Friday, March 30, 2007

NEW ADDITIONS --ACTIVE THREAD sequence of responses to a Blade letter on homosexuality and the military & other immoral bedroom plans --the letter is

on my blog titled General Pace, Stick to Your Guns

"Local Toledo Homophome Blasted By Blade Readers"
- from

"Some people like Gen. Peter Pace and ____________, a March 22 letter writer, would like to dismiss homosexual behavior as merely a moral weakness and liken it to adultery, lying, or stealing. What their intolerance is, however, is blatant bigotry and ignorance."

Another says:

"I would like to thank letter writer _________for helping me define my morality. Does she live under a rock? Each person decides his or her own morality. It cannot be customized. It is a choice. Numerous medical researchers and magazines tell us that most homosexuality is genetic; it is not a choice but a physical reality. Therefore it is not immoral. I have multiple sclerosis. It was not a choice. It is a physical reality. Therefore, I am not immoral because of it. And every sexual act performed by a gay couple is also enjoyed by straight couples, if they choose."

A third letter:

___________'s March 22 letter regarding Gen. Peter Pace's comment on gays in the military is myopic and without substantiated, verifiable truth in regard to her casual dismissal of genetics being a basis for homosexuality.
She failed to mention her clinical and scholarly credentials that would render her comments helpful. They wouldn't come from misinterpreted biblical writings, would they? If so, I am confident that she strictly adheres to all admonishments found in her studies of the Bible."

It seems that _________'sletter raised some eyebrows here in the Toledo area. Apparently more than one person thinks Ms. ______ bible-based morality doesn't fit with reality. But then, as she has shown us on this blog, she's right and the world is wrong.
posted by liberal_dem at 8:26 AM on Mar 29, 2007

microdot said...
Krikey, you're gonna get scolded for that one! Yikes!

12:27 PM EDT

Chris said...
Wow, this person is going to be in a world of hurt when she goes to Hell for being a bigot.

12:44 PM EDT

Barb said...
"Homophobe" is the word I believe, LD --or is homophome some new noun I haven't heard of? --I doubt Ms._____ is afraid of homosexuals --should she be?

Chris, bigot is somebody who hates. I didn't see where she said she hated homosexuals or expressed anything hateful about them.

If I recall, she said people who are potentially tempted or attracted by somebody to whom they are not married, should not be put into intimate quarters --i.e. bathrooms, bedrooms and barracks--with such people. Girls shouldn't room with boys in the dorms and barracks --and homosexuals, likewise, shouldn't room with the people to whom they are potentially sexually attracted--because the straight people should be as bothered by that as girls should be if a boy is put in their room or bathroom. It's not proper --not moral.

Granted, a segment in society doesn't care about morals --but those who do, should not be subjected to sleeping or showering with or dressing in front of, people of opposite sex or same sex orientation.

If homosexuals have great self- control and don't burn in lust lying on the barrack bunk, and want to serve in the military like any other male or female, obeying the rules in moral college's dorm rooms and army barracks--rules against intimacy with people to whom they are not married, they shouldn't be advertising their orientation. Don't tell --is appropriate --or otherwise, don't serve.

Traditionally, sexual attraction is acted upon within the bonds of hetero marriage. That's what is moral.

Who can say what is moral? Yes, the Creator --see Leviticus 18 to see where all sex outside hetero marriage is sin for which the land was ruined and vomited out its inhabitants. Nothing too ancient or obsolete to understand clearly.

The bigotry is toward the sin --not the sinner.

5:39 PM EDT

Barb said...
Letter writers Nicholas Feldt, Barbara Rochelle, and Linda Garrison assert that homosexuality is most surely genetically caused and that Ms.______, not being a scientist, must be wrong to say otherwise.

Dr. Francis S. Collins, is the head of the Human Genome Project. He concluded that while "there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits…for virtually none of them, is heredity ever close to predictive."

He wrote: “An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations."

I agree with him that homosexuality is not hard wired but I don’t think it’s proof of genetic influence –to observe that a gay twin has a gay brother 20% of the time –BECAUSE SINCE THEIR GENES ARE IDENTICAL, he should have a gay brother 100 per cent of the time. I suspect it is more something environmental about being a twin that is an influence on homosexuality --something about the parental or sibling relationship. Also, I would ask, how large is our study sample, of gay male twins in australia where this work was done??

Dr. A Dean Byrd, writing about Collins' work, notes: “ The heritability estimates for homosexuality is substantially lower than General Cognitive Ability, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness, Aggression and Traditionalism. Dr. Collins noted that environment--particularly childhood experiences--as well as the role of free will and choice affect us all in profound ways. As researchers discover increasing levels of molecular detail about inherited factors that underlie our personalities, it's critical that such data be used to illuminate the issues, not provide support to ideologues."

Byrd: “Citing such dangers, Dr. Collins referred to the book written by gay activist Dean Hamer, who declared the discovery of the "God gene" (this same author also is associated with earlier disproven claims that he had discovered “the gay gene"). Dr. Collins noted that the "evidence" in Hamer's book "grabbed headlines," but was "wildly overstated" --just as his announcements of finding a gay gene marker --for which research irregularities and announcement of a gay gene, the National Cancer Institute called him on the carpet.

all the studies purporting to find a genetic role in homosexuality, have been debunked or flimsy at best.

Even Newsweek writers came to that conclusion not long ago.

The gay gene is a media myth that the mass audience believes --including you guys.

5:52 PM EDT

Barb said...
Ask yourselves --have they found a gene that all gays share? No, they have not --they are more likely to share a gene for poor eyesight or artistic talents or frail body type --nothing that is exclusive to homosexuals.

Is it possible that something occurs in the womb with the mother's hormones that causes sexual ambiguity? Perhaps, but it will show up in their bodies --not just in their heads.

6:10 PM EDT

microdot said...
Barb, for once I will agree with you. I never stated or do I believe that homosexuality is strictly genetic behaviour. I do believe there are some genetic causes of homosexuality, but much of it is caused by the formation of an individuals personality and the factors which affect them. Because we are all different and completely unique human beings, the same set of circumstances do not affect any two humans in the same way. I for one think that continually going on about the genetic causes is not the issue here.
I think the issue is that you choose to condemn a huge portion of the human race for the parts of their personalities you don't approve of.
Most gay people live pretty quiet lives and you aren't aware of their existance. Most people live private lives that don't attract your attention.Because a lot of gay people are obviously different to you, you notice them and become the object of your scorn.
"Straight" people commit murders and sex crimes. It's not even worth trying to make some sort of percentage comparison.
When ever anyone brings up the persecution of gay people or a hate crime against a gay person, you are quick to trot out some aberrative atrocity in your gay crime files to prove to the world that gay people commit crimes too.
Only you never just stop there, if you read your posts, and maybe you aren't capable of being self critical or aware, but the anger starts to flow and the language gets more harsh.
I have said it before, you don't think you are capable of physically harming a homosexual and I certainly believe you, but your obsessive condemnation and religious justification for your statements are the very things that inspire hate crimes. The attitudes towards blacks in America that kept segregation and racial hate institutialized for years was caused by the rationalization that let "moral" men keep slaves. They convinced themselves and believed that they were sub human and not like "us". They could quote from the bible and go to sleep at night believing that slavery was gods will and to change it would be to usurp the natural order.
As far as I am concerned, you are applying the same moral rationalizations to gay people.
As far as I can see, the idea of genetics and gayness entered this discussion when we mentioned the President of the Southern Baptisit University who thought that it would be okay to genetically modify fetuses if it would prevent them from becoming homosexual.

6:39 PM EDT

-Sepp said...
I've always seen it as a fetish that some people have. As for being genetic, it seems that regardless of the topic nowadays, you can find a scientist who will say whatever you want him to say. As for what goes on in other people's bedrooms, I'll start caring when it becomes my business. I'm thinking...never is pretty close to the correct answer for that.

8:31 AM EDT

Anonymous said...
I note with laughter that barb calls the woman Ms. ___________.

9:39 AM EDT

Barb said...
Correction, Dean Hamer was (is?) with The National Institute for Health--NIH --not the Cancer Institute.

Microdot: I agreed with the Baptist minister that if homosexual orientation WERE found to be genetically influenced and caused, and IF scientists COULD
"correct" homosexuality in the fetus or genes, most parents would want to do so. And evangelicals don't oppose any surgeries or genetic remedies that prevent or correct abnormal, undesirable conditions --like a mindset that does not match one's body --as in gender identity confusion often contributing to homosexual orientation. However, we don't believe that such mindsets come from our genes.

Find something hateful I've said about homosexuals. Just because I say homosexual activities are immoral --doesn't mean I hate anyone who does them. It means that what they do with their own sex should not be entered into --should not be started, primarily because the Bible says it is immoral (He did not design us for it)--i.e. forbidden by our Creator who said the land would and did vomit out the people who did any child sacrifice and any sexual behaviors (listed: same sex, with animals, and close relatives) other than hetero marriage.

As for the Blade writer who said many hetero married couples enjoy the same activities as gay couples --no woman in her right mind would enjoy anal sex --according to my friend whose doped up, thereafter divorced husband forced that experience on her --and I doubt that giving oral sex frequently (if at all) is high on a woman's list of sexual pleasures. Taste buds and noses are given for good reason.

Anal sex can cause anal incontinence --who needs it? Most of us have enough trouble expelling things with that body orifice but certainly don't want to leak instead. I can't think of anything I would want my kids to avoid any more than anal(or oral) or adulterous sex --unless it's drugs. I don't want anyone around my kids who would PROMOTE anal or oral sex experimentation --which is what is happening with the GLSEN (?) activities in public schools --with questionnaires asking kids if they have ever considered trying gay sex to see if they might, in fact, be homosexual.

An excellent and thorough article by a PhD priest, Father Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco, Ph.D. is found HERE --from Reprint/Synopsis Series --The Myth of the Gay Gene at NARTH website.

He also notes that gays in countries that are gay tolerant have a high rate of mental illness among their gays --just as in a Bible belt community --maybe more.

He wrote,"...the observed differences in mental health status between homosexuals and heterosexuals are just as great in the Netherlands and in New Zealand, two societies which are relatively more tolerant of homosexuality, as they are in the United States, a society which is relatively not as tolerant. [24] If social ostracism is indeed a significant factor in influencing the mental health status of homosexual persons, then one would expect to see differences among societies with varying tolerances to homosexuality."

What you DO see is LESS homosexuallity in cultures/families/religions which subtly teach against it and protect their kids from early sexual influence; by chaperoning and repressing even the normal adolescent hetero interest, they DO promote normal hetero marriage. Christian kids raised to delay sexual gratification, admittedly, can hardly wait "to have and to hold," and can hardly believe such joyous pleasure of intimacy is LEGAL with God -Hallelujah!

In U.S. we are trying to make gays feel happier about gayness by approving the condition --but it cannot be done --even with our approval. Our approval only encourages more young, sexually inexperienced people to walk through the door of gay ideation --consider it, experiment --and find out, voila! orgasm! Overcome all inhibitive barriers and a person can wallow in sexual experience any number of ways with any number of people--ways that aren't good for the physical and emotional health --nor spiritual health.

Young people DO have same sex attractions --that are not sexual --but admiration and enjoyment of one's personality --GLSEN would like to convince people that sexual experimentation, called "exploring one's sexuality," will open doorways to them that are good --when those may be trap doors to a self-image problem, promiscuity and sexual addiction --disease and misery --for many.

I don't hate homosexuals --I feel deeply sorry for them --even when they don't. But I also have hope for them --even when they don't. They can change --but the best thing when it comes to sexual addictions (any addiction) is to never get started --because scientists do see brain structure changes with addictions. That's why "fleeing temptation" is the best course --whether we are talking about hard drugs, alcohol, nicotine, MJ , porn or abnormal sex.

We need to know what the traps are to avoid them --and homosex is a trap. the orientation is a disorder to prevent and correct --not to act upon.

It's not the same thing as race, Micro. It's a temptation and chosen behavior --but the gay self-image is partially shaped by environment/other people--and there are studies to show this.

As for the percentage comparison of straight or gay sex crime --there have been studies done --and while heteros do more of the sex and other crime, gays do more sex crime proportionate to their numbers in the population, --even if you adjust the law (as has been done) to de-criminalize sodomy. Many of those gay crimes might not be countable if you lowered the age of consent to 12 as has been done in some European countries --which says there is a lot of pederasty among gay men --e.g. Tom Foley --who would wait until they were 18, but 16 and 17 attracted him. Foley is not primarily a pedophile --he is a homosexual --and he likes 'em young -just like the guys on "to catch a predator." Men who are attracted to teens are not necessarily or primarily pedophiles --they are hetero or homo --sexuals. They often also have sex with people their age, but there is an attractiveness to the young and inexperienced --and indulging that attraction when you are an older, full adult, has to do with immorality --more than abnormalcy.

Sin is our normal condition. That's why God provided a Savior --When we respond to God's Grace with willful rejection of our sinful thoughts, the Holy Spirit enables us to be moral people. It does help to be raised to choose morality before you get into deep trouble of any sort. But anyone's kids can get into sin in a culture that is allowing sinners to reach out and tempt via media and education as this one is.

I feel sorry for everyone of those predators, gay or straight, caught on that tv show, "To Catch a Predator." Even the host says he believes many of them would have led more conventional lives if it were not for the temptation of the internet.

10:08 AM EDT

liberal_dem said...
So, 'barb,' I open the door for comments and you go right back to your usual righteous pap paragraph after long paragraph after....

Don't you ever learn?

Surely you aren't stupid.

Why don't you get it? The 3 Blade writers are surely but the tip of the proverbial iceberg of the 'normal' folks who think you are nuts.

The people who comment here already know that.

Your pomposity and verbiage can't cover for your unwillingness to learn.

Face it: you are stuck and don't know how to get out of your present situation. To me you have all of the classic symptoms of OCD.

A good therapist and some medicine could help you get over your homophobia and help you return to a normal life, so that you don't keep embarrassing yourself and your family with your homophobic blather.

Get some help. You'll have a much brighter life.

10:19 AM EDT

Barb said...
When you detect anger in me, Microdot --it's because of the misstatements and deliberate misinterpretations i get concerning me and others who believe as I do on the social issues--and when I am censored and not allowed to defend myself.

I realize I am often too lengthy to hold interest --and not always organized in my posts, but you don't have to read me --but you might expand your mind if you did because I do explain where I'm coming from and I don't think I deserve persecution.

But then neither did St. Paul or Jesus or the Christians killed around the world today. Two were just murdered by Muslims in an african nation yesterday --heard it on the radio. JEsus said we are blessed who are persecuted for righteousness' sake. So, go ahead! Persecute me for believing and quoting the Bible!

I am irritated when people call the Religious Right Nazis, bigots, racists --etc. when that is not the case. I don't think you can find any examples of bigotry in what I say --where i am hating someone and scorning them because they are sinning in their lifestyles --I am not condemning them or wishing Hell upon them. E.g. I do feel sad for the guys on To Catch a Predator.

And we are going to feel sorry for a lot more of us on judgment Day when all our sinful thoughts are revealed --unless we put them under the Blood of Christ and repent before it's too late. That was Jesus' first sermon --in fact --to Repent --for the Kingdom of Heaven is Here! It starts NOW.

Jesus told the woman caught in adultery that he did not condemn her, got the others to realize their own sins so that they wouldn't stone her --but then he said, "Go and sin no more." He didn't change the definitions of morality --he just said we couldn't hide --we are all sinners even the proud pharisees among us --and I dare say most of us are wrongfully proud about something.

Yes, Anonymous, I am somewhat acquainted with the Blade letter writer, Ms. what's her name. Glad I could give you a chuckle.


Chris said...
Barb, you can be a bigot simply by showing intolerance of another group. As for what is moral and what is not--this is a relative question. No one should impose their morals on others. I'd hate to teach my children the "morality" of intolerance.

11:16 AM EDT

microdot said...
Oh la la la la...please tell me which European countries have lowered the age of consent to 12? Please, I've done an extensive search but I can't find them.Not even Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, San Mariano, Andorra and Vatican City...they're pretty small countries, but I looked...and then there is S.M.O.M.S, which is medieval protectorate which encompasses a courtyard in Rome....
In Russia, homosexuality was always publicly condemned and the Orthodox church has always been strict. In The Soviet Union, homosexuality was stricly punished and persecuted, but that didn't stop the pervasivness of homosexulaity in Russian Society. Where do you think most gay pornography comes from?
You cherry pick your statistics and information to fit your prejudice, but it has no effect on reality.
There is a lot to be said for tolerance and acceptance of individuals. The reality is that if you make something an obsessive taboo, it takes on an aura that makes it more attractive to those susceptible. It's like drugs...If we treated drugs in a more rational fashion and educated kids about them in a sane way way instead of hysterically hyping reality, you might persualde a lot more kids to make up their own minds armed with real facts instead of hysteria.
I would like to say that you have made this issue the same as race. I'm sure you can find verses in the bible to back up what ever belief you want to promote. That was my point.
I have to stop this here or I will find myself addressing your friends bad anal sex experience...Did you really have to take us there?

12:21 PM EDT

Barb said...
LD --My son says you sound "like the angry old man who yells at the kids to get off his lawn."

Chris --what is tolerance? Isn't it the ability to co-exist peacebly --even in a friendly manner --with people with whom you disagree about anything --including the definition of morals, religious beliefs, lifestyle issues?

I am tolerant ---believe me --I AM TOLERANT!

I am the friendliest, most forgiving, cheek-turning person vilified on this forum yet.

To you, tolerance seems to mean approval of others' views and lifestyles, beliefs and morals --or at least indifference.

BUT tolerance does NOT mean approval--or condoning. It means allowing free speech, willingness to let others be heard in adult forums, being cordial, even friendly, in spite of disapproval and disagreement.
Tolerance does NOT mean agreement.

So who is intolerant? those who stifle the opinions and free speech of others --those who hate and scorn and ridicule people with whom they disagree. Those who go off topic with mean-spirited ad hominem attack. Even what my son said about LD --is not "mean spirited." It's an apt visual image, however. A gentle jibe.

St. Paul noted in his letter to the Christians in Rome--that to even APPROVE sin is to sin. So tolerance must not come to mean approval or agreement --or the Church and its God-given liberties will be endangered and the violence you decry will be turned toward the believers --as in other countries now. And you'll be biting the hand of a force for good if you take on the universal Church of all who believe the Bible.

The intolerant do not want to hear any disagreement --they do not want to discuss unless they are sure to prevail. They are bankrupt in rebuttal and so give in to their hateful impulses.

12:28 PM EDT

Barb said...
About the bad experience, the blade letter writer responding to the General pace letter -- went there without naming the act saying heteros do the same acts as homos. That's why I brought it up. I'm saying, "not commonly."
And not healthfully.

I thought it was Holland where the homosexuals lobbied and succeeded in lowering the age of consent to 12. Appreciate your research. I didn't make it up.

There was a Scandanavian country that jailed --or at least tried--a minister for preaching the Bible on the subject of homosexuality. I'd call that intolerant of differences and denying freedom of religion and speech, wouldn't you? As they do in Canada regarding religious broadcasts on the topic. We are working toward criminalizing the Bible on h.s. as "hate speech."

In Germany they recently took two families' children away for home schooling.

That's a spirit of intolerance growing here --toward Christians who don't line up with the politically correct view on homosexuality.
I know only of some tolerance for slavery, not racism, in the Bible --though some tried to interpret the Mark of Cain as a racial difference. The Bible in its entirety condemns slavery --and racism --because we are told that Christ died for ALL. The Bible strongly supports the idea that we are all equal at the foot of the cross. You can't find defense for homosexual acts at all in the book.

I heed the teaching that says I have no license to hate sinners or think I am better than they. But I also heed the teaching that says we are not to approve homosexual conduct --and not to do it. And that we are to tell people the GOOD NEWS that Christ died on Good Friday for our sins --and that we must repent of our sins to avail ourselves of this great sacrifice for eternal life --which means resurrection from the dead for all of us. GOOD NEWS! But if we call evil good, and don't know that we are sinning, how shall we repent and be saved?

Sepp said he didn't care about this issue; it isn't his business --but the children are everybody's business --and the influences on culture that could lead them into addictive traps --are everybody's business. If homosexuality is NOT hard-wired genetic condition or a health condition like MS, then it is preventable, fixable, etc. And we SHOULD care about that. Instead of letting society encourage people to try homosexuality and see if they like it --as encouraged by media and gay sex education --GLSEN.

When it comes to sex, we need to choose not to wallow in the first sexual thought that comes to us in childhood or adolescence --and not assume that a thought is a determinant --anymore than a perceived, possible genetic influence on human behavior could be a "determinant."

1:03 PM EDT

liberal_dem said...
...and on and on and on...

Get some help, barb, before you become anti-social and need to be institutionalized.

2:08 PM EDT

-Sepp said...
"Get some help, barb, before you become anti-social and need to be institutionalized"

Thats a bit harsh don't you think? Gays just aren't Barb's cup of tea, so what? She isn't harrassing them, she just doesent agree that what goes on behind closed doors should be jammed down everyone's throat and repackaged as a "lifestyle" for public consumption. Her being repulsed by what they do is no less natural than them doing it...right?

Institutionalizing Barb because she doesent agree with your views?
Thats been done before...the Nazis did that to everyone who didn't agree with the social engineering under nazism. So if someone dosent buy into this "lifestyle" they are branded intollerant and somehow lower citizens?
Just because she doesnt agree with what those folks do does not mean she's "intollerant".

3:13 PM EDT

Chris said...
Barb, perhaps I should have used the word "discrimination" instead of intolerance. Although I think these terms can be intermingled at times. I do feel however that someone can be bigoted by practicing discrimination.

To me tolerance means giving everyone the same opportunities (marriage, serving in the military, etc). Is this too much to ask for?

3:51 PM EDT

Chris said...
Not agreeing with someone's views or lifestyle is no problem, obviously. But when you make special rules or laws, to prevent these same individuals from having equal opportunities....well isn't that what the Nazis did?

3:53 PM EDT

microdot said...
Sepp, my only comment on what you have just posted is that, yes, you are correct, Barb has a thing about gays, she is really obsessed with them and she misses no chance to portray them as subnormal abberrants who need to be controlled in one way or another. She uses her biblical rants in a way that could be used by a more easily inluenced person as a provocation and justification for violence and persecution.

4:28 PM EDT

Barb said...
microdot --my findings say 16 is netherlands age of consent --12 in canada under some circumstances --and phillipines also --and 13 in Japan --and a few others have a very young age of consent. And some countries have different ages for hetero or homosex relations, different ages for boys vs. girls and different views concerning age differences when the couple are both quite young. Perhaps the article I read was for the push to lower age of consent somewhere in Europe.

6:22 PM EDT

Barb said...
Microdot wrote: "She uses her biblical rants in a way that could be used by a more easily inluenced person as a provocation and justification for violence and persecution."

I've told you this before, Micro et al, that those who are inclined to violence toward homosexuals are NOT influenced by people like me or the Bible. You think they are going to quote, "Thou shalt not kill" while they murder? The gay bashers are the same as the race bashers, more likely the mean and drunk guys coming out of the bar --people who are intolerant of any differences in people --but especially intolerant when they are drunk like Mel G. was --intolerant of all the rights of others to the point of violence. Only the insane would use God for a justification, since God says we are not to do these sorts of killings or any. HE is the judge and He will impose justice or forgiveness according to our repentance or lack of it.

You'd be more on target if you blamed most hate crime on alcohol.

Chris --all people DO and SHOULD have equal rights --to marry a person of the opposite sex and have children if they wish. That's what marriage is --a union of man and woman with possibility or making a family by natural or adoption means --if they choose.

Every man has a right to find a woman who will marry him --and vice versa. Equal rights to EVERY man and woman.

You are suggesting some NEW right --heretofore not recognized on the planet --a right for a man to marry a man and a woman to marry a woman. That's been on a list of taboos in every generation since the dawn of man --along with a man marrying his horse --or his sister -or his mother --or his father --or his child --or any child -or anyone younger than what we think of as an age of consent. It has also been considered immoral to break up a marriage to marry another, though the law no longer punishes adultery and does allow for divorce just as God did --he said he allowed for divorce for the hardness of our hearts.

Rather than saying discrimination leads to bigotry, I would say bigotry leads to discrimination. But marriage laws are not currently about discrimination --nor about bigotry. They have more to do with age-old understanding about what is natural and what is best for children --the traditional family unit provides for optimal financial support, emotional support, sexual image formation, structure and chaperonage for children and teens, protection of women and children from all sorts of wolves at the doors and in our computer screens. God designed and planned the family for our optimal benefit.

We need a welfare state now, because the family is in disarray. Homosexual families are going to fare even worse on average in stability and chaperonage for kids. Will they tell kids to "wait for marriage" --or "explore your sexuality"?

Remember that Rosie O Donnel's boy said he wanted a daddy and she told him he couldn't have one because she was the kind of mommy who wanted another mommy. "So get a stiff upper lip, boy! It's a woman's world." If he's not gay, it will be a wonder.

Human Sexuality magazine for Physicians once had an article wherein the doctors observed that children raised without affirming fathers in their lives tended to be promiscuous with men --both the girls and the boys.

We need to grow up, take on our bio-responsitilibies and do right by our families according to God's plan --and try to raise kids who can do likewise. We'll need God's help to get us out of the moral messes we've been making ever since the 60's at least.

7:09 PM EDT

In other words, Mel Gibson was only intolerant of Jews because he was drunk? When he isn't drunk, he loves them? Come on, Liquor may be the lubricant, but it only unlocks the gates of what is already there.

7:22 PM EDT

-Sepp said...
Discrimination? Against gays? How about the special rights they have obtained? Detroit Edison will grant health insurance and life insurance benefits to gay does the city of Toledo and, all they have to do is put their "partner's" name on the form! The same benefit isn't extended to hetrosexuals...discrimination? You bet! And, homosexuals who are the largest risk group for aids / hiv infection don't have to pay an extra surcharge for their "at risk behavior" ...but a smoker does! once again, discrimination? Damn right it is! When you measure the costs of treating lung cancer which after diagnosis, treatment is pretty much pain management for a few months as opposed to insurance paying for HIV treatment and AIDS medications the cost difference is staggering!
Drunk drivers, speeders, smokers, drug addicts, and, people who just happen to live in an area that is considered "high crime" all have to pay for their insurance risks via higher premiums while gays have become a protected class who pay nothing extra for their choice of behavior. We can pass laws to stop people from's a lifestyle too...and use the excuse of insurance burden or, second hand smoke but, gays get a free pass? Second hand smoke has a possibility of making you sick but, second hand AIDS will kill you for certain. So, the discrimination arguement is pretty much moot at that.

8:14 PM EDT

liberal_dem said...
We can pass laws to stop people from's a lifestyle too...and use the excuse of insurance burden or, second hand smoke but, gays get a free pass? Second hand smoke has a possibility of making you sick but, second hand AIDS will kill you for certain. So, the discrimination arguement is pretty much moot at that.

Sorry, sepp, but we depart. The gays are not bothering society and especially not your personal life nor your taxes.

Drunks, alcoholics, druggies and smokers, on the other hand, cause problems for society and are therefore a rick to others.

Please don't throw in gays as some sort of 'risk' to society. That is baseless intolerance and bigotry.

9:16 PM EDT

-Sepp said...
Oh really? AIDS has nothing to do with the tax burden? "On the fence" gays and bisexual men are the main cause for Aids / HIV spreading all over the planet. Thats not Al Gore "science" it's a proven fact. Any idea how many tax dollars go into this disease as opposed to the others?
Total tax dollars thrown at AIDS /HIV reasearch and prevention is $1,862,282,000 annually!
Skin cancer..$1,647,000
Breast and cervical cancer $191,965,000
Hep C...$21,930,000
Prostate cancer...$14,062,000

Notice any difference? One disease is completely preventable and garners nearly 2 billion dollars for reasearch while the diseases that aren't completely preventable get considerably less!

Sure drunks and druggies ARE a risk to others but are you going to sit there and type that the spread of HIV has no risk to others?
You MAY get killed by a drunk driver...
You MAY get robbed by a druggie...
You MAY get cancer from second hand smoke...
You WILL DIE if you're infected with HIV /AIDS!
See just a little bit of difference there LD? "Will" and "MAYBE" are pretty damned defining and only one is a 100% certainty.
It isn't bigotry, it isn't homophobia, it isn't's simply the naked truth like it or, not. Just because a certain demographic poses a high risk for certain dangers to others, political correctness does nothing to diminish the's simply a liberal way to ignore it by pretending it's not true in order to somehow diminish the danger which is pure bunk. After you get it, try pretending you don't have it. You'll still end up dead.

9:56 PM EDT

Barb said...
Why do facts not phase you, LD?

Homosexuals are a great cost to health care system and we all pay --they usually do have the alcohol and nicotine addiction with their lifestyle as well.

AIDS was brought here by the homosexuals because of their vacation activities in Haiti --where Haitians got it from Africa. That's documented fact --the wild party life with indiscriminate sexual coupling was brought back to the bath houses of NYC and San Francisco and other major urban areas --and we started to see GRID --Gay related immunity disease. One air line worker in Canada infected hundreds who infected others. It was rampant in the gay community and went from gays to the blood supply, the wives, the prostitutes, the drug users, the babies.

Everybody knows the disease could have been halted in America if gays had stopped their promiscuous activities --but they didn't --and we didn't tell them to do any more than put a leaky condom on it.

Not so long ago, newsweek reported the young gays, a new generation, were heedless of the dangers and just as risky in behavior as the first wave of AIDS victims.

I'm sorry enough for them and care enough about them --to tell them that it's the lifestyle! instead of tippytoeing around the facts in the name of PC tolerance.

There has been enormous cost to seeking a cure and finding a way to prolong their lives so they can pass it to more people --I want their lives to go on in good quality --but not so they can promote this lifestyle and induct new victims.

What are we thinking of, promoting this with gay pride parades, etc.? IT'S NOT GENETIC!!!!! THEY CAN STOP bringing in our youth.

As for Mel-- yes, he wasn't violent and out to kill anyone --but drink did bring out the worst in him of his prejudices. His father taught him some extreme views --not just basic Bible --but prejudice against Jews that the Bible doesn't justify when you study it and realize it is all about Jews --good ones and bad ones --Jesus and Paul were Jews. I am a Jew-follower as a Christian. I claim their patriarchs as my own --Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I think their history is the history of the human race --and it's the heritage of the Gentiles, too, because jesus has ingrafted us into their family tree. Shalom!

10:06 PM EDT

Chris said...
Sepp, as far as the health insurance "partner" point you made----isn't same sex marriage in Ohio and Michigan against the law? So how else would they be able to get the same benefits as other married couples? So really the Detroit Edison and city of Toledo insurance rules would not be needed if same sex marriage wasn't discriminated against, right?

Also Sepp, you're facts regarding aids are a little fuzzy. Only about half of aids cases in the US are due to homosexual behavior. Worldwide, two-thirds of aids cases come from Sub-Sahara Africa. Most of these cases are not due to homosexual behavior.

Barb, it's sad that you have to twist the meaning of words around so that they suit your discriminant ways. Your "marriage" wordplay was impressive, but wrong. Why do you think the law should define marriage as man-woman?

1:18 AM EDT

Barb said...
oops --I think the word should have been "faze."

2:13 AM EDT

Barb said...
The law should define a married couple as a man and a woman because it has ALWAYS BEEN SO BY DEFINITION. Suddenly we know more than the wise of all the centuries past?

Because only the man and wife are bio-designed for procreation and survival of the human race.

Because male and female created He them --in the image of God.

The other arrangements are unnatural --and immoral --since the only sanctioned relationship in either history OR the Bible is husband and wife, male with female.

The hetero couple with a nuclear family unit --at its best is a national mental health center --providing male and female role models and normalcy for kids --providing stability.

Because the gay life is at risk for disease by nature of the promiscuous lifestyle and the sex acts themselves.

Because gay activity is a sex addiction --unlike normal marital sex which is rightly engaged in whenever the urge moves the couple but has none of the downside characteristics of sex addiction. Children are one upside result.

As for 1/2 the U.S. AIDS cases not being from gay sex --you got it wrong. Homosexuals are 100 percent responsible for U.S. AIDS --because they brought it here from Haiti and spread it like wildfire, into the straight population from them. Remember, i told you they called it Gay-Related Immune Deficiency. Because they were the ones first afflicted in droves because of their activities.

Ever see the Mapplethorpe art photos? gay men urinating into each other's mouths? Ever hear of "fisting?"

We're trying to sanitize something that isn't sanitary --or normal --or healthy --or inevitable --or genetic --or congenital. We need to figure out how to parent for heterosexuality --for normalcy --because it probably can be done.

On the one hand, gays have said they would never choose this lifestyle --so why is GLSEN pushing it onto our children instead of asking straight america for compassion AND a solution --and recommending safeguards so that our children won't get into this.

Also, God's word does tell us in both testaments that the only approved use of sex is within hetero-marriage. It explicitly describes and prohibits gay behavior --Leviticus 18 and Romans 1. It also describes it in one passage as a sin turned away from, by new believers.

3:44 AM EDT

liberal_dem said...
You MAY get killed by a drunk driver...
You MAY get robbed by a druggie...
You MAY get cancer from second hand smoke...
You WILL DIE if you're infected with HIV /AIDS!

Sorry again, sepp, but your post is off-target.

Drunk driving is a menace to society as is second-hand smoke. There is no doubt about either one. Men, women and children are affected each day by thousands of instances of 'exposure' to both of these societal menacings.

You cannot just "throw in" AIDS with these two because you are personally against gays

This is a specious debate tactic and you know it: I expected more from you than this

9:47 AM EDT

liberal_dem said...
Tell me BARB: do you think that [the author of the Blade letter] is a homophobe?

9:49 AM EDT

Chris said...
Barb, wise old men thought slavery was ok too. Marriage was only defined as man-woman by people who wanted to discriminate. If the sole intent of marriage is procreation, should we annul all marriages with no children?

And anytime someone should spouting off bible verses or explanations to argue what should or should not be law, they lose the argument. Law is and must be secular in nature.

10:28 AM EDT

noah's ark said...
I'll tell you what, gimme some of that old-tyme Bible days law.

First off, any man is worth twice any woman. Says so right here:

"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and above, if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female, ten shekels" (Leviticus 27:1-7)

Also, the Old Testament teaches us how to treat women of nations we defeat in battle. Some good pointers for our boys in uniform:

""And when the Lord thy God hath delivered [a city] into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones . . . shalt thou take unto thyself . . . But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth" (Deuteronomy 20:13-16).

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies . . . And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house . . . thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife" (Deuteronomy 21:10-13).

Tell me you're not gonna run right to the recruiter's office after reading that!!

Also, in Bible-tymes, a man could marry a girl in her early teens. Heck, a man could have multiple wives back then!! You guys wanna tell me that three fifteen year-old wives doesn't sound fantastic? A guy can keep slaves a-plenty, too. Y'all enjoy mowing your own lawn, cleaning gutters, etc.? I sure don't. Slaves. Think about it, eh?

And, if you marry some girl and it turns out she's not a virgin, you can stone her to death on her parent's doorstep!!

You guys with me? Come on...Leviticus rocks when you're a man!!

11:26 AM EDT

Barb said...
Having some acquaintance with her, I'm sure, LD, that Ms. _____ is not a homophobe --not fearful of homosexuals --and not a bigot (hater) either. She is constitutionally quite jolly actually, easy going, loving to all --the milk of human kindness runs in her veins, I believe we could say. She loves chocolate like most of the rest of the world and thus can be rather sweet herself! : )

If you had similar character traits, you would probably like her inspite of your differences. Because that's the ultimate in tolerance --liking people with whom we differ.

1:52 PM EDT

Barb said...
I expect you to say quite self-righteously that you can't like people who hold slaves, who are cruel to children, racists --or homophobic bigots as you mis-label her the latter.

You have previously suggested that I myself should be institutionalized for constitutional craziness --or at least censored.

I wish you could for once surprise me and show more tolerance than I expect for the likes of Ms. R. and myself.

It IS nice you are letting this dialogue go on until we've all had our say and discussed every aspect of the topic, inside and out. You get some points for that.

Maybe we could get her to participate in this forum....

2:00 PM EDT

Barb said...
LD -your comment on Sepp's comparison of elective risks of the smokers, drinkers, and homosexuals, doesn't make sense to me.

Isn't he saying we spend far more on AIDS --and protect the behavior that primarily caused it --than on any other preventable, risky behavior-induced addiction or disease? That's probably true, isn't it? Whether it is or not, we don't have pride parades for smokers --I guess we do have the St. Pat's parades for drinkers?--but that's supposed to be about Patrick and not booze --

In any case, the prime cause of AIDS in the U.S. is promiscuous gay sex which brought it to the straight community as well --and there is liklihood that it started with anal sex in Africa if, in fact, they have used anal sex as a means of birth control as is suspected--or if anal sex is a secret ritual among African men as it is in the "straight" Afr. Am. Community here who admit that many of them are "on the down low" --i.e. commiting homosexual acts without identifying as gay --making the afr. am. women at highest risk for AIDS in the U.S. today --if I recall correctly.

Eventually, we ought to be recognizing that there is something essentially unnatural, disordered and addictive and dangerous to a majority of gay behavior --and figure out how to prevent the experiences and the orientation in our children.

I do believe with all my heart that childhood and pubescent gay activity when kids are first "sexually awakened," --as with the hypothetical molesting priest and altar boy, male coach and jr. high wrestler, uncle and nephew, molesting older kids--any such experience, especially in a fatherless youth culture, can cause a gay self-image --and create possibility of sex addiction, oriented toward one's own sex. We need to speak truth to problems.

There are many roads to Rome (i.e. homosexual orientation and first sexual experience) --and it is in society's best interests, for health and economy, to discourage those who would lure kids into this lifestyle by telling them it's OK to experiment with their sexuality -like GLSEN and the corporate-sponsored gay pride parades and tv programming.

This is not a good FAD or TREND --for youth to "explore their sexuality" --because it will lead to more youthful sex activity and all the negative results of that.

The Gay activist agenda gives youth license to get in serious trouble.

2:33 PM EDT

Barb said...
The New International Version --reads more understandably than your version, Noah's Ark (Don?)

1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'If anyone makes a special vow to dedicate persons to the LORD by giving equivalent values, 3 set the value of a male between the ages of twenty and sixty at fifty shekels [a] of silver, according to the sanctuary shekel [b] ; 4 and if it is a female, set her value at thirty shekels. [c] 5 If it is a person between the ages of five and twenty, set the value of a male at twenty shekels [d] and of a female at ten shekels. [e] 6 If it is a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels [f] of silver and that of a female at three shekels [g] of silver. 7 If it is a person sixty years old or more, set the value of a male at fifteen shekels [h] and of a female at ten shekels.

Sounds to me like the idea isn't that a man is worth more --but that he is to be assessed more --because he is the man, after all --and has to give more as a dedication of himself to the Lord with money.
Yes, they did give more to the Lord for the males to be dedicated --Adam was created first ---He is the Head of his home. But he has the earning power --and it's like an assessment --God told Moses to assess more for men (remember,the man is paying it all with his earnings for his family)-(who would bring more money on the slave block, too, because of the nature of the work he can do--physically more difficult work --Men are stronger when it comes to hauling around pyramids, after all)

The New Testament says that "In Christ, there is no male or female, slave nor free, Jew nor Gentile --but all are one in Him."
That's where we get our idea of equality before God -not from Moses.

If Moses' revelation of God was complete, Jesus would not have said He was the light of the world. Moses' revelation would have been as much light from God as needed. But there was more to come --in the revelation of God Incarnate, Jesus.

2:51 PM EDT

Barb said...
To summarize previous ramblings --the assessment had to do with your WORK value --babies the least, senior citizens less than people in their prime, women less than men. The man of the house, the breadwinner, is being assessed for anyone he wants to dedicate to the Lord --it's like a tax for his family --according to their physical work value.

2:54 PM EDT

Barb said...
About the battle passages --the whole world was going to Hell in a hand basket back then --sacrificing children to Molech, visiting temple prostitute/priestesses, believing in gods made with their hands, incest with daughters to ensure a harvest, war toward Abraham's (moses') people with captivity and enslavement--

The jews may have been bloody in conquest after their liberation from Egypt --and taking women captive --but they were told to not kill the women and children in most cases --and to take them in, (without their idols) because otherwise they couldn't support themselves without their men. God had His celestial Hands full trying to bring order out of chaos in our fallen, wicked world. he had to start somewhere --and He had to establish His people who were to be the light to the Gentiles, to the world eventually through Christ --who were to be people of laws, standards, moral behavior --instead of like the lawless and immoral and cruel pagans around them.

Civilization has been a slow process --and sometimes Hitlers and Sadams and their supporters have to be killed so that people can breathe free and know their God.

3:04 PM EDT

microdot said...
I'm not touching that one with a 20 foot pole. I think it's time for an intervention. The word-o-meter has clocked a new worlds record...we are estimating by the inch, 15,560 words by Barb.
She has told us about 12 year olds being forced into unholy scandinavian marriages, bad anal sex experiences had by her friend (I'd sue!), secret afro american anal sex rituals, her opinion of the work of Robert Maplethorpe,(did she burn the unholy images after burning or are they in a folder under the bed?) Practices in the back rooms of gay leather bars, I glad she spared us Richard Gere and his gerbil....
This has been a very interesting trip into someones obsession, a land not quite lit, not quite dark, where things are not as they seem to be, do not try to adjust your computer, we have entered THE BARB ZONE! cue the theme music.......

5:20 PM EDT

Chris said...
noah's ark....I thought I recognized your foul stench!

6:12 PM EDT

noah's ark said...
"The New International Version --reads more understandably than your version..."

I don't need some "new" version, tainted by human meddlings. I'll read the Bible as God intended, thank you very much!! I read my version as saying that women are worth half as much as men. Your new-fangled liberalized version may say otherwise, but I say "fiddlesticks"!!

What's more, why aren't the "battle" passages of Leviticus equally applicable today? Is the word of God as set out to Moses not good enough for you? God's wisdom was good enough then, but not good enough now? Sure, the gay-bashing stuff is fun, but we can't throw away the Leviticus baby with the Deuteronomy bathwater. Either the whole of Old Testament law remains valid, or none of it does. We can't cherry-pick God's laws as we see fit, Barb.

You often cite Ann Coulter as being "right" about everything, with the disclaimer that you haven't read any of her books. You should actually read Ann Coulter...she really understands how to apply Leviticus to the War on Terror. For example, Ann wrote: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

You see, Ann Coulter understands that those passages from Leviticus hold the solution to Iraq and the problem of terrorism. You get rid of terrorism by getting rid of the Islamofascists. What we should be doing in Iraq is killing the men, and our soldiers can take on Iraqi women as wives, and adopt the rug-rats. Of course, there are way more Iraqi women than U.S. troops in Iraq. But once again, looking to the Old Testament reveals the solution – polygamy!! Also, allowing our soldiers to take Muslim women as the spoils of war (as God clearly advocates in Leviticus) will also solve the recruitment problem.

You’re getting soft on me, Barb, with your liberal modified Bible, and your selective cherry-picking of which of God’s laws we ought to follow. Did you get your husband’s permission before getting on the internet? Probably not. I’ll bet your head isn’t even covered right now!!

Conservative Christian my wish you were this conservative!!

6:45 PM EDT

noah's ark said...
"noah's ark....I thought I recognized your foul stench!"

Charming to the last, Chris...

Now, where is the hidden Rebel base??

7:16 PM EDT

-Sepp said...
LD, where did I ever say I was "personnaly against gays"? All I mentioned was that they shouldn't bitch about discrimination on one hand but, get special rights on the other. Is they're "lifestyle" my cup of tea? No but, it doesen't mean I have a problem with them. They do their thing...I do mine. I just think that it's bullshit that they can add anyone they wish to their insurance without even submitting proof of some kind of cohabitation. Which opens up an already expensive system to abuse IE, selling "companion" coverage to anyone they choose. If they're going to extend this coverage to those who cannot marry, at least make them prove some kind of relationship exists.

8:01 PM EDT

Barb said...
ROFL! Even I have a sense of humor, micro-D --and no mapplethorpe photos under the bed --just plus size catalogues for ladies.

about Anne coulter --I brought her up once on this thread --You guys bring her up more than I do --you accused me of reading her stuff and getting it from her --which ain't true --like most things you guys think and say.


Many of the laws of the old testament had their purpose for that time and place --a wild and lawless world. bUT THE law in its entirety was burdensome legalism--much of it giving the Jews discipline in a lawless world, cohesion and identity as a people --but Jesus said, "My yoke is easy and my burden is light."

And instead of the harsh justice of the O.T., Jesus says, "I give you a new commandment --that you return good for evil, love your enemies, pray for those who despitefully use you, turn the other cheek" etc.

But the New Testament upholds the basics of moral law regarding sexuality --and for all kinds of good reasons for our own good observeable in culture today.

Let's not forget the disease risk and high cost of a lifestyle and question why we would celebrate or promote it --when, in fact, it is not inevitable or genetic. Even one of the newspaper critics of the letter on Gen. Pace and gays in the military said that researchers think there is an environmnetal trigger that brings about gay orientation in someone who may have a genetic predisposition to it. Even if they could prove the genetic predisposition (which they haven't) she suggested surgery might be done to prevent the orientation --just as she would like a cure for her MS.

FACT IS, homosexual orientation is more likely caused by the "environmental triggers" than by any predisposition. We should want to eliminate the triggers and protect our youth from this difficult, non-procreative, generally unhappy condition. We need to cultivate minds that sync with our bio-assignment as male or female. We don't do that with GLSEN school promotion of "exploring one's sexuality" in the name of tolerance.

10:51 PM EDT

No comments: