HOMOSEXUALS LOST IN HISTORY

This column is not about individual homosexuals. It is about a specific band of gay men who distinguished themselves yet were forgotten by history for an extended period of time.

Today gays, homosexuals, and same sex marriages are common place. The closet has been outed in most instances. In the military, don't ask, don't tell, is no longer the command of the day.

There was a time way back when the homosexual lifestyle was recognized and respected. More so than today. The place was ancient Greece. The time the 300 BCs. Homosexual relations were common. Men so inclined lived openly as partners. The lifestyle was not politically incorrect.

The Greece of those years was not the same as the Greece of today.There was no central government. Cities ruled. They were powers unto themselves. Little kingdoms. They fought each other constantly.

Sparta was the big gun. It was the most powerful city in Greece. The men were devoted to the military arts. Spartan boys were sent to military school at seven, Every male between the ages of 20 and 60 was required to serve in the armed forces. The military might of Sparta was feared by all.

Thebes was recognized at the time as a city of substance. A power militarily and commercially. However it was not considered competition for Sparta. 

The Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC changed that impression. The Spartans were beating the Thebes as expected. The turning point in the battle came when an elite Thebian military unit was able to break through the Spartan right wing. The unit was known as the Sacred Band.

Thebes won. Historians refer to the Battle of Leuctra as the most decisive battle ever fought by Greeks against Greeks.

The Sacred Band consisted of 300 soldiers who had something in common. They were gay. They were lovers. The Sacred Band consisted of 150 homosexual couples who lived openly as such. The group was referred to as a band of lovers. Respectfully, of course.

It was not accidental that the Sacred Band came to be. The unit was conceived and put together on the theory that every man would be motivated to fight to his maximum. To protect his lover and to avoid shaming himself in front of his lover. The Sacred Band did conduct themselves accordingly.

The Sacred Band was undefeated for 33 years. Their defeat when it came was an annihilation. The defeat occurred in 338 BC in the Battle of Chaeronea. They were defeated by the Macedonians.

The opportunity to surrendered was offered. The remaining Sacred Band members refused. They preferred to fight to the death. They did so. All were killed.

School children should have been taught of the bravery of the Sacred Band. One could say they were not because of their homosexuality. Such would not be true. It was politics.

City states were big time rivals. The dislike for each other was great. Over the years leading up to the defeat of the Sacred Band, Thebes reputation diminished. Sparta's and Athen's increased. After the defeat of the Sacred Band, Thebes continued its downward spiral reputation wise and power wise.

How many today have ever heard of Thebes? Yet all know of Sparta and Athens. The Greeks wrote Thebes out of the history books. It is only in recent times that knowledge of Thebes has been returned. And with it the bravery and glory of the Sacred Band. 

MISINFORMED WE ARE

People did not believe the Earth to be flat during Columbus' time. Ferdinand, Isabella and the scholars did not argue with Columbus that the Earth was flat and he would fall off. 

Columbus and the Court spent nearly ten years arguing over whether Columbus could carry sufficient food and water to make it to the Indies. Interestingly, Columbus sailed for India, landed in the Americas, and thought where he landed was close to the coast of Japan. Distance measuring was not an exact science in the Middle Ages.

So.....Why was I taught in grammar school that Columbus believed the Earth was round, everyone else thought it was flat, and by sailing to the Americas he proved the Earth to be round.? Why were most, if not all of you, taught the same thing?

Washington Irving and the politicians of his day are responsible.

Washington Irving was and is one of America's best known and respected authors. His writings included Rip Van Winkle and The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. In 1828, he wrote A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus. He took literary freedom in the book. He mixed myth with fact. He had an active imagination. He set it to work.

Irving's story line was apparently more interesting if the Earth was flat and Columbus was trying to convince everyone it was round.  The story line was more exciting and dangerous. So Irving misrepresented historical fact.

The Earth had been determined to be round as far back as 600 BC. Two thousand years before Columbus, Men such as Copernicus, Plato, Pythagoras, and Aristotle determined the earth was round. There was no question as to its spherical shape.

Sometime in the 300 BC, Aristotle wrote On The Heavens. Therein he clearly spelled out the Earth was round and why. One of the reasons was that it could be seen to be so by the spherical shadow it made on the moon.

Aristotle became the final authority. Everyone believed him. Even the early Islamists believed the earth to be round. They relied on Aristotle in so believing.

Now come the politicians. The politicos of Irving's day considered Irving a brilliant man. Everyone did. If he wrote in a novel that everyone except Columbus thought the world was flat, it had to be that way.Columbus was the hero of the book and had to be portrayed as such. Standing alone against an ignorant world. Many State legislatures made the book required reading for children. Though not fact, Irving's version of events became fact. 

Such is why you and I were taught in our early school years that Columbus believed the earth was round, that he fought hard to convince Ferdinand and Isabella he was correct, and that he made that perilous voyage. The voyage where everyone believed he and his ships were going to come to the edge of a flat Earth and fall of.

To this day, the fiction remains the truth. Children are still taught Columbus stood alone in believing the Earth was round. No one seems to care about correcting Irving's version of history.

THE POOR PEE IN A CUP

 

Florida has always been righteous regarding drug use. More so since the election of Rick Scott as Governor. The Governor successfully signed into law a bill mandating drug testing by welfare applicants.

 

Scott's reasoning was twofold. First, to protect children from danger. Drug users it was felt would abuse their little ones. Second, to insure tax dollars were not being used to buy illegal drugs.

 

Scott's law required the welfare applicant to pay for the test. The test a simple one. The welfare applicant peed in a cup which then was tested for drug content. The tests were conducted at privately owned clinics and drug facilities. The welfare applicant was required to pay for the test. The cost generally in the $35 -$40 range. If the test result was negative, the welfare applicant would be reimbursed by the State.

 

The Governor went further. He was concerned that State employees might be engaged in drug use. He issued an Executive Order requiring mandatory drug testing of all State prospective hires and random testing of current employees. Scott's Executive order applied only to employees working in those State agencies where Scott had appointed the Directors.

 

The sense of the law itself was that the unemployed poor were more prone to use drugs.

 

Studies had been conducted prior to the passage of the law. The United States Chamber of Commerce found that 70 per cent of illicit drugs were used by employed persons. Another study regarding drug use among rich and poor children found that children of the rich were more likely to use drugs than the poor.

 

Florida had data which was derived from actual applicants for welfare benefits. The 2011 numbers showed that out of 4,086 applicants tested, 108 of the tests came up positive for drug use. The numbers indicated very few welfare recipients were drug users.

 

The State countered the interpretation by saying that drug users did not take the test because they knew what the outcome would be. Some credence is to be given to such position. However, I find it hard to believe the number who avoided taking the test was anywhere near the number who actually did.

 

There is the United states Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. To mandate wholesale testing of all welfare applicants without something more was considered by some improper. Where was the necessary requisite of reasonable cause? How can reasonable cause even be determined in a mass testing situation?

 

A federal lawsuit came about. It was inevitable. The case was Lebron v. Wilkins. Judge Mary S. Scriven of Orlando rendered her decision this past New Year's eve. She found the law to be unconstitutional in that it violated the Fourth Amendment. The law permitted in effect illegal searches and seizures by mandating mass urine testing of a particular group. The Judge found no pervasive drug problem among welfare recipients.

 

The only governmental study on the subject was one done by Florida itself in 1998. The study is referred to as the Demonstration Study. Judge Scriven relied on it as part of her decision.  She said Florida's Demonstration Project was the only competent evidence of record addressing drug use by Florida welfare recipients.

 

The study indicated there was a lower rate of drug usage among welfare recipients than the population of Florida as a whole. The study further found  there was no indication of children being adversely affected.

 

Florida's own study came back to bite the State in the ass.

 

Scott has stated Florida will appeal.

 

Now for the interesting part of this story.

 

Prior to his election as Governor, Scott owned a drug testing business. Solantic. An urgent  care chain consisting of 32 sites. Drug testing was one of Solantic's more popular services. During the campaign, Scott estimated the worth of his Solantic holdings to be $62 million.

 

Upon election, Scott did the right thing. He divested himself of his interest in Solantic. The question is did he divest in a proper fashion. Scott transferred the shares in a revocable trust to his wife.

 

Scott's attorneys met with the Florida Commission on Ethics. Apparently the procedure was acceptable. I however question the propriety of the revocable trust transfer to the wife.

 

There is the adage if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck, it is a duck. The same applies here from my perspective. Conflict of interest rears its ugly head. The problem arose when Scott supported and signed into law welfare drug testing. It went a step further when he required by Executive Order that certain State employees also be tested. His wife owned the controlling interest in his former company Solantic. Solantic had to benefit to some extent in the revenue to be derived from the drug testing.

 

I am not saying Scott did anything wrong. However, it is my belief that a high ranking official such as a governor should be as pure as Caesar's wife. There is an appearance of conflict of interest. 

 

This matter goes a step further. We live in an age where people believe most public officials are benefiting from their positions. Generally to the detriment of the citizenry. The mandatory urine testing scenario does not play well with the

Governor's image. Right or wrong, it supports the public's general feeling that something may be amiss at the high ends of government.

 

CHEERIOS

Everyone loves Cheerios! It is one of the first solid foods a baby munches on. Seniors love Cheerios because of its cholesterol reducing capability.

 

General Mills announced last week that it would no longer produce Cheerios using genetically modified ingredients. Wow! Who knew?

 

General Mills says it is doing so not because genetically modified foods may be dangerous. It is doing so because of the ever increasing opposition to genetically modified foods.

 

I say.....Well done, General Mills! May you be the first of many food producing corporations to take such a stand.