You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
Truth Wins Out (TWO) condemned Focus on the Family today for distorting Centers for Disease Control (CDC) statistics on HIV and encouraging the very sexual behavior that spreads the disease. By doing so, Focus on the Family is promoting a culture of death and encouraging sexually active people to act recklessly and irresponsibly, says TWO.
Last week, the United States acknowledged it had underreported new cases of HIV. It revised the statistics from approximately 40,000 new infections in 2006, to 56,000 - a 40 percent increase. Focus on the Family spokesperson Jeff Johnston shamelessly exploited the revised data to oppose safer-sex practices, which would have prevented nearly all of the reported infections. Instead, he implied that gay men should marry women they did not find sexually attractive:
"Outside of a faithful marriage between a man and a woman, there is no 'safe sex,'" said Johnston. "It is irresponsible to teach people that you can have 'safe sex' or 'safer sex' outside of marriage."
"It is undeniable that safe sex works and has saved the lives of millions of people," said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. "Contrary to Focus on the Family's death-promoting dogma, there is no HIV crisis for gay or straight men who practice the very safe sex techniques that they have irresponsibly dismissed. Furthermore, how is a gay man in a relationship any more at risk than a heterosexual man in a relationship? Focus on the Family's propaganda defies science, logic and common sense."
It is also odd that Focus on the Family presumes that marriage is a panacea that makes teaching safe sex unnecessary. Mike Trout, the longtime co-host on Focus on the Family's radio program, said on Oct. 17, 2000 that he had an inappropriate relationship with a woman other than his wife.
"Right wingers should learn about condoms too, so when they cheat on their spouses, they do so safely and not bring STD's into the home," said Besen. "This is particularly true in Bible Belt states which have the highest divorce rates in the nation. It is never helpful to promote ignorance over education - and that is precisely the sex education paradigm embraced by Focus on the Family."
In a CitizenLink press release, Focus on the Family also distorted the proportion of reported HIV infections in 2006 that were attributable to men who have sex with men.
"The Centers for Disease Control reported that 53 percent -- barely half -- of new HIV infections in 2006 were attributable to MSM. Focus on the Family inflated this statistic to 'almost 60 percent' and falsely attributed this exaggeration to the CDC," said Truth Wins Out's news director Mike Airhart.
Concerning the reference to high divorce rates in the so-called "Bible Belt," Wayne is simply repeating a statistic without analyzing it, making him as duplicitous with studies as Focus on the Family often is. Sociologists David Popenoe and Scott Stanley have already explained that this higher divorce rate in southern states is due primarily to increased rates of poverty, as well as marriage at younger ages. For example, these states rank at the bottom of the country for household income. As has been known for years, among the other hardships of life experienced by lower-income families is troubled marriages.
But you see, Wayne's argument actually is a logical fallacy - a false cause argument, along the lines of post hoc ergo propter hoc. These southern states have many other features, besides a high number of self-identifying "evangelicals."
For example, they also have the highest per capita consumption of barbecue ribs. Could one then argue that eating ribs causes divorce?
Just because A happened before B (breaking a mirror prior to seven years of bad luck) does not mean that A caused B.
More controlled studies - which narrow down the influencing factors - have clearly demonstrated how that conservative Christianity does, in fact, contribute to strong marriages. Religious people tend to be more satisfied with their marriages - even reporting higher sexual satisfaction - than couples who are not religious. And, religious couples are, in fact, less likely to get a divorce. Religion is only a negative factor when one partner is religious but the other is not.
But, even given the fact that statistics can be misleading and that Christianity does contribute to good marriages, it is nevertheless true that there is too much divorce, even among conservative Christians. No argument there.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 11:59 AM
Wayne is not taking Christian divorce rates out of context whatsoever, because he isn't suggesting a corollary between the failure of those marriages and religion; he is using that fact to illustrate the hypocrisy of the born again crowd, which piously asserts the "sanctity or marriage" for their own political purposes while not upholding that standard for themselves. It totally obliterates their claim to moral superiority in this regard.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 12:48 PM
Wayne, they're all in denial, they'll make any excuse to avoid the truth. There is no such thing as "safe sex" either, not even within a marriage. There is "safer" sex, nothing is 100% guaranteed. Viruses of course can lie dormant, benign or otherwise or go undetected for years and not show up on a test.
Anonymous states..."Sociologists David Popenoe and Scott Stanley have already explained that this higher divorce rate in southern states is due primarily to increased rates of poverty, as well as marriage at younger ages. For example, these states rank at the bottom of the country for household income. As has been known for years, among the other hardships of life experienced by lower-income families is troubled marriages."
The above of course refers to "christian" heterosexuals. Its all that incestuous inbreeding in the southern states, the christian fundamentalists who believe in scripture. They're all by-products of the incestuous relationships enjoyed by Adam & Eve's children.
Anonymous, I think you should concentrate on your fellow christians' penchant for divorce and their addiction to extra-marital sex instead of wasting your precious time trolling a gay blogsite. You're spending an awful lot of time here, I wonder why? Get your own house in order first, hypocrite.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 12:50 PM
Anonymous also commits a simplistic logical error when he attempts to explain away the high Christian divorce rate as "...due primarily to increased rates of poverty, as well as marriage at younger ages." Of course, the non-Christians who live in those states also experience those increased rates of poverty as well as marriage at younger ages; those factors are a constant for both groups.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 1:11 PM
......"Sociologists David Popenoe and Scott Stanley have already explained that this higher divorce rate in southern states is due primarily to increased rates of poverty, ...
idiotic reasoning. what he is saying is that the divorce rate is high among poor christians. i thought jebus was the panacia for this. you know; it's not the people in the ghetto, it's the ghetto in the people.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 1:13 PM
Article by Andrew Sullivan:
The other is Bush country, solidly Republican, traditional and gun-toting. Massachusetts voted for John Kerry over George W Bush 62% to 37%; Texas voted for Bush over Kerry 61% to 38%.
Ask yourself a simple question: which state has the highest divorce rate? Marriage was a key issue in the last election, with Massachusetts’ gay marriages becoming a symbol of alleged blue state decadence and moral decay. But in fact Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 inhabitants. Texas, which until recently made private gay sex a crime, has a divorce rate of 4.1.
A fluke? Not at all. The states with the highest divorce rates are Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. The states with the lowest divorce rates are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont.
Every one of the high divorce rate states went for Bush. Every one of the low divorce rate states went for Kerry. The Bible Belt divorce rate is roughly 50% higher than the national average.
Some of this discrepancy can be accounted for by the fact that couples tend to marry younger in the Bible Belt and many do not have the maturity to know what they are getting into. There is some correlation, too, between rates of college education and stable marriages, with the Bible Belt lagging behind a highly educated state such as Massachusetts.
The irony still holds, however. Those parts of America that most fiercely uphold what they believe are traditional values are not those parts where traditional values are healthiest. Hypocrisy? Perhaps. A more insightful explanation is that socially troubled communities cling to absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice.
Doesn’t being born again help to bring down divorce rates? Jesus was clear about divorce, declaring it a sin unless adultery was involved. A recent study found no measurable difference in divorce rates between those who are “born again” and those who are not; 29% of Baptists have been divorced, compared with 21% of Catholics. Moreover, a staggering 23% of married born agains have been divorced twice or more.
Teenage births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state such as Texas where the religious right is strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, teen births as a percentage of all births are 16.1%. In liberal, secular Massachusetts they are 7.4%, less than half.
Marriage itself is less popular in Texas than in Massachusetts. In Texas the proportion of people unmarried is 32.4%; in Massachusetts it is 26.8%. So even with a higher marriage rate, Massachusetts has a divorce rate almost half of its “conservative” rival.
Take abortion. America is one of the few western countries where the legality of abortion is still ferociously disputed. It is a country where the religious right is arguably the strongest single voting bloc and in which abortion is a constant feature of cultural politics.
Compare it with a country such as Holland, perhaps the epitome of social liberalism. Which country has the highest rate of abortion? It is not even close. America has a rate of 21 abortions per 1,000 women aged between 15 and 44. Holland has a rate of 6.8. Americans, in other words, have three times as many abortions as the Dutch. Remind me again: which country is the most socially conservative?
Even a cursory look at the leading members of the forces of social conservatism in America reveals the same pattern. Rush Limbaugh, the top conservative talk-radio host, has had three divorces and an addiction to painkillers. Bill O’Reilly, the most popular conservative television personality, just settled a sex harassment suit that indicated a highly active adulterous sex life. Bill Bennett, guru of the social right, was for many years a gambling addict. Bob Barr, the conservative Georgian congressman who wrote the Defense of Marriage Act, has had three wives. The states that register the highest ratings for Desperate Housewives, the hot new television show, are Bush states.
The complicated truth is that America is a divided and conflicted country. But it is a grotesque exaggeration to say that the split is geographical or correlated with Democrat and Republican states. Many of America’s biggest “sinners” are those most intent on upholding virtue. It may be partly because they know sin close up that they want to prevent its occurrence among others.
Some of those states that have the most liberal legal climate — the northeast and parts of the upper Midwest — are also in practice among the most socially conservative. To ascribe all this to “hypocrisy” seems to me too crude an explanation. America is simply a far more complicated and diverse place than crude red and blue divisions can explain.
The spasms of moralism that have punctuated American history from the Puritans all the way through prohibition and now the backlash against gay marriage are not a war of one part of the country against another. They are a war within the souls of all Americans.
Within many a red state voter there is a blue state lifestyle. And within many a blue state liberal there is a surprisingly resilient streak of moralism. It is this internal conflict that makes America such a vibrant and compelling place.
The conflict exists perhaps most powerfully within the Republican states themselves as they grapple with the “sin” of their own practices and the high standards of their own aspirations. It is worth remembering that Bill Clinton was a product of a Republican state and that for more than half his life Bush was a dissolute wastrel from a Democrat-state family.
These contradictions are not the exceptions. They are the American rule. If you love this tortured and fascinating country they are one more reason to be thankful that it still exists.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 1:41 PM
Anonymous said "religious couples are, in fact, less likely to get a divorce.".
A lie as is so typical of christians. The fact is "divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience. George Barna, president and founder of Barna Research Group, commented: "While it may be alarming to discover that born again Christians are more likely than others to experience a divorce, that pattern has been in place for quite some time. Even more disturbing, perhaps, is that when those individuals experience a divorce many of them feel their community of faith provides rejection rather than support and healing. But the research also raises questions regarding the effectiveness of how churches minister to families. The ultimate responsibility for a marriage belongs to the husband and wife, but the high incidence of divorce within the Christian community challenges the idea that churches provide truly practical and life-changing support for marriages.""
Born-again Christians are just as likely to divorce as non-born again adults. A new study from Barna Research Group, released earlier this month, shows that 33 percent of all born-again individuals who have been married have gonethrough a divorce. That number is statistically identical to the 34 percent of non-born again adults who divorce, says Barna.
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:L8obB_ZVOBgJ:faculty.leeu.edu/~daltopp/Born%2520Again%2520adults.pdf+divorce+barna&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=33&gl=ca
posted by Priya Lynn, at
8/08/2008 2:35 PM
Even if poverty is the main reason for divorce in the south it is still the fault of religious zealots.
1) They vote for candidates who give tax breaks for the rich at the expense of the poor (See Phil Gram and his "mental recession")
2) They don't do anything to life people out of poverty in these states, for all their talk of morals and are hostile to government intervention of any kind
3) Back in the day, religion was used to justify slavery and Jim Crow, thus leading to many African Americans being poor today, as they have not had the luxury of inheriting wealth.
4) The red states - in the name of religion are still electing candidates who are hostile to helping the poor and middle class. This lifts the divorce rate. So, fundamentalists in the Bible belt are partially responsible for the high divorce rate.
Yea, and just listen to twisted interpretation of the bible from evangelicals that say divorce is not such a big sin. In reality for every statement in the bible that has some vague reference to homosexuality, there are about a million verses dealing with the prohibition of divorce. Instead the fundys treat divorce as a one time single incident of sin equivalent to, say swearing, that can be prayed away; i.e. "dear lord forgive me for ending my marriage, amen. And presto chango out of jail free. Never mind the hell this puts children through. These people are the real moral relativists.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/08/2008 3:56 PM
The findings in numerous national polls conducted by highly respected pollsters like The Gallup Organization and The Barna Group are simply shocking. Gallup and Barna surveys do show that many people who identify themselves as "evangelical Christians" are as likely to embrace lifestyles every bit as sexually immoral as the world in general. And yes, divorce is more common or as common among self-identifying "born-again" Christians than in the general American population.
But not all the polls and surverys and studies are bleak. Although Wayne and his ilk would probably never cite this study, sociologist Christian Smith compared the attitudes and behavior of evangelical, fundamentalist, mainline, liberal, and Catholic Christians as well as those of the "non-religious" and found that over the previous two years, evangelicals were more than three times more likely to have given "a lot" of money to help the poor and the needy than the non-religious. In fact, evangelicals scored higher than any other Christian group.
A Pew Center poll in 2001 supported Smith's findings. In this survey, those with a high religious commitment were a little more than three times as likely as those with a low religious commitment to have volunteered to help poor, sick, and elderly people in the last month (35 percent vs. 11 percent).
George Barna has developed a set of criteria to identify people with a "biblical worldview." These people believe that "the Bible is the moral standard" and also think that "absolute moral truths exist and are conveyed through the Bible."
In addition, they agree with all six of the following additional beliefs:
God is the all-knowing, all-powerful Creator who still rules the universe; Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; Satan is a real, living entity; salvation is a free gift, not something we can earn; every Christian has a personal responsibility to evangelize; and the Bible is totally accurate in all it teaches.
The good news is that the small circle of people with a biblical worldview demonstrate genuinely different behavior. For example, Christians with a biblical worldview have volunteered more than an hour in the previous week to an organization serving the poor, much more than non-religious people.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/09/2008 12:02 PM
Here's the difference between sane people and homophobic people who see the same statistics on AIDS:
Sane People: how can we effectively address this problem?
Homophobic People: How can we exploit these findings to make the most people miserable?
...
And anonymous, shut the hell up. Anyone who believes the Bible is any source of morality, let alone the best one, needs a fucking CAT scan.
Or they could just bother reading it for a change.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/09/2008 1:44 PM
That's right Eshto. Any book that teaches original sin, the idea that people inherit the sins of another and that thought crimes, finding the bible unbelievable, are deserving of eternal torture can't in any way shape or form be considered a source of morality.
posted by Priya Lynn, at
8/09/2008 2:06 PM
actually aj/theo,
the VAST majority of money that christians give is to their church. You mislead to claim that this is given to the poor. It is given to promote the propaganda of their respective sects. Sure some is given to the poor, but no one has given more to the poor then the atheist Bill Gates. He has given the largest endowement ever.Bigger then the Carnagie endowment.
but at least you were able to give your tiresome and obligatory evengilical witness:
God is the all-knowing, all-powerful Creator who still rules the universe; (perhaps, if there is a god)
Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; (some christians say yes some say no, but we are talking myths here)
Satan is a real, living entity;
(there is evil in the world, how childish to have to personify it)
salvation is a free gift, not something we can earn; (acording to the evil John Calvin, murder and torturer)
every Christian has a personal responsibility to evangelize;
(every secularist has a duty to enact laws to keep this out of public places, and every employer has a right to say "not on my time". this responsibility makes you some of the most tiresome people on earth, a fact I am reminded of every time a J.w. or mormon knocks on my door)
and the Bible is totally accurate in all it teaches.
(it is so full of inaccuracies that even a first semester law student could tear it to peaces)
p.s.
There is no proof that prayer works. NONE, notta, zilch. This in itself disproves christanity or any religion
posted by Anonymous, at
8/09/2008 2:56 PM
The lowest rates of divorce are among Episcopalians. We are just too classy to be pumping out bastard babies.
interview of the most charitable human in the history of mankind. Enjoy:
Gates was profiled in a January 13, 1996 TIME magazine cover story. Here are some excerpts compiled by the Drudge Report:
"Isn't there something special, perhaps even divine, about the human soul?" interviewer Walter Isaacson asks Gates "His face suddenly becomes expressionless," writes Isaacson, "his squeaky voice turns toneless, and he folds his arms across his belly and vigorously rocks back and forth in a mannerism that has become so mimicked at MICROSOFT that a meeting there can resemble a round table of ecstatic rabbis."
"I don't have any evidence on that," answers Gates. "I don't have any evidence of that."
He later states, "Just in terms of allocation of time resources, religion is not very efficient. There's a lot more I could be doing on a Sunday morning."
posted by Anonymous, at
8/09/2008 3:18 PM
AJ/THEO = fRED PHELPS WITH PERFUME
posted by Anonymous, at
8/09/2008 8:03 PM
Anonymous said "The lowest rates of divorce are among Episcopalians".
No, that's not the case, read the link I gave you:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
"Barna's results verified findings of earlier polls: that conservative Protestant Christians, on average, have the highest divorce rate, while mainline Christians have a much lower rate. They found some new information as well: that atheists and agnostics have the lowest divorce rate of all."
posted by Priya Lynn, at
8/09/2008 8:13 PM
"every Christian has a personal responsibility to evangelize"
Actually, by your own theology, not. If salvation is through grace rather then works, then there is no need to evangelize, since this by strict definition, is work. So it must now be asked what other works are necessary for salvation.
(can't wait to hear this twisted "logic")
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 1:02 AM
The last comment is a perfect example of when not to write something and reveal your stupidity. For if you can't represent another person's view in a way that he would agree with, then you have no right to disagree with him. Its fine if you disagree with the Bible's teaching on salvation and the difference between faith and works, but you should at least attempt to honestly present those teachings instead of setting up one straw man after another.
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2: 8 - 9
Ephesians 2 contains that magnificent statement concerning the eternal salvation which is graciously provided by our Creator God through the medium of faith in Jesus Christ. Faith is a personal conviction which a person exercises when he or she encounters the Good News of Jesus the Christ. The clear exhortation from St. Paul the Apostle and the other NT writers is for people to believe in Jesus Christ, His sacrificial death for sin, and resurrection. God provides the free gift of salvation on the basis of His grace, or unmerited favor. People must receive the free gift of salvation by means of their faith.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 2:17 PM
I am afraid that you are the stupid one, because you, if fact did not dispute the post you are critical of. Instead you make the claim that on is saved by grace through faith alone. I am not disputing that. what I am saying is that is contridicted when you make the statement that I quoted:
"every Christian has a personal responsibility to evangelize"
If you must evangelize, then,in fact, faith alone is not enough. You must also evangelize, which is in fact a "work". Hope this clears it up a little. You would agree that evangelizing is a work wouldn't you.
Nope. You're still the ignorant one - opposing that which you clearly do not understand (faith vs. works in Christian soteriology).
Christians are saved from God's judgment by God's grace, which they receive through their personal faith in Jesus Christ and His work. "Justification" is the legal declaration by our Creator God upon a human lawbreaker/sinner, where God declares the lawbreaker/sinner to be righteous.
This declaration by God is based completely and totally on the work of Christ on the Cross. A person is justified by faith - that is, they are placed in a right standing before God by their faith in Jesus Christ.
Christians are not saved by "works" - and yes, post-conversion evangelism is a "good work." Works and good deeds have absolutely no affect upon a Christian's salvation. Good works do not earn them salvation, nor do good works help Christians keep their salvation.
But none of this means that Christians are not to have good works. If people claim to be Christians and they do not have good works, then they are not truly saved.
Why? Because their actions - or in this context the lack of good works - demonstrate the faith they have is not a real one. Once truly saved from God's judgment based on their true faith in Christ, the Christian is now changed. They now do good works such as evangelism, not to "earn" salvation, but to please and honor the God they were created to please and honor. Christians don't do good works to be saved or stay saved. They do good works because they are saved.
So the relationship between faith and works in Christian soteriology, that you grossly misunderstand, is really quite simple. Christians are saved by faith, not by works. But, once saved, they do good works because they are already saved.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 2:59 PM
afraid not theo. You logic is so illogical that they had to invent a branch of study that I am will aware of, soteriology to defend it.
It is a wonder how generations of uneducated illiterate folks ever made it to heaven without the benifit of theological studies in soteriology. Considering that almost no one had, or could even read, a bible before the 18th century.
There are some ideas that are so idiotic that one must be religious to believe them.
actually one is save by hope, not faith
Romans 8:24
one can never accuse god of making clearity a priority. if the bible really came from god, we wouldn't be debating this crap, because it would be so clear that an uneducated farm hand would be able to get it. If god really was against homosexuality, wouldn't it have been easier to just say, "don't stick your cock in another guys ass". I think they had greek words for cock and ass back then. and wouldn't that have made this comment thread moot.
Yeah, I just did some research on the CDC findings. And as an ex gay christian - yes, I agree that FOTF skewed the interpretation of those findings. Statistiscs are easy to skew, however, there is training for reporters and statistics and how to report on them. Perhaps should send their people there.
It really bigs me that this kind of reporting goes on.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 3:18 PM
And again, as an ex gay christian - divorce is equally as high in the religious community as it is in the non-religious community. Geez - accountability folks!
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 3:19 PM
ex gay christian
the only type of "ex gays" are christians. I have never heard of and "ex gay" athiest or buddist, which I guess means that homosexuality is caused by a lack of Jesus.
again you are not "ex gay". you love cock and hate the poonany. as far as the christian thing goes you will have to ask theo if you are one of those. he is the final word on that.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 3:43 PM
Biblical and Systematic Theology is just too tough for some people. And if my logic is so bad, how about listing and explaining some of the logical fallacies I commit. You know, like actual analysis...
Anyone want a real "lol"? Read the following again:
"Considering that almost no one had, or could even read, a bible before the 18th century."
Help me out here, what percent of the christian population had a bible in their possession before the 18th century? what per cent of the christian world was literate before the 18th century? for the first 1400 years of the christian era, with no printing presses no one read a bible from cover to cover (which pretty much places them in line with contemporary christians). The printing press would not get many bibles into the hands of the general public until much later.
Statistical research shows that less than 10% of professing Christians have ever read the entire Bible. The church as a whole is Biblically illiterate! Much less knowledgeable soteriology.
theo, your case really falls apart and you, like all christians, are unable to be certain of your own salvation, much less others. which is moot since we are talking myths anyway. Your false sense of security keeps you coming back to this blog in a desperate attempt to convince yourself that you believe this crap, which you really don't in the end. now go back to sleep and dream of the good ol days when you gave yourself permission to suck the cock they you love so well.
actually all of aj's theology is Calvin based. But how much credability can one put in John Calvin, who over saw murder and torture of the non believers.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/10/2008 7:42 PM
hello, everyone: you would be best not to debate iwth theo/aj/anonymous (sounds like the holy trinity at least in her own mind).
This is a person who made the statement that without god, there is no basis for morality. Obviously, someone with no understanding of either. debate with her is a waste of electrons.
the god of theo ld testament a ofunt ofm orality. My 6 year old nephew has more morals. The god of the new testament who sacrifces his own son or commits suicide or whatever to scorrect the problem which he himself created-- with the caveat that you must believe he did it to benefit from it?
to quote my 6 year old nephew-- that's just not fair.
don't feed the trolls. Or as I would like to put it--
never mudwrestle with a pig. you only get dirty, andthe pig loves it.
posted by Anonymous, at
8/13/2008 12:28 PM
As a concervative christian - it is true and I agree that most of the church has niether read the entire bible nor taken any time that could be considered significant to study the bible in it's context, meaning and language, and interpretation.
Toooooo many people are falling in like herded cows. Same goes for the far left liberals, too. Again toooo many are falling in step with whatever is being told to them whether it is true or not.
Soooo, when someon starts in on the immorality of another person - all I can do is look inward and ask God for forgiveness for us all.
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 4:11 PM
