posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 04:00 AM
Just because you can cite one example of where using gay sex was a TACTIC used to keep people in the army, does NOT mean this was institutionalized as
law or policy.....it was not manditory for millitary service, in fact not every soldier engaged in this.
Just because societies didnt hunt down and eradicate gay behaivior does NOT mean it was totally accepted either...
How about some historical examples from greek studies eh?
In Xenophon's MEMORIBILIA, he writes about Socrates views on;
Socrates' description of himself as "experienced in the pursuit of men".
Of sensual passion he would say: Avoid it resolutely: it is not easy to control yourself once you meddle with that sort of thing. Thus, on hearing
that Critobulus had kissed Alcibiades' pretty boy, he put this question to Xenophon before Critobulus:  Tell me, Xenophon, did you not suppose
Critobulus to be a sober person, and by no means rash; prudent, and not thoughtless or adventurous?
Certainly, said Xenophon.
Then you are to look on him henceforth as utterly hot-headed and reckless: the man would do a somersault into a ring of knives; he would jump into
 What on earth has he done to make you think so badly of him? asked Xenophon.
What has the man done? He dared to kiss Alcibiades' son, and the boy is very good-looking and attractive.
Oh, if that is the sort of adventure you mean, I think I might make that venture myself.
Poor fellow!  What do you think will happen to you through kissing a pretty face? Won't you lose your liberty in a trice and become a slave,
begin spending large sums on harmful pleasures, have no time to give to anything fit for a gentleman, be forced to concern yourself with things that
no madman even would care about?
 Heracles! what alarming power in a kiss! cried Xenophon.
What? Does that surprise you? continued Socrates. Don't you know that the scorpion, though smaller than a farthing, if it but fasten on the
tongue, inflicts excruciating and maddening pain?
Yes, to be sure; for the scorpion injects something by its bite.
 And do you think, you foolish fellow, that the fair inject nothing when they kiss, just because you don't see it? Don't you know that this
creature called fair and young is more dangerous than the scorpion, seeing that it need not even come in contact, like the insect, but at any
distance can inject a maddening poison into anyone who only looks at it?
Maybe, too, the loves are called archers for this reason, that the fair can wound even at a distance.
Nay, I advise you, Xenophon, as soon as you see a pretty face to take to your heels and fly: and you, Critobulus, I advise to spend a year abroad. It
will certainly take you at least as long as that to recover from the bite.
This does not sound like blanket acceptance of gays in greek society, and this comming from one of the most influential Scholors and philosophers of
Lets try this bit of greek lore out
Aeschine's speech Against Timarchus of 346 BCE is one of the most valuable sources we have about Athenian attitudes to homosexuality. Unlike Plato,
whose views were highly distinctive and not necessarily shared by his fellow Athenians, Aeschines was appealing directly to the members of an Athenian
jury, and so it may be expected that he was appealing to current popular opinion. It is by far the longest text addressing homosexual behavior we have
from the Classical Greek world.
The circumstance of the speech are complex. Basically it was an attempt to save the lives of the Athenian envoys to Philip II of Macedon. Demosthenes
had lead an attack on them, and, it seems, Timarchus, one of Demosthenes' allies, was to lead the prosecution. The beleaguered envoys, facing death,
responded by prosecuting Timarchus, charging that under Athenian law he could hold not public office. The prosecution was successful. Timarchus was
excluded from office [Dem. Xix. 284] and Demosthenes suffered a major setback in his resistance to Philip II.
For an extended discussion of this text and its implication see Kenneth J. Dover, Greek Homosexuality, (London: Duckworth, 1978, or a later edition),
Chapter II: "The Prosecution of Timarkhos".
Basically, Aeschines was throwing mudd onto the prosecutor, by calling into question his MORAL CHARECTER as well as questioning the law about if
Timarchas was fit to serve as council as he had committed acts of questionable moral charecter under the law.
here's Aeschines talking about who the lawgivers deny public service to under the laws;
Whom does he specify in the third place? "Or the man," he says, "who has debauched or prostituted himself." For the man who has made traffic of
the shame of his own body, he thought would be ready to sell the common interests of the city also.
While gays were around, (and apparently this Tiamarchas was getting around) these two examples from greek texts indicate that while the greeks
acknowledged gay behaivior, they didnt seem to be in total cultural acceptance of it either....in fact it seems that one could be DENIED the right to
hold a public office if one had committed acts considered IMMORAL, and against the law...in this specific case, Aeschines uses timarches sexual
promiscuity with men as the "IMMORAL" qualifier under their laws.
Please note that the lawgivers dont just say things are immoral because their gods said so, but tried to use logical reasoning about questions of
lifestyle and charecter to judge their fellow countrymen.
Tiamarchas WAS removed from this case and denied the right to be a prosecutor because of this...
Yet gays were accepted in greek society eh?
Now that ive shot down the gays ok in greece/rome argument,
yes or no,
Does a democratic society have the right to self determination; the right to set boundaries on behaivior in order to define itself, and its laws?