.  What a dark and sad state, indeed.

I do not see any attempt by Brussels to compel Poland to "promote" homosexuality in public education. However, I do see genuine concern regarding the curtailment of free speech and access to information. Sexual education is a necessary part of any public education system's curricula, and if parents actually did perform this function, such programmes would be unnecessary. Indeed, Roger Scruton would argue that the Polish government and Brussels should not interfere in this matter. One cannot cherry pick one's freedoms.

...of the EU?....This is a country that is overwhelmingly Catholic....Are the schools Catholic?....The EU needs to mind it's own business and leave these Polish (Catholic) Schools alone!....Let parents discuss these issues with their kids!....BUTT OUT EU!......