The Democratic bill regarding the War just hurts our troops by putting them in the enemies' crosshairs today --
"Let's see --how can we get the Americans out of there! Just kill more of their kids! Blow up some vehicles! We and the democrats want them out of this war --and deaths are their rationale--so let's give them more deaths to hurry them home!"
That's the reality --the democrats don't want us to succeed in Iraq because they need our failure there to ensure a democratic pres. in the white house --they think.
Nothing will hurt our image and prestige more abroad than to let them say, "We told you so!" That's what the dems seem to want. Astonishing to me that they don't want to DETERMINE to get Iraq on its feet before we leave. Why do they expect instant success like instant everything else in America? --We've got centuries of history behind these people under the yoke of oppression and sectarian rivalries. But they voted! they cheered Sadam's demise! We need to stay there and behave while we are there --and be there in such numbers that we are a successful peace-keeping force. In time, they'll be grateful--as most of them were in the beginning.
Dems haven't really calculated the potential clout of the evangelical, pro-life third of the nation who have yet to find a candidate to back. When they do, the dems don't have a prayer--(I hope.) It won't be a democratic candidate for sure, because Ann Coulter was right --they are "godless" in their ACLU and NEA agendas for porn access, GLSEN (gay sex ed) in schools, rights of criminals, gay marriage and abortion on demand for convenience. (And I've not read her book.)
I also find our stance on the Iraqi's failure to help themselves a little strange --in light of our expressed guilt for going in there in the first place. Doesn't seem to be the right sort of rhetoric coming from those who think we should have been more "diplomatic" in conversation with Iran and No. Korea. Both sides of the aisle have blamed Iraqis for not really getting with the program of rebuilding their nation and providing its defense. Do we want to say that in insulting terms? Even if it's true. And I did hear one of our soldiers say (via his grandmother) that he and his buddies would stay fully dressed and sleep with their guns enroute to a mission with the iraqi army --while the Iraqis got comfortable. I'm thinking that says they trust us more than we trust them --in the middle of the night --with guns.
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 PoliticsinMudville.blogspot.com
"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 couples...as 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 smoking...it'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 smoking...it'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
Arthritis...$13,808,000
Breast and cervical cancer $191,965,000
Diabetes...$61,683,000
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 discrimination...it'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 risk...it'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 foot...you 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.
About the Law, Noah's ARk, WE ARE NOT UNDER THE COVENANT OF OLD TESTAMENT LAW ANYMORE --BUT UNDER GRACE AND THE NEW COVENANT OF THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB. (caps not for screaming but for emphasis.)
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
"Local Toledo Homophome Blasted By Blade Readers"
- from PoliticsinMudville.blogspot.com
"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 couples...as 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 smoking...it'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 smoking...it'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
Arthritis...$13,808,000
Breast and cervical cancer $191,965,000
Diabetes...$61,683,000
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 discrimination...it'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 risk...it'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 foot...you 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.
About the Law, Noah's ARk, WE ARE NOT UNDER THE COVENANT OF OLD TESTAMENT LAW ANYMORE --BUT UNDER GRACE AND THE NEW COVENANT OF THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB. (caps not for screaming but for emphasis.)
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
Thursday, March 29, 2007
A Gay Gene?
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. So far, homosexuals generally are absolutely like heteros in their hormone levels and physical features.
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. So far, homosexuals generally are absolutely like heteros in their hormone levels and physical features.
Blade Writers Blast a Barb on Defense of Gen. Pace about Gays in Military
If I recall, a Bible-believing woman wrote the Blade, published on March 22,2007 and printed here recently, a letter which 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, dorm bedrooms and barracks--with such people. In other words, young ladies shouldn't room with young men 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.
FURTHERMORE...
Letter writers Nicholas Feldt, Barbara Rochelle, and Linda Garrison assert that homosexuality is most surely genetically caused and that the Blade letter writer, 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.
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.
FURTHERMORE...
Letter writers Nicholas Feldt, Barbara Rochelle, and Linda Garrison assert that homosexuality is most surely genetically caused and that the Blade letter writer, 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.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Time Magazine Says TEACH THE BIBLE!
I was thrilled to read the cover article in this week's Time magazine. The Religion editor said all educated people need to know the Bible, that it is, in fact, the most influential book behind Western culture. He recommends it be taught in public schools --which is legal. He admitted there are challenges in trying to teach without either proselytizing --or seeming to sanction protestant Christianity over other faiths. I'm not sure why he thought The Book favored protestants --although much of Catholic tradition does go beyond the protestant version. Perhaps he was referring to a text book on the subject that favored a protestant view of scripture. I also think there is a possibiity that unbelieving teachers will teach their unbelief and skepticism in such a study.
Nevertheless, I have been saying for years that every educated person should know and appreciate The Golden Rule --and know and appreciate Jesus for having stated it. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Likewise with the Ten Commandments and Moses. Likewise with SO MANY of the persons, parables, historical accounts (or stories) --in the Book. Educated people should know the Christmas and Easter stories --instead of looking dumb on Leno's JayWalk. They should know and appreciate the Love chapter written for Christians in Corinth and attributed to St. Paul. "If I have not love, I am a noisy gong...." And the 23rd Psalm, "The Lord is my shepherd..." --and if I were teaching, I admit, I could not resist pointing out after David's 23rd Psalm, that Jesus said, "I am the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep." John 10:11.
The author suggested that even Genesis 1 and 2 should be taught so people would know what it is that "creationists" are purportedly defending in the science wars.
Actually, today's creationists focus a lot on the fact that the theory of Darwinian evolution just doesn't make sense in light of today's knowledge of DNA.
We have so much to lose if we continue to bury The Book to favor every other ism, ology and religion --as in California where students spend more time studying Yoga and Islam than Judeo-Christianity.
Today's secular humanists, post modern folks, are biting the hand that fed the noblest ideas of western civilization, in their hostitility toward The Book, Christianity and Christians, in general.
Nevertheless, I have been saying for years that every educated person should know and appreciate The Golden Rule --and know and appreciate Jesus for having stated it. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Likewise with the Ten Commandments and Moses. Likewise with SO MANY of the persons, parables, historical accounts (or stories) --in the Book. Educated people should know the Christmas and Easter stories --instead of looking dumb on Leno's JayWalk. They should know and appreciate the Love chapter written for Christians in Corinth and attributed to St. Paul. "If I have not love, I am a noisy gong...." And the 23rd Psalm, "The Lord is my shepherd..." --and if I were teaching, I admit, I could not resist pointing out after David's 23rd Psalm, that Jesus said, "I am the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep." John 10:11.
The author suggested that even Genesis 1 and 2 should be taught so people would know what it is that "creationists" are purportedly defending in the science wars.
Actually, today's creationists focus a lot on the fact that the theory of Darwinian evolution just doesn't make sense in light of today's knowledge of DNA.
We have so much to lose if we continue to bury The Book to favor every other ism, ology and religion --as in California where students spend more time studying Yoga and Islam than Judeo-Christianity.
Today's secular humanists, post modern folks, are biting the hand that fed the noblest ideas of western civilization, in their hostitility toward The Book, Christianity and Christians, in general.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Democratic Party Issues
What are the Democratic Party issues for which they want to re-gain the presidency?
They want Judicial, Legistlative and Administrative power
A. to keep abortion legal
B. to gain legal marriage for homosexuals
C. to protect access to porn and sex establishments (as happened here in Toledo with Judge Skow)
D. to promote ACLU, liberal, atheistic values and enforce their view of church-state separation (a naked public square, term from The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in America, a book by Richard John Neuhaus)
E. to promote Planned Parenthood values (liberal, atheistic) in sex education of public schools, and access to and funding for abortions
F. to promote censorship of the Right, especially the Religious Right by casting them as bigots and their Biblical views as hate speech
G. to stifle the grass roots conservative groups (churches) by "campaign finance reform"
WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THEY WILL EMPHASIZE TO REGAIN THE WHITE HOUSE?
A. the war in Iraq --all the dead and wounded there are reason to come home instead of establishing that struggling democracy which millions of Iraqis voted for
and for which they celebrated the downfall of Sadam
B. the myth of the Bush lie (re: WMD in Iraq) --Most EVERYONE believed it, including George, so it was not HIS lie. My understanding is that Sadam did have nuclear aspirations --and did have SOME evidence of WMD in the country, if not as much as expected. He certainly was a kindred soul with bin Ladin in his vindictive intentions toward the U.S. We could expect him to harbor, aid and abet terrorists.
C. their Robin Hood philosophy of steal from the rich to give to the poor via tax schemes that actually hurt the economy through business DISincentives. If you tax people too high, they can't/won't invest, hire or buy.
D. their view of national health insurance for all when we already have more access for citizens' care than any other country in the world. Canada has rationing and Europe has a two tiered system, public and private --because the private-pay care is so much better. If you need EXPENSIVE, HIGH TECH remedies, you are more apt to get it covered here than in Canada or Europe. (Granted we are taking out of plan elective remedies (like plastic surgery) to other countries where they are cheaper.)
E. More money for failing schools instead of vouchers to go to successful schools
HOW WILL THEY TRY TO CO-OPT THE CHRISTIANS?
A. they will use religious language to try to deceive believers into thinking that democrat candidates really do have religious faith --they will focus on the compassion and pacifistic teachings of Christ. They will parade out every Christian liberal they can find and every Gospel choir --and "God Bless America" soloists at their convention.
B. I believe they will downplay the issues of homosex and abortion --but defend them when asked, in compassion terminology of equal rights to all --and women's rights focused on abortion for victims of incest, rape, and life of mother.
They want Judicial, Legistlative and Administrative power
A. to keep abortion legal
B. to gain legal marriage for homosexuals
C. to protect access to porn and sex establishments (as happened here in Toledo with Judge Skow)
D. to promote ACLU, liberal, atheistic values and enforce their view of church-state separation (a naked public square, term from The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in America, a book by Richard John Neuhaus)
E. to promote Planned Parenthood values (liberal, atheistic) in sex education of public schools, and access to and funding for abortions
F. to promote censorship of the Right, especially the Religious Right by casting them as bigots and their Biblical views as hate speech
G. to stifle the grass roots conservative groups (churches) by "campaign finance reform"
WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THEY WILL EMPHASIZE TO REGAIN THE WHITE HOUSE?
A. the war in Iraq --all the dead and wounded there are reason to come home instead of establishing that struggling democracy which millions of Iraqis voted for
and for which they celebrated the downfall of Sadam
B. the myth of the Bush lie (re: WMD in Iraq) --Most EVERYONE believed it, including George, so it was not HIS lie. My understanding is that Sadam did have nuclear aspirations --and did have SOME evidence of WMD in the country, if not as much as expected. He certainly was a kindred soul with bin Ladin in his vindictive intentions toward the U.S. We could expect him to harbor, aid and abet terrorists.
C. their Robin Hood philosophy of steal from the rich to give to the poor via tax schemes that actually hurt the economy through business DISincentives. If you tax people too high, they can't/won't invest, hire or buy.
D. their view of national health insurance for all when we already have more access for citizens' care than any other country in the world. Canada has rationing and Europe has a two tiered system, public and private --because the private-pay care is so much better. If you need EXPENSIVE, HIGH TECH remedies, you are more apt to get it covered here than in Canada or Europe. (Granted we are taking out of plan elective remedies (like plastic surgery) to other countries where they are cheaper.)
E. More money for failing schools instead of vouchers to go to successful schools
HOW WILL THEY TRY TO CO-OPT THE CHRISTIANS?
A. they will use religious language to try to deceive believers into thinking that democrat candidates really do have religious faith --they will focus on the compassion and pacifistic teachings of Christ. They will parade out every Christian liberal they can find and every Gospel choir --and "God Bless America" soloists at their convention.
B. I believe they will downplay the issues of homosex and abortion --but defend them when asked, in compassion terminology of equal rights to all --and women's rights focused on abortion for victims of incest, rape, and life of mother.
REiteration --America IS Behaving Badly About This War
People are being short-sighted, lacking wisdom, if they think they are protecting the troops by calling them home.
Terrorists will especially target our boys and girls in uniform, knowing Americans have no stomach for it --and knowing that's what makes our democrats want to pull them home. Remember the leader of the Viet Cong--he said they were just hanging on by a thread --but knew if they could just hang on a little longer, the Americans would quit, judging by the success of the anti-war movement in our country. Americans would and did win the war for the Viet Cong by giving up. We wasted the lives of our war dead by not winning!
It is our ability to identify with troops and their parents, our Judeo-Christian compassion and empathy for the families of the fallen soldiers --and for war-torn nations-- that makes us want to end all wars --a righteous desire --but these troops went into the military knowing there was a risk, knowing that freedom for any nation would not be free. Unlike the drafted soldiers of the Viet Nam conflict, these troops have had surprisingly great attitudes despite their injuries and fallen comrades, wanting to get back to their units as soon as their wounds heal.
I'd want my kid out of there, also --but I'd prefer that America looked like such a united and formidable foe that the terrorists would lay low in Iraq --go home --and that the Iraqi insurgents who stepped up the terror to MAKE us cut and run --would see it was futile.
Instead, the Pelosis of Congress are making our troops more vulnerable than they already are --and more vulnerable than necessary. The cross hairs are on our boys JUST because THAT's what makes us want to pull them home.
Terrorists will especially target our boys and girls in uniform, knowing Americans have no stomach for it --and knowing that's what makes our democrats want to pull them home. Remember the leader of the Viet Cong--he said they were just hanging on by a thread --but knew if they could just hang on a little longer, the Americans would quit, judging by the success of the anti-war movement in our country. Americans would and did win the war for the Viet Cong by giving up. We wasted the lives of our war dead by not winning!
It is our ability to identify with troops and their parents, our Judeo-Christian compassion and empathy for the families of the fallen soldiers --and for war-torn nations-- that makes us want to end all wars --a righteous desire --but these troops went into the military knowing there was a risk, knowing that freedom for any nation would not be free. Unlike the drafted soldiers of the Viet Nam conflict, these troops have had surprisingly great attitudes despite their injuries and fallen comrades, wanting to get back to their units as soon as their wounds heal.
I'd want my kid out of there, also --but I'd prefer that America looked like such a united and formidable foe that the terrorists would lay low in Iraq --go home --and that the Iraqi insurgents who stepped up the terror to MAKE us cut and run --would see it was futile.
Instead, the Pelosis of Congress are making our troops more vulnerable than they already are --and more vulnerable than necessary. The cross hairs are on our boys JUST because THAT's what makes us want to pull them home.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
War Mythology
Myths --
that we just went to Iraq for their oil.
that we just went there because Sadam threatened to kill Bush's father.
that the pres. lied when he said we were going because they had WMD (everybody thought they did! They gave us no reason to think otherwise by their behaviors re: inspections --and toward the Kurds earlier.)
Personally, I don't mind if we go to war to keep the middle east oil available to us, because I'm not sure how we could defend ourselves in the short run against terrorism without the oil. Our lives would be very different if we suddenly had only our own oil sources, I bet. We had better be rectifying our dependence on foreign oil.
Doesn't the Constitution of the U.S. say the primary responsibility of fed. gov't is national security? Opening the Middle East to the West is part of that strategy.
I'll bet they are being opened up to Christianity and the Bible also --and Christians can thank Geo. Bush for that. Christianity is the light of western civilization --the difference between the bararian hoardes and the civilized folks.
Any body who thinks we don't have a long road ahead of us re; the middle east--IS believing in mythology.
that we just went to Iraq for their oil.
that we just went there because Sadam threatened to kill Bush's father.
that the pres. lied when he said we were going because they had WMD (everybody thought they did! They gave us no reason to think otherwise by their behaviors re: inspections --and toward the Kurds earlier.)
Personally, I don't mind if we go to war to keep the middle east oil available to us, because I'm not sure how we could defend ourselves in the short run against terrorism without the oil. Our lives would be very different if we suddenly had only our own oil sources, I bet. We had better be rectifying our dependence on foreign oil.
Doesn't the Constitution of the U.S. say the primary responsibility of fed. gov't is national security? Opening the Middle East to the West is part of that strategy.
I'll bet they are being opened up to Christianity and the Bible also --and Christians can thank Geo. Bush for that. Christianity is the light of western civilization --the difference between the bararian hoardes and the civilized folks.
Any body who thinks we don't have a long road ahead of us re; the middle east--IS believing in mythology.
An example of Hate Speech which Incites
A local Toledo blog rightly objected to a Kansas church that pickets military funerals to make a political statement --a statement that
God is punishing america for her homosexuality by allowing our troops to die.
Then he said:
"There have been many posts on this blog by such a skewed-thinking evangelical. Folks like that are dangerous to our society as well as to our democracy. They are in the same category as the Taliban of Afghanistan or the 'religious' authorities in Iran."
This really is "hate speech" that would incite violence toward evangelicals like me --far more dangerous than anything I have ever said.
People can disagree and say, "NO, you're wrong!" or "I disagree and here's why, " on any topic --without it being "hate speech." But when you call Geo. Bush a Nazi, and call evangelicals the Taliban or Iranian religious authorities, you are suggesting, however subtly, that it's ok to hate them, wage war against them, in fact, to do away with them because they would kill you first and deprive you of your liberty --(like the Nazis, Taliban or Iranian leadership.)
Just because people disagree about what is right or wrong, doesn't give us license to hate either side.
American politics needs to get back on a high road of cordiality and respect for differing views.
God is punishing america for her homosexuality by allowing our troops to die.
Then he said:
"There have been many posts on this blog by such a skewed-thinking evangelical. Folks like that are dangerous to our society as well as to our democracy. They are in the same category as the Taliban of Afghanistan or the 'religious' authorities in Iran."
This really is "hate speech" that would incite violence toward evangelicals like me --far more dangerous than anything I have ever said.
People can disagree and say, "NO, you're wrong!" or "I disagree and here's why, " on any topic --without it being "hate speech." But when you call Geo. Bush a Nazi, and call evangelicals the Taliban or Iranian religious authorities, you are suggesting, however subtly, that it's ok to hate them, wage war against them, in fact, to do away with them because they would kill you first and deprive you of your liberty --(like the Nazis, Taliban or Iranian leadership.)
Just because people disagree about what is right or wrong, doesn't give us license to hate either side.
American politics needs to get back on a high road of cordiality and respect for differing views.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
HOW THE DEMS ARE HURTING THE TROOPS
Democrats are IN EFFECT telling the insurgents/terrorists in Iraq that the best way to get the U.S. out of Iraq is to kill our troops.
Doesn't it stand to reason that enemy combatants will do all they can to scare us out of Iraq --to make our country FEAR what they can do to our troops --so we will pull out? They know that if we wanted to wipe Iraq off the map we could. They know if we increase troop strength and protection for our troops, we can probably prevail and establish a peaceful situation --long enough to let the Iraqi people taste peace and establish democracy.
Democrats, instead, are being VERY foolish, telling the enemy that "If you kill more of our boys, we will get scared and leave! We don't have the stomach for a protracted effort, so just give it all you got and we'll go home sooner, not later! And we'll apologize on the way out!"
HOW DUMB CAN WE BE????!!!!!
Doesn't it stand to reason that enemy combatants will do all they can to scare us out of Iraq --to make our country FEAR what they can do to our troops --so we will pull out? They know that if we wanted to wipe Iraq off the map we could. They know if we increase troop strength and protection for our troops, we can probably prevail and establish a peaceful situation --long enough to let the Iraqi people taste peace and establish democracy.
Democrats, instead, are being VERY foolish, telling the enemy that "If you kill more of our boys, we will get scared and leave! We don't have the stomach for a protracted effort, so just give it all you got and we'll go home sooner, not later! And we'll apologize on the way out!"
HOW DUMB CAN WE BE????!!!!!
More Reporting by Gay Couples --or More Gay Couples???
By KARAMAGI RUJUMBA
BLADE STAFF WRITER
Not only are Ohioans increasingly identifying their same-sex relationship status, but so are gay, lesbian, and bisexual couples in the Midwest and other parts of the country, according to a study by the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at the University of California at Los Angeles' school of law.
The study says Ohio had a 62 percent growth in the number of people who said they were in same-sex relationships between 2000 and 2005, from 18,937 couples in the 2000 census to 30,669 couples in last year's American Community Survey. Michigan had a 48 percent increase from 15,368 in 2000 to 22,701 in 2005.
And the number of the nation's same-sex couples grew by more than 30 percent from nearly 600,000 couples in 2000 to almost 777,000 in 2005, said Gary Gates, a senior research fellow at the institute. His study, "Same Sex Couples and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Population: New Estimates from the American Community Survey," is based on an analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2005 American Community Survey and the 2000 population census.
But unlike an official Census count, its community survey is based on a sampling of households and does not count people in "group quarters" - college students, inmates, and patients in long-term care facilities.____________________________________________
The article goes on to say that couples are "coming out" because of a reduction of stigma --but also as a means of rebutting the ban on gay marriage --(which would seem to be MORE stigma, not less.)
Are more people "coming out" as the article asserts --or are more participating in homosexual co-habitation? I suspect it's both. The article doesn't mention if the report tells the ages of the individuals or how long these couples have been together. That would be interesting.
Even the first gay couple who "married" in Mass. stated they didn't think marriage meant monogamy in their case. So what's it all about? Family Research Institute finds that gay couples are usually not stable. Not that hetero relationships are doing so well. However, heteros don't tend to stay together if infidelity occurs; gay relationships may actually have more tolerance for promiscuity --since that's the nature of the culture for the men, especially. Not that the high profile lesbians are doing any better than their hetero counterparts in Hollywood. If Rosie O Donnel, the "queen of mean," gets any more nasty or manly, one wonders if her "wife" will stay around much longer.
I find the stats alarming, but not surprising. We are repeating the sins of Sodom and Gommorrah. The Bible is clear. God has spoken. He said he vomited the pagans out of the land because of their sexual sins and forbade the Jews, His people, to commit such sins. God created female for male, in HIS image --to become one flesh. Jesus said a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. And St. Paul was very clear that homosexuality was displeasing to God (Romans 1:18-32).
There is also a bible verse that says some Christians were "once homosexuals" --and others did other sins --but are doing so no more --suggesting that people can stop being homosexuals.
I'll have to pull up the Bible references --later.
BLADE STAFF WRITER
Not only are Ohioans increasingly identifying their same-sex relationship status, but so are gay, lesbian, and bisexual couples in the Midwest and other parts of the country, according to a study by the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at the University of California at Los Angeles' school of law.
The study says Ohio had a 62 percent growth in the number of people who said they were in same-sex relationships between 2000 and 2005, from 18,937 couples in the 2000 census to 30,669 couples in last year's American Community Survey. Michigan had a 48 percent increase from 15,368 in 2000 to 22,701 in 2005.
And the number of the nation's same-sex couples grew by more than 30 percent from nearly 600,000 couples in 2000 to almost 777,000 in 2005, said Gary Gates, a senior research fellow at the institute. His study, "Same Sex Couples and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Population: New Estimates from the American Community Survey," is based on an analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2005 American Community Survey and the 2000 population census.
But unlike an official Census count, its community survey is based on a sampling of households and does not count people in "group quarters" - college students, inmates, and patients in long-term care facilities.____________________________________________
The article goes on to say that couples are "coming out" because of a reduction of stigma --but also as a means of rebutting the ban on gay marriage --(which would seem to be MORE stigma, not less.)
Are more people "coming out" as the article asserts --or are more participating in homosexual co-habitation? I suspect it's both. The article doesn't mention if the report tells the ages of the individuals or how long these couples have been together. That would be interesting.
Even the first gay couple who "married" in Mass. stated they didn't think marriage meant monogamy in their case. So what's it all about? Family Research Institute finds that gay couples are usually not stable. Not that hetero relationships are doing so well. However, heteros don't tend to stay together if infidelity occurs; gay relationships may actually have more tolerance for promiscuity --since that's the nature of the culture for the men, especially. Not that the high profile lesbians are doing any better than their hetero counterparts in Hollywood. If Rosie O Donnel, the "queen of mean," gets any more nasty or manly, one wonders if her "wife" will stay around much longer.
I find the stats alarming, but not surprising. We are repeating the sins of Sodom and Gommorrah. The Bible is clear. God has spoken. He said he vomited the pagans out of the land because of their sexual sins and forbade the Jews, His people, to commit such sins. God created female for male, in HIS image --to become one flesh. Jesus said a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. And St. Paul was very clear that homosexuality was displeasing to God (Romans 1:18-32).
There is also a bible verse that says some Christians were "once homosexuals" --and others did other sins --but are doing so no more --suggesting that people can stop being homosexuals.
I'll have to pull up the Bible references --later.
Friday, March 23, 2007
George and Jesus
It was a bold statement for Bush to admit to a skeptical world when he was Governor planning to run for presidency, that Jesus was his most admired person because Christ had changed his heart --that's what he said.
I'm glad for a leader who prays and seeks wisdom from God who IS real --who has guided His followers for thousands of years.
Jesus said, "I and the father are one. If you've seen ME, you have seen the Father." He did the miracles; He rose from the grave. He converted Paul who never met him --who was CHIEF SKEPTIC --absolutely SURE like atheists that Jesus was not a divine miracle-worker but more like a snake oil salesman --until Paul had his own Damascus Road experience in Acts Ch. 9.
The story of Jesus involves too many people to be made up by so many different journalists. Jesus changed Paul, assassinator of Christians, and he changed the world! and Easter celebrates again --He is Risen! He is Risen, Indeed!
We should be more appreciative of Bush, a good man of prayer who controls himself and his libido in the presidency --and fully concentrates on affairs of state --instead of having his own affairs for top priority. It's a shame how the democrats want to nitpick over Bush underlings who haven't always had their mouths under control. Bush may not be eloquent, but he hasn't yet been accused of malicious intent and desire to destroy the careers of Plame or the fired attorneys--whereas his predecessor did all he could to smear his accusers in the press --and did goodness knows what blackmail with his illegal access to FBI files.
Loose lips of Bush's staff (as in the Plame case)have been a problem only because democrats are desperate for anything to give them an excuse to impeach, and keep us all focused on subpoenas, firings, etc.
I'm glad for a leader who prays and seeks wisdom from God who IS real --who has guided His followers for thousands of years.
Jesus said, "I and the father are one. If you've seen ME, you have seen the Father." He did the miracles; He rose from the grave. He converted Paul who never met him --who was CHIEF SKEPTIC --absolutely SURE like atheists that Jesus was not a divine miracle-worker but more like a snake oil salesman --until Paul had his own Damascus Road experience in Acts Ch. 9.
The story of Jesus involves too many people to be made up by so many different journalists. Jesus changed Paul, assassinator of Christians, and he changed the world! and Easter celebrates again --He is Risen! He is Risen, Indeed!
We should be more appreciative of Bush, a good man of prayer who controls himself and his libido in the presidency --and fully concentrates on affairs of state --instead of having his own affairs for top priority. It's a shame how the democrats want to nitpick over Bush underlings who haven't always had their mouths under control. Bush may not be eloquent, but he hasn't yet been accused of malicious intent and desire to destroy the careers of Plame or the fired attorneys--whereas his predecessor did all he could to smear his accusers in the press --and did goodness knows what blackmail with his illegal access to FBI files.
Loose lips of Bush's staff (as in the Plame case)have been a problem only because democrats are desperate for anything to give them an excuse to impeach, and keep us all focused on subpoenas, firings, etc.
Tragedy in Detroit --Real Christians Don't Murder
Associated Press
DETROIT - Andrew Anthos died Friday of injuries sustained during an attack last week outside his downtown Detroit apartment building. Family members said he was a victim of an anti-gay hate crime.
Anthos was on a city bus Feb. 13 when a man asked him if he was gay. The man followed Anthos off the bus at the stop in front of his building and beat him with a metal pipe. Anthos, whose family said he was gay, was taken to a hospital and later fell into a coma.
Local and national gay rights groups condemned the attack. Police told The Detroit News in story published Friday that the department was investigating whether the attack was a hate crime.
Police have no witnesses and only a vague description of the attacker from Anthos.''Obviously we're very, very distressed for Andrew's family,'' said Jeffrey Montgomery, executive director of the Triangle Foundation, a statewide gay rights advocacy group based in Detroit. ''But what the crime really is evidence of is the risk with which gay people live their lives every day.''
The Detroit News says:
Andrew Anthos was a private, gentle man whose twin passions to support military veterans and public transportation earned him a reputation for community service.
___________________________
NOtice what Liberal Democrat at Politics in Mudville had to say about this and whom he blames:
Michigan does not have a hate crime law. Interesting. One wonders why.
Just yesterday there was a letter to the editor in The Blade written by an oh-so righteous fundamentalist who makes it a habit to bash gays. Frequent visitors to my blog would recognize her name. Letters like this bolster the delusional homophobic in our society . Because of this, the murderer of Andrew Anthos felt 'justified' in his actions. After all, Anthos's lifestyle was 'against god' and he deserved to die.
Theocracy.
_________________________________________
MY RESPONSE:
This is a tragedy but not so uncommon for downtown Detroit --especially if it was late at night.
No one should blame the Bible or the believers for what happened to Anthos. He lived in downtown Detroit and was on a city bus, for goo'ness sake! He wasn't killed by anyone who just came from church--unless the killer were insane. Because we believers are taught to love sinners but not the sin. We don't believe God wants us to murder anyone, not even babes in the womb.
Just as Matt Shepard's killers were not Christian, neither was Anthos' killer.
The only philosophy that CAN restrain violent forces in our society are the teachings of Jesus --who also said men should leave parents and cleave to their wives. Haters killed Him, too.
The haters/killers of this sort are most likely the irreligious who can't tolerate any differences from the norm ; they despise Christians, too. The most radical Muslims could have done it because they think killing Christians or gays is honorable in Allah's sight. "Kill the infidel." But Christianity does not justify such murder at all --contrary to what LD wrote.
I went to h.s. with some of the irreligious who were mean, petty, cruel, vindictive, haters for no reason. They aren't worried about what the Christian, Biblical God thinks or they wouldn't murder or abuse, verbally and otherwise.
Someone mentally ill would kill gays for the same reason a serial killer murders prostitutes. No good reason. The insane may see them as tempting-to-them deviates of society instead of as people God loves, for whom Christ died.
Liberals need to stop blaming the Christians, their Bible and pulpit, for what could've even been gay on gay crime. Like Afr.American people who call each other the "N" word, so it is that gays can kill each other calling each other insulting names. I'm not saying this WAS gay on gay crime --but whoever the murderer was, he wasn't a true Jesus follower who did the crime. MOre likely an insane person if he acted alone as the victim believed.
I feel very sorry for this kindly man who cared for our veterans.
____________________________
AS for Michigan not having a hate crime law.
No crime comes from godly love. All murders should be prosecuted severely.
Is it really worse to kill someone for racial or sexual orientation reasons--than to murder your wife or your neighbor for OTHER reasons? I think not. I have never understand why the law needs to make a distinction. Murder is murder.
DETROIT - Andrew Anthos died Friday of injuries sustained during an attack last week outside his downtown Detroit apartment building. Family members said he was a victim of an anti-gay hate crime.
Anthos was on a city bus Feb. 13 when a man asked him if he was gay. The man followed Anthos off the bus at the stop in front of his building and beat him with a metal pipe. Anthos, whose family said he was gay, was taken to a hospital and later fell into a coma.
Local and national gay rights groups condemned the attack. Police told The Detroit News in story published Friday that the department was investigating whether the attack was a hate crime.
Police have no witnesses and only a vague description of the attacker from Anthos.''Obviously we're very, very distressed for Andrew's family,'' said Jeffrey Montgomery, executive director of the Triangle Foundation, a statewide gay rights advocacy group based in Detroit. ''But what the crime really is evidence of is the risk with which gay people live their lives every day.''
The Detroit News says:
Andrew Anthos was a private, gentle man whose twin passions to support military veterans and public transportation earned him a reputation for community service.
___________________________
NOtice what Liberal Democrat at Politics in Mudville had to say about this and whom he blames:
Michigan does not have a hate crime law. Interesting. One wonders why.
Just yesterday there was a letter to the editor in The Blade written by an oh-so righteous fundamentalist who makes it a habit to bash gays. Frequent visitors to my blog would recognize her name. Letters like this bolster the delusional homophobic in our society . Because of this, the murderer of Andrew Anthos felt 'justified' in his actions. After all, Anthos's lifestyle was 'against god' and he deserved to die.
Theocracy.
_________________________________________
MY RESPONSE:
This is a tragedy but not so uncommon for downtown Detroit --especially if it was late at night.
No one should blame the Bible or the believers for what happened to Anthos. He lived in downtown Detroit and was on a city bus, for goo'ness sake! He wasn't killed by anyone who just came from church--unless the killer were insane. Because we believers are taught to love sinners but not the sin. We don't believe God wants us to murder anyone, not even babes in the womb.
Just as Matt Shepard's killers were not Christian, neither was Anthos' killer.
The only philosophy that CAN restrain violent forces in our society are the teachings of Jesus --who also said men should leave parents and cleave to their wives. Haters killed Him, too.
The haters/killers of this sort are most likely the irreligious who can't tolerate any differences from the norm ; they despise Christians, too. The most radical Muslims could have done it because they think killing Christians or gays is honorable in Allah's sight. "Kill the infidel." But Christianity does not justify such murder at all --contrary to what LD wrote.
I went to h.s. with some of the irreligious who were mean, petty, cruel, vindictive, haters for no reason. They aren't worried about what the Christian, Biblical God thinks or they wouldn't murder or abuse, verbally and otherwise.
Someone mentally ill would kill gays for the same reason a serial killer murders prostitutes. No good reason. The insane may see them as tempting-to-them deviates of society instead of as people God loves, for whom Christ died.
Liberals need to stop blaming the Christians, their Bible and pulpit, for what could've even been gay on gay crime. Like Afr.American people who call each other the "N" word, so it is that gays can kill each other calling each other insulting names. I'm not saying this WAS gay on gay crime --but whoever the murderer was, he wasn't a true Jesus follower who did the crime. MOre likely an insane person if he acted alone as the victim believed.
I feel very sorry for this kindly man who cared for our veterans.
____________________________
AS for Michigan not having a hate crime law.
No crime comes from godly love. All murders should be prosecuted severely.
Is it really worse to kill someone for racial or sexual orientation reasons--than to murder your wife or your neighbor for OTHER reasons? I think not. I have never understand why the law needs to make a distinction. Murder is murder.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
General Pace, Stick to Your Guns!
General Pace spoke for millions worldwide when he said homosexual acts are immoral like adultery. Why? Because both are temptations that ought to be resisted at the first thought. Moral people flee temptation. (No, Oprah and Montel, homosexuality is not genetic or inevitable.)
I read in People magazine that 16 universities offer co-ed dorm rooms and anyone may sign up for them –not just dating couples, but strangers. Some rooms practically have revolving doors with people frequently changing roommates for current girl/boyfriends. This is as crazy as the co-ed bathroom phenomenon.
We who object to co-ed rooms in colleges also object to out-of-closet Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Transgenders in barracks and military bathrooms. It IS simply immoral to put unmarried people of opposite attraction together in intimate quarters.
Just as a moral and responsible father wouldn’t want his daughter to share a dorm room with a man who would naturally and likely be tempted to jump into bed with her; he also wouldn’t want his son to have to share quarters with anyone (male or female) who is tempted to jump into bed with him.
So why not let the GLBT’s all room together in the military? Because they are sexually attracted and tempted by each other, of course. IT’S UNNATURAL to expect to throw attracted young people together in intimate quarters without an eventual breach in moral conduct.
With that breach comes tremendous risk for emotional trauma, pregnancy, disease, jealousy, fights, break-ups, infidelity to spouses and sweethearts back home –all the traditional harms of immorality—not conducive to troop morale and cohesiveness.
General Pace should stick by his guns –and the liberal media should GET REAL and withdraw theirs.
I read in People magazine that 16 universities offer co-ed dorm rooms and anyone may sign up for them –not just dating couples, but strangers. Some rooms practically have revolving doors with people frequently changing roommates for current girl/boyfriends. This is as crazy as the co-ed bathroom phenomenon.
We who object to co-ed rooms in colleges also object to out-of-closet Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Transgenders in barracks and military bathrooms. It IS simply immoral to put unmarried people of opposite attraction together in intimate quarters.
Just as a moral and responsible father wouldn’t want his daughter to share a dorm room with a man who would naturally and likely be tempted to jump into bed with her; he also wouldn’t want his son to have to share quarters with anyone (male or female) who is tempted to jump into bed with him.
So why not let the GLBT’s all room together in the military? Because they are sexually attracted and tempted by each other, of course. IT’S UNNATURAL to expect to throw attracted young people together in intimate quarters without an eventual breach in moral conduct.
With that breach comes tremendous risk for emotional trauma, pregnancy, disease, jealousy, fights, break-ups, infidelity to spouses and sweethearts back home –all the traditional harms of immorality—not conducive to troop morale and cohesiveness.
General Pace should stick by his guns –and the liberal media should GET REAL and withdraw theirs.
LD FEATURED MY COMMENT! What a humanitarian!
Answering in your own style of rhetoric: you are full of it, LD, and it's filled up your ears and blinded your eyes. (I only say this because you posted excrement on my previous comments.) (LD is Liberal Democrat of PoliticsinMudville.blogspot.com)
Thanks for posting a post of mine that would resonate with right-thinking folks. Once again, no rebuttal of ideas from you and your friends, just scorn and insult from your dark rooms. (I only say this because you said I came from a dark place without light.)
I suppose anyone who would agree with me in their comments will not be posted --not that right-thinking folks follow your blog as much as I do. Most people can't stand exercises in futility.
As for the death of Matt Sheppard, I understand that was less for hate than an intention to rob? until Matt made a sexual approach to one of them? No excuse for the killers. (Actually any murder stems from hatred and is a hate crime.)
I do not approve the fundamentalist preacher who picketed at Matt's funeral --any more than you should approve those whack jobs like Cindy S. who picket against the war at the military funerals.
However, what do you say about the two gay fellows who sodomized an 11 year old boy to his death about the same time as the Sheppard incident and got comparatively little publicity or indignation in mainstream press? People on either side of the orientation aisle can murder and do --like John Wayne Gacy, Dahmer, and most of the really prolific serial killers --who were more often gay than not --by the data. I believe the facts will show that gays are more often murdered by gays than by straights.
As for freedom of ideas, I wouldn't suppress your speech nor be as discourteous as you.
As for Microdot and the ego charge, I have no bigger ego than you guys. You wouldn't like my views (or me) any more if I demonstrated low self-esteem. You hate that I am confident in what I say. but aren't you? Maybe not --maybe that's why the rebuttal is so pitiful to non-existant -resorting to censorship.
Half a bubble off center, micro? see? that's how you see people who merely disagree with you and want to tell you so, who only email you because the forum is closed where your insults and misinfo are posted, whereas your email is not.
If only the sunni and shia confined their battles to email and verbal exchange. The danger to censorship is that there IS no verbal exchange --only hatred nad misunderstanding and false accusation --eventually erupting in violence. Don't worry --not from my side of the aisle. It's when you want to shut the other side up, rather than respectfully competing in free exchange of thoughts and ideas, that your ideological side of the aisle may become dangerous to the other.
So again, I do appreciate the privilege of being posted on your blog.
As for UPtheFlag's post about the military chaplains. I believe the freedom has been restored for Christian chaplains to preach the Bible at Christian memorial services, etc. --and to pray in Jesus' name. And for those of other faiths to pray and preach according to their beliefs. The question now is to restore the position of Chaplain Klingenschmidt who said in a prayer that this young dead Christian soldier was in Heaven today because the Bible says those who believe in the Son go to Heaven and those who do not believe in Him will perish. The CO got him court martialed --because "his feelings were hurt" by Christian scripture since he was not a believer in Christ.
I wouldn't recommend that Christian chaplains badger anyone who is suffering with the negative and the Hellfire verses. It would be better to stress the love of God, Christ's resurrection, and His offer of salvation for all who repent of sin and believe that He is the Son of God. We don't have to spell out the consequence --we KNOW that death itself is ugly and sure without hope of Heaven. The question is, can any religion authoritatively promise an escape from death? a 2nd chance at life? Only the man who came back from the grave --according to the eyewitnesses who started a major world religion on that premise --who had their lives to lose for proclaiming it --but were willing to die because they had seen a risen Jesus.
It's a shame that UPtheFlag won't hear the truth of this matter on the chaplain due to the censorship by her father --but she probably wouldn't benefit from the truth anyway since she seems to suffer congenital sensory deprivation.
Scorn and hatred for God-believers and Christians has been going on since the beginning --since Elijah's demonstration of the power of God on a firey altar after Jezebel had killed all the prophets of Israel except Elijah--since Jesus did His miracles and rode into Jerusalem on a donkey and was hailed as King and thereafter crucified for what He did and said --no crimes--since Paul went to the Jews and other God-believers in Antioch and was kicked out of town at his second meeting which had drawn out the whole city like a Billy Graham crusade. He was one who had hated the Christians --until the resurrected Jesus blinded him on the Road to Damascus.
Paul said to the angry ones, "Don't you want to have eternal life???" It's the same question today. And many believe --but many do not --to their loss. (This story is found in Acts 13. Later, some of these from Antioch stoned Paul and thought they had killed him. It was at Antioch where believers established a church and were first called "christians.")
"Narrow is the way that leads to life and few there be who find it."
Nothing would please me more than to meet you all and love you all in Heaven --to hear that you eventually decided the Bible was true --and realized God loved you so much that He gave His only begotten son --that whosoever believeth in Him will not perish but have everlasting life."
Yes, I do have an agenda. And it's not for my ego. After all, who really chooses to be scorned? Not me.
Thanks for posting a post of mine that would resonate with right-thinking folks. Once again, no rebuttal of ideas from you and your friends, just scorn and insult from your dark rooms. (I only say this because you said I came from a dark place without light.)
I suppose anyone who would agree with me in their comments will not be posted --not that right-thinking folks follow your blog as much as I do. Most people can't stand exercises in futility.
As for the death of Matt Sheppard, I understand that was less for hate than an intention to rob? until Matt made a sexual approach to one of them? No excuse for the killers. (Actually any murder stems from hatred and is a hate crime.)
I do not approve the fundamentalist preacher who picketed at Matt's funeral --any more than you should approve those whack jobs like Cindy S. who picket against the war at the military funerals.
However, what do you say about the two gay fellows who sodomized an 11 year old boy to his death about the same time as the Sheppard incident and got comparatively little publicity or indignation in mainstream press? People on either side of the orientation aisle can murder and do --like John Wayne Gacy, Dahmer, and most of the really prolific serial killers --who were more often gay than not --by the data. I believe the facts will show that gays are more often murdered by gays than by straights.
As for freedom of ideas, I wouldn't suppress your speech nor be as discourteous as you.
As for Microdot and the ego charge, I have no bigger ego than you guys. You wouldn't like my views (or me) any more if I demonstrated low self-esteem. You hate that I am confident in what I say. but aren't you? Maybe not --maybe that's why the rebuttal is so pitiful to non-existant -resorting to censorship.
Half a bubble off center, micro? see? that's how you see people who merely disagree with you and want to tell you so, who only email you because the forum is closed where your insults and misinfo are posted, whereas your email is not.
If only the sunni and shia confined their battles to email and verbal exchange. The danger to censorship is that there IS no verbal exchange --only hatred nad misunderstanding and false accusation --eventually erupting in violence. Don't worry --not from my side of the aisle. It's when you want to shut the other side up, rather than respectfully competing in free exchange of thoughts and ideas, that your ideological side of the aisle may become dangerous to the other.
So again, I do appreciate the privilege of being posted on your blog.
As for UPtheFlag's post about the military chaplains. I believe the freedom has been restored for Christian chaplains to preach the Bible at Christian memorial services, etc. --and to pray in Jesus' name. And for those of other faiths to pray and preach according to their beliefs. The question now is to restore the position of Chaplain Klingenschmidt who said in a prayer that this young dead Christian soldier was in Heaven today because the Bible says those who believe in the Son go to Heaven and those who do not believe in Him will perish. The CO got him court martialed --because "his feelings were hurt" by Christian scripture since he was not a believer in Christ.
I wouldn't recommend that Christian chaplains badger anyone who is suffering with the negative and the Hellfire verses. It would be better to stress the love of God, Christ's resurrection, and His offer of salvation for all who repent of sin and believe that He is the Son of God. We don't have to spell out the consequence --we KNOW that death itself is ugly and sure without hope of Heaven. The question is, can any religion authoritatively promise an escape from death? a 2nd chance at life? Only the man who came back from the grave --according to the eyewitnesses who started a major world religion on that premise --who had their lives to lose for proclaiming it --but were willing to die because they had seen a risen Jesus.
It's a shame that UPtheFlag won't hear the truth of this matter on the chaplain due to the censorship by her father --but she probably wouldn't benefit from the truth anyway since she seems to suffer congenital sensory deprivation.
Scorn and hatred for God-believers and Christians has been going on since the beginning --since Elijah's demonstration of the power of God on a firey altar after Jezebel had killed all the prophets of Israel except Elijah--since Jesus did His miracles and rode into Jerusalem on a donkey and was hailed as King and thereafter crucified for what He did and said --no crimes--since Paul went to the Jews and other God-believers in Antioch and was kicked out of town at his second meeting which had drawn out the whole city like a Billy Graham crusade. He was one who had hated the Christians --until the resurrected Jesus blinded him on the Road to Damascus.
Paul said to the angry ones, "Don't you want to have eternal life???" It's the same question today. And many believe --but many do not --to their loss. (This story is found in Acts 13. Later, some of these from Antioch stoned Paul and thought they had killed him. It was at Antioch where believers established a church and were first called "christians.")
"Narrow is the way that leads to life and few there be who find it."
Nothing would please me more than to meet you all and love you all in Heaven --to hear that you eventually decided the Bible was true --and realized God loved you so much that He gave His only begotten son --that whosoever believeth in Him will not perish but have everlasting life."
Yes, I do have an agenda. And it's not for my ego. After all, who really chooses to be scorned? Not me.
Holy Week Services
The church I attend will commemorate Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem –when the Jews came out and hailed him as king –on Palm Sunday –hopefully with exciting music –and Good Friday will be a candlelight service remembering his sacrifice on the cross for all people, again with lovely music –and Easter Sunday will be the celebration of Christ’s resurrection—and His promise that “because I live, you shall live also.” If this is true, you would certainly want to know!
Our services are Palm Sunday, April 1, 10:40 AM and Easter on April 8, 10:40 AM—and Good Friday at 7:00 PM –at the Holland Free Methodist Church at 6605 Angola road –right behind Spring Meadows.
Our services are Palm Sunday, April 1, 10:40 AM and Easter on April 8, 10:40 AM—and Good Friday at 7:00 PM –at the Holland Free Methodist Church at 6605 Angola road –right behind Spring Meadows.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
About the Attorney General's Firings and Bush Response; Democrats Much Ado about Nothing
If you were a CEO, would you want all your inter-office memos and emails published? I think not. You want to be able to fire somebody and say so because you think he's an idiot --or inept--or because you want to put someone else in there --which is the prerogative of the president and the AG. Didn't someone say that Janet Reno fired all 93 attorneys? What's the Dems' problems with firing 8?
If the problem is that the AG unwisely said they were fired for performance lack, let's remember TRAVELGATE --when Hillary fired career employees at the White House travel office (not political appointees) on trumped-up charges of ineptitude --so she could hire friends from Arkansas. And she got away with that!
Democrats in congress should bive Bush the same breaks they'd give their own party!
This is what we can expect from the dems all the way to the election--constant nit-picking and media mongering to imply great evil in high places --which is really much ado about nothing.
If the problem is that the AG unwisely said they were fired for performance lack, let's remember TRAVELGATE --when Hillary fired career employees at the White House travel office (not political appointees) on trumped-up charges of ineptitude --so she could hire friends from Arkansas. And she got away with that!
Democrats in congress should bive Bush the same breaks they'd give their own party!
This is what we can expect from the dems all the way to the election--constant nit-picking and media mongering to imply great evil in high places --which is really much ado about nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
