Friday, July 25, 2008

In a slap in the face to the honorable gay and lesbian men and women who serve this country, a loony right wing activist attacked gay service members in front of the House Armed Services personnel committee.

The nut job, Elaine Donnelly, warned of "transgenders in the military." She warned that lesbians would take pictures of people in the shower. She spoke ominously of gays spreading "HIV positivity" through the ranks.

"We're talking about real consequences for real people," Donnelly proclaimed. Her written statement added warnings about "inappropriate passive/aggressive actions common in the homosexual community," the prospects of "forcible sodomy" and "exotic forms of sexual expression," and the case of "a group of black lesbians who decided to gang-assault" a fellow soldier.

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote that, "at the witness table with Donnelly, retired Navy Capt. Joan Darrah, a lesbian, rolled her eyes in disbelief. Retired Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, a gay man who was wounded in Iraq, looked as if he would explode.

Rep. Vic Snyder (D-Ark.) labeled her statement "just bonkers" and "dumb," and he called her claims about an HIV menace "inappropriate." Said Snyder: "By this analysis...we ought to recruit only lesbians for the military, because they have the lowest incidence of HIV in the country."

Let's just call Donnelly's statement what it is: Raw Hate.

Such right wing activists will say and do anything to smear gay people. They have no scruples nor a conscience. What they do have are fanatical fringe religious beliefs that do not conform to reality - so they must create an alternative reality. When their strange "world view" rightfully gets mocked, these "victims" - who work to take away equal rights of others - scream "religious bigotry."

Bigotry, of course is an irrational fear, (and fearing right wing crazies is quite rational) while holding people accountable for screw ball world views is necessary in a civilized country. In any case, Donnelly's tomfoolery hurt her case, more than it helped.

The Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is as immoral as it is insane - kind of like Donnelly.

148 Comments:

By the same token, Donnelly might as well call for the ban on heterosexual women serving in the military. After all, they could be be prone to sexual overtures, encounters with their male counterparts which would also severely impact morale, not to mention promote the spread of STD's, human papilloma virus, gonnorhea, syphyllis, chlamydia and unwanted pregnancy. Can she provide any evidence of her claims? Has the military conducted any serious studies on it for her to make such outrageous statements? Clearly this woman is a nut case, but then christian cultist bigots are notorious for that.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 2:16 PM  

Her testimony even drew laughter from the gallery, said the wires. She related that story of an army woman being assaulted by a group of black lesbians in 1972. Only in the mind of a bigot would that mean that all gays should be kept from the force. I'm sure we can find a story of a Jew misbehaving in the ranks. Does that mean all Jews should be kicked out? Or a story about a born again Christian committing some offense. Donnelly's "reasoning" is ridiculous and transparent. She has indeed helped our cause.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 2:44 PM  

"Paging Elaine Donnelly....your prescriptions are ready for pickup in the pharmacy."
posted by  S., at 7/25/2008 3:16 PM  

As a former evangelical and current agnostic, I could only feel repugnance at Donnelly's comments. This is the same kind of misinformation and homophobic propaganda that allows the Camerons to argue that most gays eat fesces and are members of NAMBLA (or whatever new stupidity the Camerons come up with). I just hope the evangelical movement and its allies wake up some day and realize what idiots they are making themselves look like - more than look like, actually.

Best wishes,
John Weaver
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 5:55 PM  

Okay. Let's go over this again. Since the 1940's the military has been putting out PSA'a and other short training films on VD, prostituion etc... not to curb it mind you - but what to do when you get sick.

And then there are all those reports on MST - military sexual trauma. 16% of veterans are reporting to the VA with this!!!! And I'll bet it is being under reported. And what the gays are going to rape us??!!! I don't think so - that's already a real problem between the men and women!!!

And then the pictures??? Come on!!!! Does this woman do any research on the problems being perpetrating by straight military already??

Gays are not the issue. The issue is sexual misconduct in general whether you are gay or straight. The military has a long history of acculturating it's personnel into sexual behaviors that you really don't want your mom to know about. Those behaviors by the way are unbiblical and considered sins by most christians - and yet - trained on???

The real question is - do we let gays out of the military closet - we know they are there - big deal!

This whole argument falls apart when the truth about military interests are discovered.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 6:20 PM  

robert, I think she actually IS in favor of banning women from the military.
I wish somebody had asked WHY she was even present at the hearing, since she has no military experience and isn't qualified to field questions on matters of human sexuality.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 7:31 PM  

She's a citizen - Bill -
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 9:59 PM  

And your point is what, anonymous. She presents herself as an authority on the military yet she has absolutely no experience in matters of the military. She seems to been have set up as a fake expert by the anti-gay industry.
posted by  BlackTsunami, at 7/25/2008 10:20 PM  

i don't think any anti-gay group would have let that slide by. her comments are even to outrageous for them. Black Tsunami - she's a citizen - you could have been there, too.

Geez - does everything anyone writes that doesn't spit on others who aren't gay mean that you are in agreement with right winged, anti gay messages?:????

Black tsunami- I'm the one who wrote about the other stats of sexual misconduct in the military.

You're a sharp one??!!!

Maybe you'll take that comment and somehow make it a racial slur against you, now??

Come on - grow up.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/25/2008 11:15 PM  

John Weaver, if you see this, I'm just curious, what made you finally see the light and escape from that crazy cult? I belong to a progressive, GLBT inclusive church, and I'm so tired of these extremist crazies giving the rest of us a bad name. Most of us just live our lives quietly and privately, just trying to help others along the way.
Thanks...
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 10:53 AM  

She's one for the birds, all right. What a loon!
posted by  Unknown, at 7/26/2008 11:04 AM  

"Gay Christian"? "Gay Church"? What a contradiction in terms! Any local churches that fail to excommunicate unrepentant homosexuals as members are false churches that are in rebellion to the will of Christ and the clear teachings of the Bible in general and the New Testament in particular.

Look, the Lavender Brigade can start their own religion if they wish, but please don't call it "Christianity." Thank you!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 11:10 AM  

The Catholic Church, my former church but no longer (now an atheist)...actually recognizes its gay members as as fellow "christians" and catholics provided they remain celibate, as screwed up as that is. So there are "gay christians" for those who find that a contradiction in terms. Further, I've not seen one word in the new testament attributed to JC uttering the word "homosexual" let alone condemning it, but I have read in the bible...."judge not lest ye be judged". As Ghandi so eloquently put it..."I like your Christ, but I do not like your christians, they are so unlike your christ".
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 12:02 PM  

'that are in rebellion to the will of Christ'

Theo--as usual, you are making this all up. Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality. NOT ONE WORD.

As for the rest of it-- you 'real' christains have been killing the'false' christians for centuries.
Or is it the other way around? Hard to tell-- there have been so many murders in the name of Jesus.

finally, one has to wonder why you are here so much, why you read every article, why you must comment on it all.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 12:12 PM  

"Lavender brigade"!!??? Ooooo you can feel the love! If anyone isnt worthy of calling themselves a christian, it's you Theocrazy! Wayne I wish you would ban this flamer FUCKWAD! All he/she does is spew hate and ignorance and hog up your blog space. Let theo start her/his own blog somewhere else, because he/she is sure taking advantage and over posting on YOURS! Do you ever take a bathroom break or a walk or stop to eat your happy meal theo? It takes about 5 minutes for you to start shooting your flamethrower whenever anyone posts some uncomfortable TRUTH that you cant deal with.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 1:17 PM  

Theo! Stop right there! Your name calling and calling out one sin (as you see it) as the only sin for which to be excommunicated is wrong! Just because you cannot see it in yourself or others in your church there are willing and ignorant sinners all around you. I am appalled that you as a christian would come here and antagonize this group of people.

If you truly loved as Christ did and truly believed in GOd and the Holy Spirit, I would think you would act in love and let God do the rest (or maybe you don't like the way God moves???) Where do you get the power to judge others? You no more know their heart than any other person!

As a christian, who is no longer gay, I am chastizing you in public and calling you out on your own sin.

And I ask for forgiveness from God for you on your behavior and your thoughts.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 2:01 PM  

Ben, I've asked that question many times, why do idiots like him keep coming here aside from trying to agitate and antagonize. Makes you wonder doesn't it? Why this constant obsession with us to begin with?

Now, I have another question to put to him. If he believes in the "scriptures" as its seems he does, and according to fundamentalists, you have to in order to be a follower of JC, then does he believe in Adam & Eve and the creation story in Genesis? Lets get an answer first then take it from there, because I have a question about that, but I want to hear the response first. Whatever the answer will be, you can bet it will be one of those contrived responses to justify his beliefs to the exclusion of ours, including those of us who are nonbelievers.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 2:36 PM  

Theo says - "Gay Christian"? "Gay Church"? What a contradiction in terms! Any local churches that fail to excommunicate unrepentant homosexuals as members are false churches that are in rebellion to the will of Christ and the clear teachings of the Bible in general and the New Testament in particular.

Look, the Lavender Brigade can start their own religion if they wish, but please don't call it "Christianity." Thank you


Theo, you seem to forget that your own churches are filled with hypocrites and those that should by all accounts be excommunicated according to God's will and the Bible. Adulterers (divorce and remarried), people of excess wealth (prosperity gospel), and those that preach heretical and blasphemous doctrines like the Rapture. Have lieing and gossiping become Christian virtues? Yep! You bet! I could go on but is it really necessary? Your own churches are filled with hypocrites! However, the difference is you and others of your ilk support (majority rules right?) such things as good and true while condemning gay people as evil.

People who divorce and remarry other than infidelity are adulterers (repeatedly if they have sex) according to Christ. Wealth is a hindrance into heaven. And the Rapture and other false doctrines that only date back the last century and a half are preached excessively within these churches as God's truth. There are no excommunications for those that do those things above. Yet you want churches to excommunicate gays all because you claim that it goes against Christ and his will? Again, does not divorce and remarriage do also? Does not wealth hinder a man's salvation? Are we not warned of false teachings (Rapture)? Shouldn't these groups be excommunicated from God's Holy Church? Should they not repent? No you say? Not surprised.

You sir really need to think long and hard and work to rid the hypocrisy and false doctrines within your own churches before you begin to condemn others.

Good Day!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 3:02 PM  

Interesting posts but here's a question for the Good Ms. Donnelly. If gays in the military is such a detrement to good service and morale, please explain the efficacy of the Israeli Military.....or perhaps you were unaware that gays serve openly in that most "weak" of Military Forces. Please enlighten how the British SAS or the JTF in Canada, their version of SEALS, are able to function so well yet poor little America can't handle a couple the "boys" in the army. Spare me. Bottom line is gays serve quite well thank you very much, without any issues at all. Maybe if the U.S. remembered it is supposed to be the land of the "free" and "home of the brave" instead of being the land of the whiny, frightened, pseudo-christian knobs, it wouldn't be so F****d up like it is right now. I love my American cousins, but if you all don't start smartening up soon, you'll find yourself akin to the Taliban and the Radical Islamist more than the nation you were meant to be. I await the answer of the American people.....I hope I and the world don't have to wait much longer.
posted by  Unknown, at 7/26/2008 3:07 PM  

Nice red herrings, appeals to emotion, appeals to motive, and straw men Robert and others. The list of logical fallacies you commit grows with every comment!

And actually Robert, the Roman Catholic Church only officially recognizes repentant homosexuals as members and fellow Christians. We all (myself included) struggle with certain sins. But the Roman Catholic Church does not officially allow homosexuals who celebrate their sin and depravity to remain as members. Nor should they.

Concerning the fact that the Biblical biographies of Jesus record no statements of His explicitly concerning homosexuality, my reaction is an authentic "So what?"

I presume the argument being made is that if Jesus didn't explicitly make a statement in the four biographies that prohibits homosexual conduct, then homosexual activity was endorsed by Him.

Setting aside the facts that the biographies of Jesus are neither (a) exhaustive of all of Jesus' words and teachings nor (b) the sole rule of faith for Christians, the argument ignores the fact that Jesus didn't explicitly prohibit a number of activities. Are the supporters of the argument enumerated above prepared to state that Jesus didn't care about incest?

Also, the argument assumes Jesus would even need to deal with the issue. The Law of Moses, which Jesus followed and fulfilled, explicitly condemned homosexual conduct as an abominable and detestable sin. Why address something that was so clear and accepted?

Finally, it should be pointed out that Jesus did address the concept of marriage.

"And Jesus answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning "made them male and female," and said, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?"' So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." - Matthew 19: 4 - 6

Here, Jesus quotes the Torah, the book of Genesis, in order to make clear that marriage is between one man and one woman. And stating what a concept is by its very nature states what a concept is not.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 3:19 PM  

I'm not quite sure what you're asking me Robert, but I know it has to do with origins. I'll provide some of my views and answer any questions you have.

I completely reject philosophical naturalism as well as the Darwinian / neo-Darwinian views on the origin of the universe and man. Generally, I hold a Christian theistic worldview. Concerning origins, I am a creationist. Our issue would be less one of origins and more one concerning the atheistic worldview vs. the Christian theistic worldview. One's views on origins is largely a product of their worldview.

Ken, I agree that many local churches fall short when it comes to Biblical discipline of its members. It is a problem and it is sad, but that doesn't mean that because it's a problem unrepentant homosexuals shouldn't be excommunicated.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 3:59 PM  

Ken, I agree that many local churches fall short when it comes to Biblical discipline of its members. It is a problem and it is sad, but that doesn't mean that because it's a problem unrepentant homosexuals shouldn't be excommunicated.

Your tone speaks otherwise Theo. And you know it.

Divorce/Remarriage = sad
Excess Wealth = sad
False Doctrines = sad

Homosexuality = evil, perverse, abomination, worthy of smite

Your tone speaks differently when it is sins that reflect the majority of the heterosexual community as opposed to the smaller gay community. I have seen this over and over with Evangelicals/Fundementalists Christians. They brush off their sins as "sad" and "unfortunate" all the while condemning gays to harsher tones and ridicule with pride and self-righteous arrogance.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 5:09 PM  

Ken, I think you may be reading too much into my comments. The sins you enumerated (save excessive wealth, which is quite subjective and may or may not be an indication of the larger sin of greed) are just as bad and wrong as homosexuality. I apologize for not making that more clear.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 5:28 PM  

I have a question for you Theo. Would you object to a same-sex relationship that was celibate in nature but they lived together, kissed and cuddled each other in support and love? Again, no sex was involved.

Would that be permissible in the sight of God and you as a Christian?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/26/2008 5:48 PM  

Theo,
would you consider yourself a christian Dominionist (Rushdoony). I have trouble understanding where you are coming from idologically. You tend to repeat yourself with lables i.e. darwin neo/darwin. these are empty phrases for the most part.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 5:14 AM  

Oh Theo, don't act so conveniently naive, I think you know where I'm going with my question about belief in Adam & Eve. As a fundamentalist "christian", you are bound to believe it, so please answer, yes or no?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 9:03 AM  

Ken, the answer to that would have to be a definite NO, that two people of the same gender touch one another without engaging in sexual activity would still be contrary to their religious beliefs. Next, they'll be saying that a father kissing or hugging his son and vice versa is tantamount to sin. I'm surprised they're not bashing straight women who dance together at weddings and other public functions. What will they come up with next I wonder? In orthodox judaism, men are supposed to cover their faces when a female is approaching....I've never seen any orthodox jew do that either, let alone any fundamentalist christian who believes in the "scriptures".
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 9:09 AM  

And gays who are the tolerant diverse community have spent most of this blog ridiculing a lot of other groups??

Strange.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 1:42 PM  

It's not strange at all, dumbass. The people getting ridiculed are bigots and they deserve it, you moron.

It's not illegal to ridicule, douchebag. Nobody has the right to not be offended, fuckwit.

We're not talking about calling people bad names, nutcase. We're talking about legal discrimination, hoser.

What's "strange", bonehead, is the whiners who support anti-gay legislation, but cry like spoiled little brats whenever anyone calls them a bad name. "Boo hoo. Those nasty gays are making fun of me just because I want to strip them of basic human dignity and civil rights, waaaaaaah."

Get your head out of your bigoted ass and grow a set. Fucktard.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 2:13 PM  

Geez Eshto - you must be really smart - Look at all the words in the world to use to get your point across and look what you choose.


No - I'm not any of those things. Those other people are ignorant and have not done a good job in researching etc... but for you to start a rant on me - is well - hmmmm - it ain't right - especially when I'm the one who pointed out the mmilitary's long history of sexual misconduct.

Doubt I'm a moron or anything else you refer to.

Have you looked in the mirror when you say those things? Oh - wait - you know me and all those other people and everything there is to know about bigotry and discrimination - since you are also a practitionerr of such?

Your victimhood is showing?? Or you bullyhood???
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 2:22 PM  

eshto: save yourself the trouble and ignore anonymous posts. They are like people in the closet which is to say extremely unhelpful if not our enemies for letting us do all the work by being identified. Even a personal handle such as mine or yours allows us to know who we are addressing. Anonymors posts are sort of like the republicans who get caught in the toilets with their pants down. They cry foul at others behaviour and manifest the worst kind of actions themselves because of their "shame in hiding." Let them stew by themselves. It is the best revenge. More importantly they sneak around behind first time commenters that rightfully may want to comment anonymously.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 2:33 PM  

This goon of a stringbean with hair says that religious beliefs should in itself mean gays remain out of the military but no one confronts this ignorant bitch about the fact that her religious convictions she is speaking on behalf of say nothing to the murder of men women and children. She is the height of hypocrisy and ignorance and must be confronted and silenced into her house of worship and out of our halls of justice. It is baffling that these same right wing christians would be mimicking my sentiments exactly if it were Islam speaking in congressional hearings. Fucktards does not even begin to define this dangerous shit.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 2:42 PM  

I can't remember who asked, but someone wanted to know how I got out of evangelicalism. Basically, I did so for theological reasons, but also because, as someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, I saw first hand how evangelicals treat the mentally ill, which in turn allowed me to see how the evangelical church also victimizes the gay community. I went through a therapeutic practice known as biblical counseling (also known as nouthetics) which is very similar to reparative therapy in some ways (the basic assumption behind the thoery is that mentally ill individuals are not so for biological reasons but because mental illness is caused by sin). Therefore, unlike most straights, I do understand what reparative therapy is like, and I am outraged that anyone could think it a legitimate therapeutic technique.
Theo, what about intersexuals (people born with XXY chromosones or mosaic chromosones, or people with XY chromosones who have vaginas)? Under what circumstances are they considered gay or straight? Or are they considered gay whether they sleep with either gender\sex? I think you need to define what constitutes male and what constitutes female before you can start condemning homosexual sex.

Best wishes everyone,
John Weaver
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 2:46 PM  

Why even waste time on this nutball? Unless you just like to argue, then have at it LOL

Seriously, this guy doing all of the fingerpointing at gays, while applauding divorce and genocide always winds up on 'To Catch a Predator', or shown on the news, for scamming a bunch of people.
posted by  S., at 7/27/2008 3:51 PM  

no one was being your enemy - just requesting repsect and no obscenities.


Or could you not tell from the posts that someone was actually on your side about the right wing activist being wrong and not doing her research?

Or is it that if someone does not think exactly the same as you do - then they are not a friend - always an enemy?

Must make relationships difficult.

Are you guys for real - how old are you?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 6:01 PM  

two men and a baby. I think that this is only a matter of time and I can't wait. This could become common place in 50-100 years.

http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/2001/01/31/eggs/print.html

making the debate even more interesting.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 6:11 PM  

sorry here is the link


http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/2001/01/31/eggs/print.html
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 6:14 PM  

one last try


http://archive.salon.com/mwt/

feature/2001/01/31/eggs/print.html
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 6:15 PM  

better link. this will of course take science and not faith.

http://www.alternet.org/story/10564
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/27/2008 6:19 PM  

I actually read that *in theory* a girl can be created from the eggs of two females. This is because females have XX, so a male would be needed of course for a boy (XY). To make a girl baby, one X would be taken from each female.
posted by  Emily K, at 7/27/2008 7:59 PM  

Theo: Sit and spin on a broken bottle neck. You do not make the rules of this world and we can all thank our gods for that. I am not the least bit like John Weaver and his loving comments on this blog. You can burn in your hell fire with your delusional thinking. Screw the roman catholic priests like so many of them screwed little children of both genders Theo. I am not interested in them and their teachings and neither are 5 billion others on this planet. You are completely misguided in your gullibility. I hope you feel the hate from me that i felt reading your nonsensical judgemental bullshit. As far as your comment about nothing explicitly said by Jesus, you can cough up and puke out your whole pathetic bible, old and new testament alike along with your own words because Theo JESUS HIMSELF WROTE NOT ONE WORD OF IT. And try proving Jesus was not a faggot who had 12 dear boyfriends and a whore he did not fuck which he considered his own family. Lastly, keep your lectures on ancient culture regarding marriage in perspective. That was merely another directive to promote genetic reproduction and control. I noticed you kept the fact of women as property in the dark like most of your ignorant brethern always tend to do. Save it Theo. You are a has been bangin your head against the wall, whether it be the wailing wall or your own cheap ones you create in your prison of a mind posturing as intelligence. It is your fantasy and none of my concern. You are like a piece of hard marble unable to be sculpted into beauty because you lack the tools to chip away at the surface of superficiality. And worse for you is that i don't give a damn about enlightening people the likes of you. Of course Please do feel free to express your opinion now ya hear darlin.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 4:11 AM  

Emily: i love and adore your theory and am not discrediting it but i wonder if two x chomosomes could fertilize each other? Of course there is another theory that we all started out as female and that males are a mutation that occurred later. Also have you ever heard that we came from the water which some say explains why we still have hair on our heads only. It served as a place for our young to hold onto as we swam through the currents while being amphibians first.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 4:40 AM  

ewe, what the hell are you talking about. Please shut up you are making a fool of yourself.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 10:49 AM  

ewe: The theory is that because a female needs XX, somehow putting together XX + XX will yield another XX. I don't know how this would be done. The genetic material would be combined somehow. It's not just a matter of "stirring" and then "pouring" the result.

I have heard we start out as "female" in the womb - or something close to it - and then if the baby is to become a male, that alteration is made later due to hormones being released by the present Y chromosome. This is why men have nipples. But we all start out the same basic "shape"- which doesn't really change for females when developing further in the womb. I believe we started out as water beings but I did not think that was why we only had hair on our head - do our simian ancestors typically have longer hair than the rest of their bodies? Because our hair is constantly growing and can get super long but I've never seen any kind of simian with super long hair. I always thought that hair remained on our heads for survival - because most heat escapes through our heads.
posted by  Emily K, at 7/28/2008 11:33 AM  

we started out as water beings? Swimming chimps with gills? help me out here. I belive in evolution, but we haven't been water beings since our ancestor fish crawled out of the ocean. we are primates on gene away from the apes.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 1:11 PM  

Let me first state that I've never posted on this blog under Anonymous or "AJ." And I fully realize that this statement probably won't convince conspiracists such as Robert, whoever he is. But oh well...

Luvcox, I would NOT label myself a "Dominionist," and I am NOT an adherent to R.J. Rushdoony's "Christian Reconstructionist" views in the theologically conservative sense (there are theologically liberal reconstructionists). In fact, I strongly oppose these and related theological views.

As for my "ideology," I could most generally be labeled an "orthodox Christian" theologically and philosophically, and a "libertarian" politically. As for whether or not I'm a "fundamentalist," I would initially say no, but that would depend on how Robert and others define that label.

As for the terms "Darwinism" and "neo-Darwinism" being "empty phrases" as you put it, this demonstrates either your ignorance or your unwillingness to be as specific as possible when it comes to debating these important concepts.

The Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy defines and describes Darwinism as such:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/darwinism/

And the following link will provide you with a video lecture by Dr. Richard Dawkins on neo-Darwinism:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4633079169415752395

Robert, please ask a specific question. You asked a general question, to which I offered a general response. Now you're asking me to answer "yes" or "no" when I don't even know what the question is. Ask a general question, and you'll get a general answer. Ask a specific question, and you'll get a specific answer.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 1:20 PM  

Theo: What in the hell brings you on a gay blog to tell gay people who happen to like themselves that you are judging all of us based on your sick belief system that is not even your own? Here is a specific question? When are you going to accept you are homosexual?Please do not feel you have to give me an answer but do treat yourself to one.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 1:29 PM  

Emily: I understand we are talking about activation more or less. Perhaps fertilizing the wall of an egg requires some sort of heat that only sperm has or maybe not. There must be something beyond just x and/or y donation by the male that begins the replicating of cells. After all the gametes only have 23 chromosomes each. Maybe it is a protein?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 1:44 PM  

It really is amazing men obsess on masculinity when we are the best example of ying yang with both x and y chromosomes. We are walking hermaphrodites and do not even know it. Perhaps not though given the strong evidence that some males only can offer x chromosomes up for reproduction while others can only offer y chromosomes and still others can offer both. I guess i just answered my own question regarding the continuum. I would like to equally pose the question that my own x and y chromosomes can be obtained and fused creating either male or female offspring. Impossible without the egg so the male does not offer the whole package with regards to the x chromosome and the only package with regards to the Y.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 2:00 PM  

interesting from a Hitchens column:

Richard Dawkins:

Vestigial eyes, for example, are clear evidence that these cave salamanders must have had ancestors who were different from them—had eyes, in this case. That is evolution. Why on earth would God create a salamander with vestiges of eyes? If he wanted to create blind salamanders, why not just create blind salamanders? Why give them dummy eyes that don't work and that look as though they were inherited from sighted ancestors? Maybe your point is a little different from this, in which case I don't think I have seen it written down before.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 2:51 PM  

As a christian - I totally believe in evolution. I think it is as divine as any other thinking.

Really, I have a hard time with people who don't see evolution as a miracle - it still fascinates me. Life is a miracle and just awesome how it adapts.

Did it ever occur to anyone that some miracles take a long time - not all are instantaneous.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 3:00 PM  

WOW - Hitchens and Co. are getting desperate! One would have thought the intellectual smack-down Hitch received from Vox Day and Dinesh D'Souza would have humbled him a little.

And had Hitchens done even a modicum of research, he would have known that creationists have explained blind cave-dwelling creatures long ago. But I've gotta hand it to Hitch, he pummels a straw-man like no other!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 3:09 PM  

you have got that backward. It was the catholic Coulter copulator Dinesh D'Souza who got smacked down. Help me out here though. what is your explanation for Vestigial eyes here? anyone?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 3:47 PM  

It's like we all carry genes from our distant ancestors. They have receded but have not been eliminated. We have our old brain where smell is located. Somethings reced into the past and others develop as environment and challenges change. What is a handicap today may be a strength in the future.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 4:20 PM  

Christopher Hitchens what? Coulter's a fruitcake, yes. But Hitchens did not win that debate. Even my atheist and agnostic aquaintances have acknowleged that.

For those interested in viewing the debate and deciding for themselves, this link should take you there:

http://www.isi.org/lectures/flvplayer/lectureplayer.aspx?file=v000187_cicero_102207.flv

Claiming that Hitchens won that debate is like saying Barry Lynn won this encounter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4mJZ6y_SZI

That Hitchens lost the debate is not to say that Hitchens is a bad debater. He's simply out of his league on this topic. Another case in point is when Hitchens got clobbered in a written debate on this topic with Douglas Wilson.

As for vestigial organs, it depends on which ones you're talking about of course. I don't know of a creationist that denies genuine vestigial organs or thinks they're a problem. That's why Hitchens argument is so surprisingly stupid. He genuinely acts as if creationists have never heard of this before. The question isn't whether or not the organs exist. The question is what such organs prove. I say they demonstrate devolution for the most part. Darwinists and neo-Darwinists claim, again for the most part, they're somehow proof of evolution. That's where the debate is - and sometimes creations and Darwinists actually agree. Hitchens, alas, is behind the curve.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 4:54 PM  

Thanks for the debate posting. It is clear then what i saw on youtube, but scaning through it again, I have to say that we have to agree to disagree on this one. Hitchens cleary won regardless of what your numerious athiest friends think.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 6:10 PM  

We'll amicably disagree. What about the James White-Barry Lynn encounter?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/28/2008 9:31 PM  

Theo or Aj, how many more times am I going to ask in plain English? DO YOU BELIEVE IN ADAM AND EVE, the so-called "first parents" of human creation? YES or NO?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 6:33 AM  

There you go Robert, whoever you are, that's a specific question (it's Theo by the way)!

Yes.

Does that answer your question? Again, general questions receive general responses. Specific questions receive specific answers.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 7:19 AM  

Theo, finally, an answer. Now...nobody knows this for sure, but it is alleged that Adam and Eve had as many as fifty children, a physical impossibility. Do you believe that?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 8:33 AM  

Robert-- whydo you continue to argue with this idiot? Theo has come to the ocnclusion that since 'theio' means god, theo must be god. Theo believes that the biblical acocunt of creation is just fine. Theo goes through pages of exegesis to demonstrate that the bible means what he/she thinks it means when the creator of the universe could just have easily been clear.

Don't feed the trolls.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 10:52 AM  

Theo,
Will Catholics go to hell?
Will Jews go to hell?
yes
or
no
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 11:20 AM  

As you stated Robert, no one knows for sure how many children Adam and Eve had. Some Jewish traditions say it was over fifty.

I don't know how many children they had, but they did live for a much longer period of time than we do today. So I would assume they had more than 2.5 kids. And longer life spans are only "impossible" (talk about presuppositions!) if you assume a form of radical uniformitarianism.

But you have no basis for even assuming the basic uniformity of nature Robert, so I'd be interested to see your attempt to justify any sort of radical uniformitarianism!

As for the hell question, ANY person - whatever they claim their religious affiliation to be - who rejects their Creator's provision (the shed blood and sacrificial death of the Messiah of Israel - Jesus the Christ) for the forgiveness of their breaking of God's Law will die and suffer punishment for their unlawful actions in hell.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 12:56 PM  

I will try again, and lets add Mormons also:

Theo,
Will Catholics go to hell?
Will Jews go to hell?
Will mormons go to hell?
yes
or
no
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 1:05 PM  

In a previous incarnation, Theo, then aj answered the question with a yes.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 2:02 PM  

More Robert conspiracism at work.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 3:02 PM  

Theo,
Will Catholics go to hell?
Will Jews go to hell?
Will mormons go to hell?
yes
or
no
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 3:03 PM  

Theo,
Though I am an agnostic, many times I would prefer to believe the other side is right (in modified form). But your claim that Hitchens lost that debate is ridiculous. He clobbered D'souza. It wasn't even close, and D'souza ended up relying on appeals to Mother Theresa to prove his case. My family is theist, and not one of them would have bought D'Souza's arguments. They're recycled crap from Ravi Zacharias and company. I'd be the first to admit that there may be compelling arguments for theism. None of those arguments were provided by D'Souza.

John
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 3:14 PM  

Oh, D'souza came to my grad school and tried to claim that Brittany Spears causes terrorism.
Please.

John Weaver
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 3:16 PM  

Ok, Theo/Aj, by the way Theo, Scott informed the blogsite that you also post as Aj, it wasn't me.

Now that you state your belief in Adam & Eve as the first parents of the human race, you also maintain that they probably had more than 2.5 children, hmmm. Caine and Abel, Seth are the three that I know of, all boys. As for the remaining 47 + or more, again a physical impossibility for one woman.

Now that you've confirmed your belief in Adam and Eve, and since there were no other Adam & Eve created by your god at the time, then we can safely conclude that Adam & Eve's children must have committed incest to have populated the earth and we must also conclude that this was done with your god's blessing and I'm sure he saw that it was good. Odd that the major religions aren't condoning incest!

Now I know why there are idiots like you in the world, you're part of the first parents' incestuous descendant progeny.

I'm done with you!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/29/2008 4:13 PM  

Christians are receiving the response that Jesus stated. The world hated Him and it will hate us as well when we promote the full message of the Word. Obviously many of you don't know much about the Scripture or faith. You have a "kind of" understanding and a "sort of" faith in something as long as it validates your homosexual agenda.

Christians, while imperfect, are people who have accepted the message of Christ, and are attempting to obey His commands. Some are better than others at serving and realizing that they too were once homosexuals, liars, thieves, drunkards, fornicators, adulterers etc. Some even fall back into their former sins, but try to break away from the sin, seek God's forgiveness and continue to walk in faith.

A problem that those who promote the homosexual agenda have is that you feel that now many of you have openly declared your status that it makes you "right". Your many voices are making you think that you are acceptable to God in your practice of this sin - perversion - but this is only a false sense of correctness. The Scripture (Bible) speaks against ALL sin, not just homosexuality. It is the responsibility of the Christian to shun sin and love righteousness. Open acceptance of any sinful lifestyle is wrong, be it lying, stealing, pedophilia (by the way Jesus never said anything against pedophilia either, but we know it is sinful) or homosexuality.

Go ahead and shout at me or any other Christian who speaks out about this sinful lifestyle in an effort to help you see the truth. It is the Christian's mission to spread the gospel. The gospel isn't a message of love to make you feel good about yourself. It is a message to get everyone, self included, to turn from sin and be obedient to God. No matter what you say, the homosexual practice will keep you separated from God just as lying, gossip and adultery will. None of these acts should be condoned or practiced by Christians. Call me - One4Truth
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 12:08 AM  

It is the Christian's mission to spread the gospel

yea on every street corner with a tin cup in your hand. evangelicals are tiresome bores.

It is the responsibility of all secular humanists to make sure that none of this nonsense becomes law. This is why gays must push as hard and harder for their agenda as the fundys are for theirs. with all the new laws protecting gays from discrimination in housing, employment and the few success in gay marriage, I would say we are winning. It is important to note we should not be overconfident.

as to christians trying to life a rightious lifestyle, i can only point out how poorly they are doing. and statistics make it quite clear that intentions and results are two differant things.

when divorce and out of wedlock pregnancys are lower in Mass then any southern state you guys are doing something wrong. there is not one europian state that has higher rates of teen sex, pregnancy,abortion,murder.... then the u.s.

but i am all for people trying to live a more responsible life. the high divorce rate among evangilicals is distroying the fabric of american life in a way that the gaylifestyle never could. if you look at the gay "Meccas" around the world, san francisco, seattle, ny city, they are doing just fine.

as to spreading the "Word", if anyone in the u.s. has not heard of jesus they must be living under a rock or insane. you are meerly peddling old news.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 11:06 AM  

Theo, and other fundys here:
Will Catholics go to hell?
Will Jews go to hell?
Will mormons go to hell?
yes
or
no
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 11:14 AM  

I just read the beginng of Wayne's book about paulk. It is a clear example of how evangilicals are liars. most all of them. and they lie with such ease. haggard, sweigart, chaucerian frauds.

now back to my homosexual perversian. lovvvvvvvvvve it, goes well with a nice red wine

lol
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 11:24 AM  

Theo, and other fundys here:
Will Catholics go to hell?
Will Jews go to hell?
Will mormons go to hell?
yes
or
no


One4God replies:

Yes they CAN. If they are unrepentant and willfully disobedient to God's Word and reject Jesus as God's one and only Son.

The Scripture says in

Matthew 7:21
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. NAS

I give to you the point about HYPOCRISY in Christianity. It is very damaging and damning. Some of you are so steeped in your anger and hatred of Christians that you will never listen to the reasoning that the only way to heaven is through Jesus (which includes being obedient to God's will). All sin is abhorrent to God. Adultery, fornication, lying, stealing, backbiting, homosexuality, etc are all perversions. Too bad some of you are so angry that you will never believe the truth.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 12:00 PM  

FUNDAMENTALISTS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 12:09 PM  

Too bad some of you are so angry that you will never believe the truth.


ain't got nothin to do with anger. You want to see anger, go into a fundy church, listen to Fox, that is where the anger is. You want reason, stay away from fundys, they wouldn't know it if it bit them.

fundys know nothing and have nothing to offer. they are just parrots:
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 12:20 PM  

One4God adds:

Here is a little Scripture taken from Paul's inspired letter to the Christians to Rome. It would be good for you to reflect upon.


Rom 1:16-32
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "But the righteous man shall live by faith."

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, that their bodies might be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and, although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. (New American Standard Bible translation)

posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 1:25 PM  

Dear one4god: Relax honey. maybe you should put the energy your directing towards gay people towards cleaning up your own life and making yourself free from sin-- before you start telling us how sinful we are and how we need to straighten up.

Oh wait, that's just what Jesus had to say, wasn't it. Oh, why listen to him, anyway. He wasn't actually a christian.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 2:03 PM  

Robert, whoever you are, what kind of cultural shell do you live in? And is all sarcasm completely lost on you? Have you never heard the very common phrase about Americans having "2.5 children"? White picket fences? Keeping up with the Jones'? Any of this ring a bell?

I mean seriously Robert, whoever you are, do you have some sort of reading comprehension or social skills problems? Do you have friends? Do you watch any movies or TV? Do you read any books?

As for the incest response, on what basis does an atheist like you object to incest? So please tell me Robert, whoever you are, how precisely would you characterize your ethical system, how do you justify it, and based on that system why is incest wrong?

Concerning your objections based on my worldview, the laws that forbid CLOSE relatives from marrying among God's people was not given until the time of Moses. At the time shortly after the Fall of man and for a time before and after the Flood, there was nothing keeping close relatives from marrying one another. The Mosaic Law forbid this, and the Law of Christ also outlaws it for Christians - for many reasons, including the need to protect against the increasing potential to produce deformed offspring (an increasing likelihood brought about because of the Fall).

Question Ewe - what is a Christian and based on what standard/authority?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 2:09 PM  

Theo: A christian is one who loves those for the way god created them. That is a simple way to say a lot but it is also my way of putting it into one sentence. This is on the authority of whoever senses true brotherhood when relating to one another and it is not fundamentalists that practice these principles. Far from it. Ask anyone who is not a fundamentalist and they will agree with me because some of us thank goodness try to grow beyond what the propaganda that has tried to control the masses from questioning and lifting our souls even higher continue to foster. You see Theo, the very people that you preach to you think you and those fundies like you are stupid. They are laughing at you behind your back as they crate your cash away to their own bank accounts. Grip reality. You are just an annoying pest to those of us who have thought well beyond your box. And when i say to you the ugly things i do, that is what an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth really means. You get back from me the hate you give. And that is because i am not perfect and know it and i want to silence the pain you inflict on gay individuals who happen to love themselves the way they are. Your rhetoric hiding behind religious beliefs is not only the true definition of blasphemy but is powerless against those that can stand up to your evil pettiness.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 2:27 PM  

So according to your opinion a Muslim could be a Christian. After all, a Muslim can, as you put it, "love those for the way god created them."

Even more, a Christian, according to your definition, doesn't even need to believe in Christ! What a useless, irrational, arbitrary, inconsistent, and ahistorical definition you provide. Quite a feat Ewe - congrats!

And what does the concept of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" "really" mean? Please enlighten me. You seem to really misunderstand the legal and theological concept in its historical usage. I'm not surprised at your misunderstanding and probable ignorance, but I'd love for you to further demonstrate your stupidity. It's Romans 1 in action.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:04 PM  

thank you for Rom 1:16-32. Paul was a lustfull repressed homosexual, quite likely. other then that I get nothing out of these passages which are among the favorite of fundies. they can be obtained from any two bit street preacher.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:14 PM  

One4God responds to Ben in Oakland:

Ben - I would like to share a little story with you taken from:
Luke 15:8-10
what woman, if she has ten silver coins and loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? 9 "And when she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin which I had lost!' 10 "In the same way, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."
NAS


I have repented and am doing the best I can. Thank you for your concern. You remind me of a dear old lady I knew who used to condescendingly pat me on the head and send me on my way. ;)
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:25 PM  

good read

http://www.relijournal.com/Christianity/Was-the-Apostle-Paul-Gay.135422
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:29 PM  

Theo: you are the dismissive cunt you usually are. Please go find the broken bottle neck and do what i suggested. Lastly, yes Christian like behavior has nothing to do with believing in Christ as your saviour.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:51 PM  

Good one Ewe! You're as illogical as ever. How one could ever speak of "Christian-like behavior" with no coherent, consistent, and historically-based definition of "Christian" is a great mystery. Then again, I expect that from your less-than-average intelligence. Again, Romans 1 in action it would appear...
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 3:58 PM  

Theo:
You know nothing of my relationship to god yet you judge everyone based on your own belief in Jesus. You are childish Theo. Push your book on those that are interested.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 4:02 PM  

science (theo's enemy)...

The three-year Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP), published in the April 4 American Heart Journal, was the largest-ever attempt to apply scientific methods to measure the influence of prayer on the well-being of another. It examined 1,800 patients undergoing heart-bypass surgery. On the eve of the operations, church groups began two weeks of praying for one set of patients. Each recipient had a praying contingent of about 70, none of whom knew the patient personally. The study found no differences in survival or complication rates compared with those who did not receive prayers. The only statistically significant blip appeared in a subgroup of patients who were prayed for and knew it. They experienced a higher rate of postsurgical heart arrhythmias (59 versus 52 percent of unaware subjects).
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 4:02 PM  

Theos book is better than science don't ya know? Oh Yes Theo says he does not know how many children Adam and Eve had for sure but he does know they lived far longer than those that live today. Based on his book once again while he attempts to put people in the place he desires by speaking about history derived from some fantasy passed on. And worse he fully expects that we are going to accept his bullshit lock, stock and barrel as reality. You are delusional Theo. Bonkers. You are a fundamentalist without any backing except those that agree with you. How disgusting and shocking that you would profess to know about fictional characters such as Adam and Eve and then go on endlessly as if they were actual people that existed. Wake up. Have you ever heard the quote "stop beating a dead horse"? That is symbolic of how old and out of date your simple belief system you regurgitate over and over is. Go away with that crap. I am not interested in going through life not thinking. And yet you for some reason think it is ok to be homophobic and vicious in your comments to gay people while convincing yourself you are some sort of spiritual messenger. Get the hell out of my face you disgrace.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 4:18 PM  

I believe you are doing the best you can-- except when it comes to telling others all about their sins. you're doing nothing for yourself there.

Let me remind you: "Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone."

When you get to the place where you are without sin, I will be happy to show you a rockpile.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 4:54 PM  

That's science, huh? HMM...not so sure about that.

The need to separate real science from non-science is seen in the way that the phrase "studies show" has become a secular form of making a vow, a useful means of reassuring the skeptical listener that the speaker is swearing to the truth of his words despite any doubts that the listener might harbor.

Another problem is the increasing appearance of meta-study abuse in the news media, a bizarre, pseudo-scientific variant of attempting to determine the truth by means of a democracy wherein each quasi-scientific study gets a vote.

Now that "studies show" is no longer considered sufficiently conclusive, "nine out of ten studies show" is supposed to be more convincing. But this is chewing gum advertising, not science.

So, what is science, if it is not self-skewering, timber-littering, or vote-counting?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines science as "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."

OK, that wasn't so hard? Science is systematic study done through observation and experiment. Therefore, if the study is not systematic, or if observation and experiment are not involved, it is obviously not science by this definition.

This is a key point. If observation and experiment are not involved, then it is not science.

So, when considering the suggested conflict between science and religion, the first and most important question is "Which science?" True science of false, pseudo-science? Science or scientism?

Now, of course, Ewe will just (1) cuss and (2) make illogical claims, or more likely a combination of the two. But I look forward to other responses that will provide some thought instead of mere entertainment.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 4:58 PM  

Theo,
Somehow in my fundamentalist Sunday school, we never were given lessons in how to evangelize by calling non-Christians (or Christians for that matter) stupid. Furthermore, even if you are a fundamentalist Christian, and even if you believe homosexuality is a sin (please note that I no longer believe in either), it does not automatically mean that one should support reparative therapy practices. Wayne's primary mission here is to oppose the ex-gay movement, not to oppose fundamentalist teachings on homosexaulity itself (though Wayne does that too). And considering the current data on reparative therapy, which shows how harmful it has been to most people who have undergone it, how can anyone honestly and in good conscience support it, fundamentalist or not? Supporting Donnelly's ban is even less sensical, as it violates every principle of equal protection under the law - while simutaneously coming up with the most ludicrous anti-gay statements imaginable.
And please don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. I know what the nouthetics\biblical counseling movement did to mentally ill evangelicals. I see the same sort of abusive therapeutic practices taking place in reparative therapy and in the evangelical church's views of gays in general.
A note to the other posters: Evangelicalism's higher divorce rate may also be caused by differences in class and economics, not by religion itself. Furthermore, I believe the original study that supported that proposition was undertaken by Richard Barna, not exactly known for his honesty in statistical matters (He's an evangelical and every 10 years tries to claim that evangelicalism is on the cusp of disaster if we don't repent).
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:05 PM  

It's simply wrong and misleading to suggest, as Ben does, that Jesus Christ preached Ben's illogical form of contemporary "tolerance." Jesus clearly did not.

"He who is not for me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters."

One finds no call to tolerance in this teaching. Jesus preached forgiveness, for all men, but first he called for the repentance of sin. Tolerance is not the same thing as love; the Christian must love the sinner, but neither "tolerate" nor condone the evil that the sinner commits.

Even in the oft-referenced case of the woman about to be stoned that Ben somewhat references, Jesus told the woman, "Go forth and sin no more."

In one sense, yes, it is not for the Christian to "judge." But the Christian is not "judging others," but simply telling the world of God's judgment - that God (not the Christian) has judged all the world as being guilty before Him.

Remember, Jesus was able to offer that woman about to be stoned forgiveness for her sin, because He was on His way to die on the cross for her. She acknowledged Him as "Lord," but He still told her, "Go, and sin no more."

If she didn't repent, she would perish. So will the homosexual if they fail to repent.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:10 PM  

First, whether or not I'm a "fundamentalist" depends on how you define that term. I've asked for a definition and have yet to receive one.

And second, I'm sorry you were mis-taught about Christian evangelism, apologetics, and polemics. Jesus Christ and St. Paul the Apostle did exactly as I do. So there's nothing inherently wrong there. Jesus specifically called people "stupid" and/or "ignorant," and St. Paul was particularly inclined towards sarcasm.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:21 PM  

Theo and his ilk will stop at nothing distorting and hijacking God as their own. He is right about Jesus being a rebel though. What you don't know Theo is that Jesus would slap you upside the head in response to your ranting. If the only thing you can say to me is " gee you are just stupid" because you cannot take it upon yourself to be mature enough to look at your self in the mirror with your own advice then i can only continue to say fuck off. And yes Theo, it is you that is the simpleton in this dialogue. You keep referring to your bible as the end all be all and it isn't. Does the dirt you keep your head in feel so good you won't come out? Jack ass. Good riddance.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:29 PM  

Run Ewey run...but watch out for Mr. T!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:35 PM  

One4God responding to Ben in Oakland:

It is no surprise that the passages dealing with "casting stones" and "judging" are primary ammunition used to "run off" those who are spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ.

A mature believer who has studied the Scripture knows when those passages are properly applied. The same believer knows that any passage can be twisted by the user to mean many things outside the context in which it was taken.

To all who oppose Christianity, I would state that your defiance to the teaching of Christ is going to pose a great trouble to you in the here-after. You can jest, cajole, ridicule, curse and produce all kinds of opinions and post various absurdities about Christians, BUT it will not change the inescapable fact that, to those who understand the Bible as being the inspired word of God, homosexuality (gay etc) is sinful and the practice of it will leave you eternally lost.
The same will happen to the willful liar, thief, fornicator, etc who practices such sin and makes no attempt from turning away.

The major difference between a faithful Christian (that many of you HATE so much) and a non-Christian is that the faithful Christian understands his sin and is trying to turn from the sin. While he may stumble and appear comical to all you enlightened ones, he is trying to be perfect, but never will attain such a status. That was only attained by Jesus.

So, I have said many things here, but the last thing I will add is that there isn't a one who hasn't been warned. And some of you will NEVER be able to forget that you have been warned. There will always be this little seed of doubt left in your mind that you are treading the wrong path. I hope one day you will turn.

Unloose the vitriol, you have shown your character.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 5:36 PM  

no the major differance between the christians and nonchristians is that the christians have not been caught yet. Swiegart and haggart and the rest of you would still be whoreing if they hadn't been caught. whenever i hear piety, i run for the hills, 'cause i know my pocket is about to be picked.

theo,

Jesus Christ and St. Paul the Apostle did exactly as I do.

dillusional much?

lol
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:02 PM  

from Theo,

What you may be asking is whether a Roman Catholic who strictly adheres to the specific Roman Catholic faith (i.e., accepts the Council of Trent and at least Vatican I), and whether a Jew strictly adheres to the post-32 A.D. Jewish faith (for the orthodox Jew should logically accept Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah, given that He fulfilled the prophecies), and whether a Mormon who strictly adheres to the Mormon faith, will go to hell.

If that's your question, the answer is yes, they will go to hell, in that they by definition reject the provision described above.


Nuff said. considering that half the country is catholic and only 5% are gay. Why is Theo wasting his time here?

Theo off the 12 step program?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:10 PM  

gosh thanks for the post other anon, i didn't think theo thought all catholics are going to hell! if sister therisa and all the popes are going to hell, well heck i'm going to go right out an play the skin flute and visit the hershey highway. OK i was going to do that anyway

rotflmfao
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:14 PM  

one4god-- somehow, I thought that would be yuour answer. you're still telling me what's wrong with me, instead of looking after yourself.

but if it means you'll be gone-- great.

btw, you're quoting paul, not jesus. so you're just spreading the gospel of paul, who never found anything saifd by Jesus that he didn't feel free to contradict, including not judging others.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:21 PM  

nothing worse than the hereafter being told to everyone by an ANONYMOUS. How pathetic. We need to stop feeding these animals. They obviously feel that they have to have the last word. So just continue with your fantasy since that is the only way you hateful homophobic closet fuckups can get through life. The absolute audacity of these people who profess to know the afterlife never ceases to amaze me. The arrogance is beyond approach. Their ignorance in inpenetrable. Go sing another song out both sides of your mouths.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:36 PM  

from Dan Savages's "The stranger" blog:

he has posted dozens of these. There is an endless supply. This is what happens when a mind is numbed and supressed by fundy christanity

http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/07/youth_pastor_watch_65

one4god are you a youth pastor?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:37 PM  

http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/07/youth_pastor_watch_65
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:38 PM  

One4God to Ben in Oakland

One who understands the Scripture would know that the writers were inspired by God.
God (as the Holy Spirit)inspired about 40 writers of the books and letters known as The Bible. God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are One. (One of the best comparisons I have heard of how this can be is the "triple point" of water where water exists as solid, liquid and vapor.)

So, if the Holy Spirit writes through Paul, His words (the Holy Spirit through Paul) are as weighty as Jesus words which you, and so many like you, so carelessly distort.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:41 PM  

I do not ditort the words of Jesus. I am dismissing your interpretation of the words of Jesus told to you by people other than Jesus. You bible thumpers are idiotic. And now i am not going to respond to you Anonymous because you use the same handle as those who disagree with you so we have no way of knowing what door of deception you hide behind. As usual.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:52 PM  

Aren't you assuming that I don't discuss and debate with Roman Catholics, Jews, and Mormons?

Also, never said all the popes are going to hell. Did you miss the Council of Trent reference? As for Mother Teresa, please read Christopher Hitchens' (an antitheist) The Missionary Position and Mark Michael Zima's (a traditionalist Roman Catholic) Mother Teresa: The Case for the Cause.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:52 PM  

One4God to anon 7/30/2008 6:37 PM

No. I am a Christian saved by the grace of God. I am a teacher of His word as it reads not as how I want it to read. I am a professional, a husband of one wife, a parent and a pretty mediocre golfer!

I have read The Bible through several times and am concerned that so many in this country have denied that God IS. I am concerned that so many have decided to reject God's Word because it has very serious consequences eternally as well as in this life.

The fact that so many can feel so good about the abased existence of "playing the skin flute" and doing the "Hershey highway" makes me want to vomit. Many of you are downright angry and hateful. Unfortunately it will work to your detriment, if not in this life, in the one after. The mockery against Christ displayed here is to be pitied and the lot of you need to be reminded that this temporary life will be judged by the One that you so easily reject.

Why am I here...I saw your buddy Wayne on FOX last night and checked out his site. I am sad that so many of you are so deceived.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 6:55 PM  

Anonymous 1 2 or 3? I don't know. You are a docile coward and an ignorant bufoon with all the same ol ignorant taunts we have heard for years. You must be jerking off to those two lesbians right? Go to your own hell. Hold on. I want you to know that i will say a prayer for your salvation. Puke.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:24 PM  

oh yeah baby. and when you got sight of Wayne on Faux News, you got yourself a little woody and came right over to his site huh?
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:27 PM  

One4God to ewe

So your only defense is an offensive spewing of adjectives and superlatives. Attacking the character of someone you don't even know adds no credibility to your arguments. It only brings you down further than you have already achieved.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:44 PM  

oh of course. do tell us more about your hershey freeway asshole. Eat your own words, you pathetic example of a human being.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:48 PM  

One4God to ewe

Amazing...it galls you that you can't bring me down!!!

I bet in real life you are a nice person. You just have a perverted sexual inclination. Sad.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:55 PM  

That is Ewe's modus operandi. He's got nothing else. He's clearly an intellectual lightweight.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 7:58 PM  

to anonymous and his echo theo: I don't care enough about you to care. Don't flatter yourself. I also am not posting to put you down. I am posting so other gay people see your hypocrisy crystal clear. Your childish schoolyard antics do not serve adults.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 8:06 PM  

By the way anon: I am still in my real life and have never left it for a virtual one which you apparently are in right now according to your own post. Please feel free to read the garbage you spread before you say you are sorry.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 8:11 PM  

Ewe accusing others of "childish schoolyard antics"? That's rich.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 8:21 PM  

One4God to ewe

I'm not sorry, just sad for ewens!
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 8:35 PM  

Tonight i went and spoke somewhere and while i was speaking i did not have the same breath i usually do. I realized it was because i had wasted my time with Anon and Theo and their toxic ugliness which brought out my own. Their sick behavior disguised in their owwn minds as spiritual assistance is horribly unhealthy for people to listen to. It is like a death knoll, void of anything except the dribble that has been gullibly accepted without question. For that i am the one full of pity for them. Love is not the first thing that comes to mind when i read their posts and it made my own reflect the ignorant hate. If people have a problem with gay people who happen to be fully aware of who they are then those same people need to examine their own feelings instead of transferring the lack of knowledge onto us in order to feed some sick way of feeling good about themselves. I have no idea why you get off like that and as i said earlier I don't care either. I do not care about you. That is so wonderful and freeing to say. You do not matter one bit to me. You have a world of disdain you can tap into. You verbally masturbate your sick religious mantras onto gay people here as if what you say has any validity and when it no longer works you call people stupid and finally use the name of god that you obviously have no inkling of to silence people. Your immaturity is disgraceful. You got from me exactly what you gave. I should slap you across the face for digging into the personal lives of gay people when it is not invited and you have nothing of merit to offer. Gay people know how to live in straight society and we know that you have no comprehension of us. That is due to your own walls you willingly build. Instead you blame and turn things around as if we have to explain and defend ourselves to you; complete strangers. I don't want to waste my time teaching the two of you. There are too many people who admit to wanting to understand. We will meet up with your kind in a courtroom where i know that you two specifically would not dare to show your face. But for some reason you think you can anonymously deny others what you flagrantly take for granted. Thank goodness my constitution does not need your approval. Some people do not get that their own rights are enhanced when we fight for the minority. Why should i be surprised. Look at this Donnelly woman and the examples she used against gay people. Something as pathetic as showering together as if we would be interested in anybody or everybody. I suppose Theo and Anon should flatter themselves with one another because i know no gay men would want to.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 10:22 PM  

OK one last post. I need to address the council of Trent and post 32 jews. This is all of todays catholics and all catholics since the mid 16th century. as to post 32 jews, you insult all jews the way you define a jew, you are in reality taliking about...christians HELLO.

you are a snake Theo, hiding behind your own rhetoric. so that is why i am here, to unrap your text.

as to mother teresa. please don't count me as one of her supporters.

now i need to get back to some serious sword swalling. remeber that theo
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 10:26 PM  

now i need to get back to some serious sword swallowing. remeber that theo?

...sorry i type in haste and can't spell for shit

lol
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 10:29 PM  

one4god, you give yourself to much credit. you are a typical suburbian white boy. you spend your free time watching fox and are a slave to a politic that empowers the empowered. you have nothing to offer that hasn't been handed out free of cost by a street corner preacher. your story id old. you know what is in the bible, but nothing about the bible. it is man written, and conflicted to the core. i suggest you read bart erhman's "misquoting jesus". that is if you can leave the echo chamber that is your life.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 10:41 PM  

One4God to ewe

Your post is a premium example of the type of posting and "informational" blogging that you people do.

There isn't a trifle of truth in your post except that about your "hurt" feelings, loss of breath and hatred for people who disagree with you. You HATE those who will not validate the twisted sexual behavior of man/man or woman/woman sex.

It hurts you and you squirm and spew your vitriol all over the pages about how horrible Christians are because they tell you the truth that you wish wasn't so and that you wish you weren't aware. I pity your efforts to convince yourself that the gay agenda is right and should be left unchallenged. But, it-like all sin-is a moral infection to this country and will bring it down. If you people would not try to cram your degrading behavior down the throats of the rest of the people in this country and try to promote your perverted behavior to our children through schools and other organizations you might find more peace. BUT, you come forth with your blatant, in-you-face I'm a gay and you're a jerk attitude trying to put your perverted ones in positions of power to pass laws against wholesome God fearing people to make us accept you or be fined or go to jail. Well ewe, if you feel badly about yourself and your perverted lifestyle then that is your problem. It is wrong, no matter how many times you tell yourself it is right, it will always be wrong.

And, just for you, this will be my last post because I am not going to keep at this. You mind is set and that's that. But, one day when you breathe your last, I hope that you will have turned from this as well as any other sin as best you can. God loved you so much that He sent His only Son to die for you. Reject it if you will, but it will be the ultimate mistake.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 10:47 PM  

I was laughing hysterically throughout your post. There is so much nonsense undeservedly directed at me. You have no idea who i even am and you say such hateful things. I want to clear up one thing since you said you are leaving for good. In your last paragraph you spoke as if you would know what my last breath will be like. First of all i do not believe a word of what you think you believe. Secondly, i have the experience of having been in the sacred presence of many many many many many many (shall i go on) countless beautiful gay men who passed away miserably. I had the honor of being with them when they took their last breath and your words have no substance at all. None. Good bye.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/30/2008 11:19 PM  

dear one4god: I try not to get involved in these ongoing rants, but I know you're reading this.

first, why do you people always use the phrase 'shove this down our throats?" subliminal, huh?

There are three groups of people I never try to convince of anything. People who are irretrievably poisoned by hated and fear. People who believe that their particular book is the capital T truth. And really stupid people.

Sometimes they are rolled into one person. But let's talk about you and Theo and the rest of group 2.

Some Christians believe that their book is, as you put it, the inspired word of god. Apparently, despite all of the errors and contradictions contained within your book, it still remains inspired. you may think that using inspired by instead of word of god lets you off the hook for its inconsistencies and idiocies, its claim to moral authority when it is anything but a book of morals, most of which you ignore in any case (anybody going to Wal-Mart on Sunday?)while claiming its infallibility when it comes to gay people.

like wise, there are Muslims who believe their book is the capital T truth, and so they fly airplanes into buildings. There are Hindus who believe the same, and so they bomb Muslim temples. there are Catholics and protestants who for centuries have murdered each other, and are still doing so. All in the name of the prince of peace.

And of course, when you haven't been killing each other, you are perfectly happy to burn witches, imprison gay people, enslave black people, deny women full personhood, etcetcetcetc, all in the name of your god. We have Theo claiming that the biblical account of creation is correct because, well, why? Because Theo believes it. The billions of facts and observations that make up the ongoing description of evolution make on impression, even though that same method of thinking produces the computer that Theo uses to proclaim her ignorance. the catholic church attacks gay people continually while hiding the child molesters in its (giggle) bosom-- child molesters who, by the way, were given by the catholic god the gift of becoming his chosen priests. why do you think god did that, being all knowing as he is?

Do you begin to see a pattern here?

One of the things you do is proclaim that we gay people must hate you Christians for proclaiming the truth. you can't distinguish between righteous anger and hate, for one. But I don't hate you, despite your belief. Like a good Christian I hate your sins -- your overweening pride, your willful ignorance, your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true, and therefore justifies whatever you do or say, because you are speaking for god and all that is good-- just like all of the other people who murder, oppress, hate, judge and on and on and on.

You portray yourself as a constant victim, moral and wholesome,and we gay people, sick and perverted and vicious as we are, as your oppressors. Do you think this might just be a little self-serving?

Basically, your are just another religious bigot who confuses your belief in god with your image of yourself as god's holy agent on earth. He, of course, is not here to defend himself form the slander.

So, you say you're not a bigot?

Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is an inborn as heterosexuality, despite the testimony of tens of thousands-- if not millions-- of gay people, despite the simple logic of "who would choose a life of discrimination and vilification", you believe that homosexuality is our sin of choice. Your beliefs about us are more important than any amount of actual evidence, but you're not a bigot.

You say that it is not you that is disapproving of homosexuality, and not you that is judging, but God. Funny, I don't hear God talking, I only hear YOU talking. I hear you quoting "God's word", allegedly on this subject, while ignoring all of the passages in the Bible that don't accord with your personal prejudices, whether it is eating shellfish or pork, or destroying all of the unbelievers in our midst with a sword. (Deut. 13-6, 8-15)

Apparently God only means what he says some of the time-- for instance, when he agrees with you.

But you're not a bigot.

Let us not get into the appalling divorce figures for 'sacred' institution of marriage. You quote your Bible about the "wrongness" of homosexuality, but ignore far more compelling commandments that don't comport with your non-prejudices. For example, Jesus was very clear on this subject: divorce is not an option. He also was quite clear about judging others before you yourself have achieved perfection. All of that you just cheerfully ignore, but not for any reasons that could be labeled bigotry.

It's just what you believe. How can that be a statement of bigotry?

In other words, my and our equality before the law can be compromised because of YOUR religious beliefs. If you said that Jews or Buddhists could not have the same civil rights that you do because they do not share your religious beliefs, you would rightly be labeled a religious bigot. But because it is about gay people, and whatever you imagine my sex life to be makes you say "ick", you are not being a bigot...so you say. You're just expressing your religious opinion.

Lest you accuse me of hating you, of being intolerant, of calling you names, let me be clear. I do not hate you, or really, care anything about you. I only wish that you would mind your own business, take care of your own marriage, and stop insisting that you have the right to mind mine--because of what you call your "religious beliefs". You can believe whatever you want, and teach it to your children, and spew it in Church to your heart's delight, however uncomfortable it may be for me to hear it. It's a free country, at least for white, conservative, preferably Christian, heterosexual people. But why to you accuse me of intolerance when I tell you to keep YOUR religious beliefs out of MY life? I haven't told you you can't believe it, or that I will pass laws to make sure that you do-- despite your claims to the contrary.

What you hear from me is not hatred, nor intolerance, nor anything like that. What you hear is ANGER.

I'm sick to death that the course of my life, and my happiness, and those of millions of people just like me, can be subject to your prejudices, whether or you prefer to call them your religious beliefs or just admit them for what they are. I am equally sick that gay people are imprisoned, attacked, murdered, executed, used as political fodder, vilified, condemned, persecuted, jailed, slandered, libeled, and accused of all sort of things that are simply NOT TRUE because someone doesn't approve, or believes their God does not approve.

I am angry as hell that any man and woman who met five minutes ago and have $50 for a marriage license can get married and have the full panoply of rights and obligations that go with it, but my friends Andy and Paul, a devoted couple for 40 years, or Lance and Peter, together for 35 years, are legal strangers to each other. I am angry that they have to jump through all sort of expensive legal hoops to secure their lives together, all of which can be undone by the combination of a distant relative, a homophobic judge, and a law that permits it.

I'm really angry that my friend Steve could not be at his husband's bedside 20 years ago when Johnny was dying, because they didn't have the medical power of attorney documents in their possession when Johnny was struck down. Johnny died alone. Steve grieved for him alone, and didn't get to say goodbye to the man whose life he had shared for 15 years. All of that pain to satisfy some Christian's beliefs about what is moral and immoral.

I'm furious that people like you can smugly say we're all not perfect, but you'll still smarmily judge us anyway, and pretend that you're not. I'm furious that you prattle on an on about morality, but the IMMORALITY of what is done to gay people every day throughout the world, damage that is inflicted on our happiness, our health, our security, and our lives all the time, does not even merit your notice-- let alone an apology. Talk about a crime against nature--what about the crimes against our nature?

You don't approve of homosexuality, or as you put it, you're not in agreement with what you see as our "choice". Let me tell you something. I don't approve of bigots, either. But the world is full of people just like you, who feel you have the right to do and say whatever you like to people you don't know, whom you clearly know nothing about, and who have done you no harm.

And why? Because there is something YOU don't like about them-- their race, their religion, their gender, their ethnic group, their language, or their sexual orientation.
And if you can't slip that one by anyone, you'll even claim that GOD doesn't like it.

Please don't pray for me--what absolute spiritual arrogance. I don't need it and I find it offensive that you think you have the right and spiritual cachet to do so.

And please don't tell me you love me, either. I don't believe it for a moment. I would prefer your naked hatred.

At least there, you are being honest, and not hiding behind your bible.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/31/2008 11:28 AM  

THEO, you've proved yourself to be the idiot over and over and have.

You've already claimed your belief in Adam & Eve as the first parents of the human race, yet you can't even admit that their offspring would have had to have committed incest many times over to populate the earth. Therefore, you not only have accepted incest but you have condoned it by your belief in the story of creation. Its is also clear that your god approves of it for allowing it in the first place.

Incest in this day and age is illegal in almost every country on earth, and I wholeheartedly support the law against it. Since your god approved of it because it is in scripture, you should be fighting to have the law struck down since it conflicts with your belief therein. Mainstream christian cults should do likewise when they proclaim their belief in scripture. You either believe all of it or you you believe in none of it, no cherry-picking Theo, we see through all that.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/31/2008 11:31 AM  

Ben in Oakland: I want you to know how very much i value your post above. Thank you.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/31/2008 1:49 PM  

you're welcome. don't get mad at 'em. they just can't help it. But let 'em know.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/31/2008 3:18 PM  

Ben, well said, beautifully done.
posted by  Anonymous, at 7/31/2008 3:20 PM  

Theo said "If she didn't repent, she would perish. So will the homosexual if they fail to repent.".

Newsflash moron, gays, just like you are going to perish regardless of how much they repent, pray, or preach. You're going to be wormfood just like all of the rest of us, your life is finite.
posted by  Priya Lynn, at 7/31/2008 4:11 PM  

I would address Robert, whoever he is, but he clearly either (a) can't read or (b) has serious, serious reading comprehension problems. For that, he - like Billy Madison - needs to return to grade school.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/01/2008 11:39 AM  

Theo, AJ< as Scott intimate, maybe even Anonymous....COME OUT, pal, stop the bullshit. You're no more straight than I am. You're an idiot and a liar. For someone who claims to be straight, you're spending way too much time on gay blogsites, maybe porn sites too. The reason you are here is that you're a repressed gay man or woman, you're gay and you can't accept it. You even have to invent a name that isn't even yours let alone lie about your sexual orientation. What's next?
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/01/2008 12:51 PM  

Ditto on what robert,nyc said to theo. All except the pal part.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/01/2008 4:53 PM  

One4God to Ben in Oakland

Ben you are a good writer and have a flair for making your point. Granted you post much assumption about me and accuse me of indicating that I have no sin to deal with when in fact I have not implied that in any way.

You accuse that I know the Bible but don't know about the Bible...far from it. I know that the New Testament alone has over 25000 supporting documents, some dating as far back as 125 AD. I know that the book of Isaiah (& other OT books) was found in the Dead Sea scrolls that were almost 1000 years older than the available texts before the discovery. Wherein there were no, I repeat NO, difference in the text aside from a few characters..get that, characters, not words, thoughts or paragraphs. I also know that the oldest text available for the Bible pre-dates some of our most venerated literature such as the Iliad by 900 years. There are more documents proving the longevity and accuracy of the Bible than any manuscript that may be attributed to Shakespear.

I know that you are absolutely correct when you point out the atrocities committed by some who thought they were doing the "Christian" thing. I agree that there are hypocrites galore in the group that you would call Christian people. So, you & I agree in this part of the discussion.

What you miss is the fact that Christians are sinners who are imperfect. What you also miss is that Christians are obligated to share their faith. Another thing you miss is that when a Christian quotes the Bible, it IS God speaking, not the Christian.

You feel picked on because Christians and even other religious sects find the homosexual act perverted. You think that Christians hate you when they actually are truly trying to warn that homosexual behavior is ONE of MANY behaviors that are UNACCEPTABLE to God according to His Word...the Bible. You think that if someone who is a Christian comes to this or any "Gay" site that they are:
A)Hateful
B)Scornful
C)Stupid
D)Homophobic (whatever that means
E)All of the above and more

If those accusations don't work, you then use "trash talk" such as "you must be gay you hang around gay sites" or "I bet you got a hard on when you saw Wayne on O'Riley". That type of response is a form of persecution from you to those of us who are certain that you HATE anyone who challenges your twisted sexual orientation.

You say that testimony of millions of persons of your persuasion is evidence enough that it is okay. You say that science is on your side. How about the child molester is he not made that way? Does that make his behavior okay? How about the man who wants to make love to his sheep or the woman who wants to have sex with her dog, isn't she made that way? Oh, and if I was black and you tried to say that being Gay was every bit as natural as being black...I would take significant issue with you.

It's sad that so many of your friends have died horrible deaths - maybe that was ewe - I don't think anyone should have to experience such. But why, why did all these deaths occur? Was there a famine in the land? Was there a disaster such as a hurricaine? Was it a disease that wiped out all these dear loved ones that could have been prevented with antibiotics? public health? better tissue or blood donor screening? Or was it from a disease that attacks all people hetero or homosexual when that have a promiscuous lifestyle..."Christian" and non-Christian alike.

I don't judge you...it isn't my place. However, it is my place as a person of faith to WARN you, just as I warn people who are gossiping, lying, cheating, and commiting adultery to repent and turn from it. Ben God's Word judges you and makes you feel guilty because I and others like Theo make you aware of it.

Stop thinking you are the intellectual and are putting me or any other believer in our place. I hold more than one college degree from "state" schools. I have studied and reject much of the so called scientific drivel that denies God and His creation. You have a form of intellect, but it will be your ruin in the end coupled with your rationalization that no one has a right to say anything to you about your sexual orientation.

You, especially you Ben are to be pitied...I pity you. Whether you like it or not I have prayed for you and ewe in all your smugness.

And that, is my last word. You write what you want, and make it appear that you have told me off, but you haven't.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/01/2008 11:16 PM  

Ewe, thank you. As for One4God and Anonymous' message to Ben....


Since latter two are believers in the creation fable in Genesis....I'll reiterate what I've said many times before.

We all know the effects of incest, birth defects both mental and physical....is it no wonder that idiots like this come here to post and rant about scripture? They are my friends, direct descendants of incest, the children of Adam and Eve's children. Enough said! Thank goodness, they are outnumbered and a dying breed at that.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/02/2008 8:55 AM  

one4god: as I said, it is pointless to try to convince someone like you of anything-- and I wasn't trying to.

But you let your cat out of the bag with words like perverted.

If you can't tell the difference, as theo can't, between two men or two women who are building a life together, and someone who has sex with a dog, then you have no moral ocmpass whatsoever.

I never said you had no sin to deal iwth. obviously you do which was my point-- and Jesus's.

Lots of christians just frankly don't care about hwat other people do in bed. you don't speak ofr all christians. nor do you or your bible speak for god.

you are judging, whehter you think so or not.

I never said johnny died of aids. that was your assumption. My partner and I are both hiv- negative, and we're not promiscuous.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/02/2008 11:03 AM  

one4godAnon: you most certainly do judge others and when you are confronted, you accuse people of being smug and when all else fails you say that you are just parroting what god told you to. Grow the fuck up. You are full of hate and you are getting it thrown right back at ya. You are like a retarded person who cannot comprehend the reality of other people. It is not a put down to tell you to cram up your hole when all you got is your tired old religious bullshit. You are so annoying. You not god. You. You do not speak for god. god speaks for god. out of your freakin mind is what you are. tired old nonsense over and over again. think for yourself. its annoying. And don't spew out your ugliness and then hide behind god, you coward.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/02/2008 2:22 PM  

I know it is pointless, but here we go again. but i promise, this will be the last time.

"Ben God's Word judges you and makes you feel guilty because I and others like Theo make you aware of it."

I feel guilty? You do not know me or anything about me, yet you presume to tell me what I am feeling. No, I don't feel guilty and I never have. There is nothing wrong with loving another human being, there is nothing wrong with being gay. as I said, i am angry.

You pity me? i have a wonderful husband, wonderful friends, both straight and gay, religious and non. I am happy, healthy, productive, well thought of by family, friends
and colleagues.

what's to pity? oh, yes, you think I'm going opt hell, along with the 4.5 billion people on the planet who do not buy your version of god, or have never heard of it. that's a real winner of a just and loving god, and very suitable for one such as yourself.

As I wrote "One of the things you do is proclaim that we gay people must hate you Christians for proclaiming the truth. you can't distinguish between righteous anger and hate, for one. But I don't hate you, despite your belief. Like a good Christian I hate your sins -- your overweening pride, your willful ignorance, your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true, and therefore justifies whatever you do or say, because you are speaking for god and all that is good-- just like all of the other people who murder, oppress, hate, judge and on and on and on."

You can't see that it is not I that am blinded, it is you-- by your certainty, by your book,
by your pride in knowing THE TRUTH that the rest of us poor mortals just don't know-- but would if only we would listen to the ignorant, the bigoted-- you,in short.

you good Christians pursue and condemn gay people with the same absolute moral certainty that you are doing God's will with which you used to burn witches, justify segregation, and on and on and on-- and iwth as much basis in reality. You feel no shame over the litany of wrongs that you have done, and continue to do, to innocent people who have done you no harm.

you merely reiterate to yourself that THIS time, finally, you know who it is that god doesn't like.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/02/2008 3:29 PM  

One4God writes...

"What you also miss is that Christians are obligated to share their faith. Another thing you miss is that when a Christian quotes the Bible, it IS God speaking, not the Christian."

Actually, claiming that the Bible is "God speaking," is nothing more than a veiled proclamation of your own personal belief that a man written book, riddled with errors and contradictions, is the inspired and inerrant result of a perfect god.

If this is the level of mindless "faith" you wish to share, then by all means, share away. But don't pretend that your say-so is anything more than just that - your say so.
posted by  Unknown, at 8/02/2008 10:19 PM  

Emproph: you hit the nail on the head. This whole topic is about Dont ask Dont tell and somehow these tweakers are tying god and homosexuality into this conversation while deliberately making a controversy between the two. Silly. dumb. Pathetic. Manipulative. Deceiving and generally ignorant. Knock Knock on the door of these idiotic right wing minds but to no avail. No one is home.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/03/2008 4:26 AM  

no fair, emproph. I said that already. Waaaahhh!
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/03/2008 12:06 PM  

"no fair, emproph. I said that already."

LOL. It wouldn't have worked without your effective diatribes.
posted by  Unknown, at 8/03/2008 1:38 PM  

Ben says:
what's to pity? oh, yes, you think I'm going opt hell, along with the 4.5 billion people on the planet who do not buy your version of god, or have never heard of it. that's a real winner of a just and loving god, and very suitable for one such as yourself.


This is the crux of the issue. If all Catholics (excuse me post trent council) go to hell, then the question I would ask is this. Would you rather spend your life trying to be a good catholic in a confessional booth or live a life of sexual freedom and wild abandon? I will choose the latter and I'll say to that "evil" Mother Theresa in hell for ya.

This theological stuff is nutty. I am not going to say that I believe in something that I don't believe in and couldn't make myself if I tried. I would guess that churches are overflowing with people who are embarassed with what they are supposed to believe but can't and can't say so. Think about it, would Rev Sweigart visit a prostitute knowing that he would spend eternity being sodomised by the devil if he really believd in hell. Of course not because he doesn't beleive.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/04/2008 4:46 PM  

You are sort of proposing Pascal's wager: better to take the chance of believing nonsense with eternal reward than to believ sense and risk eternal damnation.

You've described the hypocrisy of organuized religion.. if you REALLY believe what you are saying, then...

But the Xtians have a coping mechanism-- i'm a siner, i just need to repent, and i'll be forgiven, yadayadyayada.
We're all tempted by sin, that';s why JC yadayaydayada.

People also believe that the rules don't apply to them because they are speical.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/04/2008 4:52 PM  

I am a sinner, we are all sinner, but I am a special type of sinner. Don't you see.

I said a little salvation prayer and was born again.

This is their logic. Never mind that the prisons and church pews are filled with people who are serial born againers. Seems it doesn't always "take" the first, second third....time.

Oh, but I sincerely repented. See not just repented, but sincerely repented.

Yea right. Like Reverend Jimmy Sweigart, who would still be whoring if he had not been caught.

Truth is that if there is a god, then only god would know you well enough to know whether you are sincere or not. Meaning that no one knows whether of not they are indeed saved. Because only god knows your heart. The catholics are actually more logical in believing this way. But in the end you are all nucken futz.
posted by  Anonymous, at 8/04/2008 5:02 PM  

There is a cool range of nike air force 1 available including the latest Classic Cardy Style in Black, mens prada shoes, Oatmeal or Cream. These ugg store are almost impossible to get anywhere in the UK and sold out on the cheap Tiffany website within weeks. They are incredibly popular ugg store and its easy to see why. ugg discount is a really versatile boot UGG Bailey Button boots. The three chunky wooden ugg boots Boots Salep the side mean that you can wear them either buttoned up or down and they look great with buy ugg boots.he ultimate in luxury designer clothing has to still be the online shopping Australia boots. These timeless classics are available in nike shoes, Black and Sand these converse shoes really are the last word in comfort footwear. These ugg discount are made entirely from sheepskin with a light Eva sole there is nothing quite Tiffany earring like the feeling of slipping your feet into a brand new pair of ugg boots! But not only do they feel great cheap ugg they look great ugg discount too and can be worn tall or ugg down to expose the sheepskin fur.If you're looking for wholesale supplier for a special lady,discount af1 shoes sale recommend UGG Suburb Crochet from the prada shoesCollection-they have the qualities of great fashion ugg boots online and practicality combined-along with exquisite comfort. If you want to purchase the Tiffany jewelry, please visit ugg classic our online buy ugg boots shop. Welcome to select and buy ugg store!was shocked. But here was a statement ugg shoes that could be checked against future events retail supplies.
posted by  Unknown, at 12/28/2009 3:30 PM  

Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Key and Change Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Keys Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Keys Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Keys Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Keys Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Keys Holder
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Sarah Wallet
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Sarah Wallet
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Sarah Wallet
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Zippy Wallet
Louis Vuitton Monogram Vernis Zippy Wallet
posted by  Anonymous, at 1/06/2010 9:37 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

January 16, 2005   January 23, 2005   January 30, 2005   February 06, 2005   February 13, 2005   February 20, 2005   February 27, 2005   March 06, 2005   March 13, 2005   March 20, 2005   March 27, 2005   April 03, 2005   April 10, 2005   April 17, 2005   April 24, 2005   May 01, 2005   May 08, 2005   May 15, 2005   May 22, 2005   May 29, 2005   June 05, 2005   June 12, 2005   June 19, 2005   June 26, 2005   July 03, 2005   July 10, 2005   July 17, 2005   July 24, 2005   July 31, 2005   August 07, 2005   August 14, 2005   August 21, 2005   August 28, 2005   September 04, 2005   September 11, 2005   September 18, 2005   September 25, 2005   October 02, 2005   October 09, 2005   October 16, 2005   October 23, 2005   October 30, 2005   November 06, 2005   November 13, 2005   November 20, 2005   November 27, 2005   December 04, 2005   December 11, 2005   December 18, 2005   December 25, 2005   January 01, 2006   January 08, 2006   January 15, 2006   January 22, 2006   January 29, 2006   February 05, 2006   February 12, 2006   February 19, 2006   February 26, 2006   March 05, 2006   March 12, 2006   March 19, 2006   March 26, 2006   April 02, 2006   April 09, 2006   April 16, 2006   April 23, 2006   April 30, 2006   May 07, 2006   May 14, 2006   May 21, 2006   May 28, 2006   June 04, 2006   June 11, 2006   June 18, 2006   June 25, 2006   July 02, 2006   July 09, 2006   July 16, 2006   July 23, 2006   July 30, 2006   August 06, 2006   August 13, 2006   August 20, 2006   August 27, 2006   September 03, 2006   September 10, 2006   September 17, 2006   September 24, 2006   October 01, 2006   October 08, 2006   October 15, 2006   October 22, 2006   October 29, 2006   November 05, 2006   November 12, 2006   November 19, 2006   November 26, 2006   December 03, 2006   December 10, 2006   December 17, 2006   December 31, 2006   January 07, 2007   January 14, 2007   January 21, 2007   January 28, 2007   February 04, 2007   February 11, 2007   February 18, 2007   February 25, 2007   March 04, 2007   March 11, 2007   March 18, 2007   March 25, 2007   April 01, 2007   April 08, 2007   April 15, 2007   April 22, 2007   April 29, 2007   May 06, 2007   May 13, 2007   May 20, 2007   May 27, 2007   June 03, 2007   June 10, 2007   June 17, 2007   June 24, 2007   July 01, 2007   July 08, 2007   July 15, 2007   July 22, 2007   July 29, 2007   August 05, 2007   August 12, 2007   August 19, 2007   August 26, 2007   September 02, 2007   September 09, 2007   September 16, 2007   September 23, 2007   September 30, 2007   October 07, 2007   October 14, 2007   October 21, 2007   October 28, 2007   November 04, 2007   November 11, 2007   November 18, 2007   November 25, 2007   December 02, 2007   December 09, 2007   December 16, 2007   December 23, 2007   December 30, 2007   January 06, 2008   January 13, 2008   January 20, 2008   January 27, 2008   February 03, 2008   February 10, 2008   February 17, 2008   February 24, 2008   March 02, 2008   March 09, 2008   March 16, 2008   March 23, 2008   March 30, 2008   April 06, 2008   April 13, 2008   April 20, 2008   April 27, 2008   May 04, 2008   May 11, 2008   May 18, 2008   May 25, 2008   June 01, 2008   June 08, 2008   June 15, 2008   June 22, 2008   June 29, 2008   July 06, 2008   July 13, 2008   July 20, 2008   July 27, 2008   August 03, 2008   August 10, 2008   August 17, 2008   August 24, 2008   August 31, 2008   September 07, 2008   September 14, 2008   September 21, 2008   September 28, 2008   October 05, 2008   October 12, 2008   October 19, 2008   October 26, 2008   November 02, 2008   November 09, 2008   November 16, 2008   November 23, 2008   November 30, 2008   December 07, 2008   December 14, 2008   December 21, 2008   December 28, 2008   January 04, 2009   January 11, 2009   January 18, 2009   January 25, 2009   February 01, 2009   February 08, 2009   February 15, 2009   February 22, 2009   March 01, 2009   March 08, 2009   March 15, 2009   March 22, 2009   March 29, 2009   April 05, 2009   April 12, 2009   April 19, 2009   April 26, 2009   May 03, 2009   May 10, 2009   May 17, 2009   May 24, 2009   May 31, 2009   June 07, 2009   June 14, 2009   June 21, 2009   June 28, 2009   July 12, 2009   July 19, 2009   July 26, 2009   August 02, 2009   August 09, 2009   August 16, 2009   August 23, 2009   August 30, 2009   September 06, 2009   September 13, 2009   September 20, 2009   September 27, 2009   October 04, 2009   October 11, 2009   October 18, 2009   November 01, 2009   November 08, 2009   November 15, 2009   November 22, 2009   December 06, 2009   December 13, 2009   December 20, 2009   December 27, 2009   January 17, 2010   January 24, 2010   January 31, 2010   February 07, 2010   February 14, 2010   February 21, 2010   March 21, 2010   April 18, 2010   June 06, 2010   July 18, 2010   July 25, 2010   October 31, 2010   December 19, 2010   April 10, 2011