Accidents won’t happen
My husband and I watched the documentary Pregnant Man on Discovery Health last night.
It showed how “gender reassigned” Thomas Beatie got pregnant: by choosing sperm on the Internet whose donor had “wife” Nancy’s coloring and was smart, mail-ordering it, receiving a canister with the sperm on dry ice, heating it to 90 degrees, and injecting it via needleless syringe.
The world sure has changed, and so quickly. It seems to me it is suddenly spinning out of control.
And I read this today on AOL Entertainment. Ellen DeGeneres was asked about having children with “wife” Portia de Rossi, and answered…
[W]e have a lot of friends who have babies, and they’re amazing and change your life and there was a time we were thinking about it … [but] today is no.
I think that is one of the things about not being able to just accidentally get pregnant and have a child. You really, really have to want one, whether it’s trying to figure out how you get pregnant or if you adopt.
I think that’s even more of a reason that people that aren’t able to have kids should be allowed to adopt….
No, under normal circumstances, both Ellen and Portia could likely conceive. It’s not that they “aren’t able.” It’s that their sexual behavior stops them from procreating.
A part of me feels nothing but compassion for these misled people. I liked Thomas and Nancy. I like Ellen.
The other part of me is angry that they try to force support of their abnormal behavior on the rest of us while dragging others down with them.
Read my previous posts on “The pregnant man.”
[Photo of Beatie coutesy of Discovery Health; photo of DeGeneres/Portia courtesy of AOL Entertainment]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Dennis Prager recently spoke on Focus on the family regarding Homosexuality. He knows that the gays do not study or understand our Christian beliefs. He did an excellent job in defending opposition to homosexuality using the bible , history and science. If we leave it in the gay appologist court, they offer no ways in which they bring a better society. It is still a paraphilia from which people can find deliverance.
No one is trying to force anything on you. If they were they would be trying to make you gay. You, on the other hand, are trying to forceyour views upon others by saying that homosexual behaviour is immoral and unions between same-sex couples should be illegal.
Not that I expect you to see this. You’re too blind to see past your own nose.
“He knows that the gays do not study or understand our Christian beliefs.”
They study and understand Christian beliefs. You can’t change who you are, though.
You can change what you do, though. And it doesn’t take a theologian to figure out that Christianity does not condone homosexual acts.
Josephine, I hate the statement “you can’t change who you are.”
Yes, you can.
My nature is to be a slovenly slob. Seriously, when I was the kid whose desk was always spilling out with papers. I never lost anything because there is order to my madness, but I was definitely quite a sight to behold.
Now that I’m married with two kids, I can’t just be a slob. Mess doesn’t bother me, but it bothers my kids and it bothers my husband and therefore I had to *change* my behavior in order to run a successful household. It’s really a struggle for me, but I do it because I view it as something outside of myself.
We all have something sinful built into our nature. My problem is sloth, maybe someone else eats too much, or someone else lies, or whatever.
Some people struggle with sexual issues. We don’t encourage a man with a sex addiction to go about sleeping with every woman in his office and cheating on his wife, so why would we support the actions of someone sleeping with someone of the same sex. It’s the same issue.
Here’s the problem. No one is fighting for the right to lie. We don’t have rallies for gluttony. But the homosexual agenda denies its sinful nature and instead celebrates its definance. This is why I have a problem with the homosexual movement.
We all have private sins, but through the grace of God we can limit their impact on our lives. Of course, we will most likely struggle with these sins our entire lives, and at times fail. That’s ok as long as we realize that they are sins and work constantly to do better and get closer to God.
Telling someone living in sin that everything is a-ok doesn’t help them. The most horrible thing we can do is to label a sin a “lifestyle choice” and make a person believe that they are not living apart from God. For it is only the knowledge that we are living apart from God that allows us to begin living for Him.
“you can’t change who you are”
Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3 “ye must be born again”
One of the deliberate lies is that people can’t change. Every day people change. There are thousands of testimonies of people that changed and know they cahnged.
http://www.narth.com/
Fortunately there are more and more health care articles about truth and change. No tobacco smokers were born addicted but they often get the habit about the age people get introducted to homosexuality. The gay movement wants to slam the door on hope for change. Every day we see people change. Every day other people deny that others have changed.
The reaason gays seeek contack with youth is because they know they can be influenced and changed.
lauren, your words mean nothing to someone who does not share your religious beliefs.
Anon, just because someone is living in sin doesn’t mean that they are “bad” people any more so than anyone else. I watched the documentary too, and found the couple perfectly pleasant.
Of course, it isn’t exactly pleasant to call someone fat, so perhaps you fall short of that mark.
Jill isn’t being “mean”. Would you consider it “mean” to confront a friend who was drinking too much? What would be more merciful, confronting the friend about his drinking, or letting him continue to drink until he died?
There’s a difference between changing things about yourself and changing WHO you are.
And, if you can argue that you CAN change, do you think YOU have the ability to be gay? Do you think you could just decide to be gay one day and do it? Not just the actions, but have the FEELINGS for the same sex.
No one is trying to force anything on you. If they were they would be trying to make you gay. You, on the other hand, are trying to forceyour views upon others by saying that homosexual behaviour is immoral and unions between same-sex couples should be illegal.
Not that I expect you to see this. You’re too blind to see past your own nose.
Posted by: Leah at November 24, 2008 3:14 PM
You are doing exactly what you condem. You are forcing your views on us without evidence. You are trying to force it as morally acceptible behavior and marriage as a right. If homosexuality is so incredible dandy, why do they have a lower life expectancy by 25 years. They eat the same food and breath the same air. Can’t play the guilt card because overweight people eat with guilt and don’t die from guilt or suicide. They die from diabetes or something else.
Again why are they forcing their agenda? Why are they so bigoted and intolerant? Why the threats and slams? Why the hate?
They are not born that way.
Anon, first of all I am called to speak the truth, regardless of the affect it has on the listener.
I am explaining that we are not opposed to homosexuality because of some sort of hatred or fear of homsexuals.
However, my argument need not be religious. You can replace “sin” with “fault” and end at the same result.
“the reasons gays seek contact with youth……”. Did you just make that up xppc? ?????????There’s no shortage of straight pedophiles. Explain that one for us.
no you can’t lauren.
Marriage IS a RIGHT. Why does everyone keep saying it’s not??
According to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
ARTICLE 16… (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Please, if you see in there where marriage has to be between an MAN and a WOMAN let me know.
Josephine, of course we could have feelings for someone of the same sex. People develop close relationships with other people. Were we living in a world divorced completely from morality I’m sure people would do a number of things they currantly restrain themselves against.
People have both asexual marriages and marriages that are sexual despite pain or deformaty. People have sex with people they aren’t attracted to for any number of reasons.
People also *don’t* have sex with people they are extremely attracted to for any number of reasons.
My point is that sexual actions are choices that we make. Attraction is often a minor part in the decision to have a physical relationship with a person.
anon, you made a statement, not an argument.
You need to provide evidence for your stance.
You may be “called to speak the truth” lauren but to many people you’re speaking nonsense. Good to know…..
AHAHHAh. Oh my, Lauren, if you think who your sexually attracted to is a choice… then there is no hope for you. Have you ever met a gay person??? I sure as heck know I didn’t CHOOSE to be straight. I sure as heck know I couldn’t be gay.. I can’t force myself to be attracted to girls.
Attraction is often a minor part in the decision to have a physical relationship with a person.
For WHO? Prostitutes?? Who in the WORLD wants a physical relationship with someone they’re not attracted to!?
Josephine, allowing people to enter into a binding contract is one thing, but marriage is more than a simple legal contract. It is also a sacrament.
I don’t oppose civil unions or civil rights for homosexual couples.
No Man
With regards to the so called Pregnant Man. This is not a man. It is not even a man who was a woman. This is a mutilated Woman. Nothing more Nothing Less. Why make such a big deal about a mutilated moman getting pregnant?
I though anonymous comments were NOT allowed?
“the reasons gays seek contact with youth……”. Did you just make that up xppc? ?????????There’s no shortage of straight pedophiles. Explain that one for us.
Posted by: anon at November 24, 2008 4:00 PM
http://americansfortruth.com/homosexual-hate/homosexual-pedophilia-pederasty/undercover-fbi-agent-infiltrates-nambla.html
The gay agenda is also to greatly reduce the age of consent. I very high number of homosexuals admit to having had sex with an underage person of the same gender.
Gays don’t want marriage. They are far to promiscious. they want sexual anarchy.
So it’s okay if Satanists get married, just not homosexuals. Okay, gotcha. (I’m rolling my eyes at you.) Not everyone has your religious beliefs, and by denying a RIGHT to a human being is wrong, because despite what you say.. marriage IS a right.
Josephine, I was a member of the Gay-Straight Alliance in both Highschool and College. So, yes, I have met plenty of gay people.
Josephine, people have sexual relationships with other people for all kinds of reasons. Perhaps you genuinely like a person, but do not find them sexually attractive. If for some reason you want a deeper relationship with that person, sex can often follow.
You might be attracted to someone but not enjoy sex wit that person, but still engage in the act because of its importance to the relationship.
Outside of relationships people have sexual relationships as parts of power struggles.
Conversely, people may want to have sex with someone but be unable to do so. For instance (and I’m sorry if this is TMI) I have high risk pregnancies and can not have any sort of intercourse during pregnancy. Lack of sexual relations does cause tension, but it does not destroy a relationship. In fact, if anything, it causes a deeper bond.
There is much, much more to sex than simple attraction.
“Gays don’t want marriage. They are far to promiscious. they want sexual anarchy.”
Ahh, you stereotypical jerk. I’m sure Ellen wants sexual anarchy. Wanda Sykes, she tottttally seems like someone that wants to slut-it-up, right? George Takei, who has been in a relationship with the same man for 20+ years… he seems totally promiscuous. I’m going to guess you’ve never met an actual gay person.
I wanted to go into the city the weekend of the 15th, but unfortunately I had drill. I would’ve been protesting for gay rights with them, had I been able.
Josephine, I would doubt that satanists would view marriage as a sacrament, and they most certainly could *not* be married within most churches.
I think homosexuals should be able to enter into a civil contract. I don’t see how taking the sacrament out of the equation lessens the “human rights” aspect of the union, especially if these people don’t subscribe to my religion to begin with.
You’re getting hysterical and annoyed for no reason.
Patricia, they’re not but since he’s put in “anon” I think it can be let slide. Of course, if the person would pick a better moniker it would be appreciated.
……Who is forcing anyone to let homosexuals marry in church? Marriage is a LEGAL CONTRACT. So why do we have to call it a “civil union”? Not everyone has your religious beliefs, Lauren. You shouldn’t be able to take away a right because of religious beliefs.
I don’t believe for one second you have gay friends. Maybe they pretend to be your friends and hate you, like the gay people I know who have “friends” that think being gay is a choice.
I’m not getting hysterical, and I’m getting annoyed because you’re saying ridiculous, stupid things.
First of all I agree with you Jill: I feel terribly sad for Beattie who I believe is a very mixed up and seriously disturbed woman. I predict a troublesome future for this woman whose self-image is so distorted.
Secondly, same-sex marriage is not about the right to get married. Same-sex couples have all the rights that a married man and woman have in California, except that their “union” is not called marriage.
So more than anything else, this is about legitimizing the homosexual lifestyle and enshrining it as an acceptable lifestyle through the implementation of hate laws.
If you don’t believe this is the case, look at the group of firefighters in the US (maybe San Fran?) who were forced to drive a firetruck in the gay pride parade and to endure hours of sexual harassment.
I note the homosexuals can run a bunch of young, praying Christians out of an area of town by threatening and attempting to harm them, but were the reverse true, it is likely ALL the Christians would have been charged and jailed due to hate crime laws or whatever other discrimination laws the police would discover on the books.
Thirdly, Josephine you are operating on the assumption that same-sex attracted persons can’t help the way they are and therefore we should accept their lifestyle, even though there is a ton of research demonstrating the emotional, physical and spiritual harm these people suffer in this lifestyle.
Some of us simply do not believe that the same-sex attraction comes about this way. Of course, as long as the APA and other medical groups continue to refuse to research same-sex attraction with an unbiased approach, with the intent of determining the legitimate causes of same-sex attraction, the truth may not be uncovered for decades to come. Unfortunate for those who might have been helped much sooner.
I never, EVER said you had to “accept” their lifestyle, Patricia. Abortionists get married.. don’t they? Doesn’t mean you have to “accept” their lifestyle. I’m sure they don’t care whether you accept them personally or not.
And don’t give me your BS you googled about it being a psychological disorder. I don’t care.. it’s pretty much all from crazy Christian websites.
Maybe you should take a look at The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because you seem to think you know everything. Hrm.
Furthermore, YOU CAN’T CHANGE THAT MARRIAGE IS A RIGHT. I don’t care what your VIEWS are. Marriage is a right that YOU think should be denied to gay people, even though
xppc-
Care to explain why then, in MA where gay marriage has been legal for over 5 years, only 50 divorces have been filed out of over 6000 marriages – while the divorce rate among 5 year marriages in straight couples is almost 50%?
Some of those marriages were of couples who had been together for 20+ years. I attended 2 weddings – one of a couple who’d been together for 13 years, and another who’d been together for 6. One of them has 4 adopted children together. 2 of those children are now in their teens, and are both very much straight.
I’d love an explanation as to how those couples don’t actually want marriage and instead want sexual anarchy?
There is nothing stopping gays from going to the pawn shop to buy and wear rings.
There is no law that keeps men or women from removing their rigns when they want to stray.
As a normal male I don’t have the right to marry another male. A gay male doesn’t either. Our rights are the same. A gay has the right to marry 1 person of the opposite sex. They gays are going ballistic because they think they will have happiness if they get something they have never had.
Who invented marriage anyway?
Josephine, because marriage has a definite meaning that implies the sacramental nature of the union. Honestly, I believe that marriage should be separate from civil unions all together.
Basically that anyone can get a civil union, but “marriage” should be performed through your individual faith tradition.
Josephine, you have very limited life experience if you can not accept that someone who has been active in the gay-rights community can not see things differently than you do. I wrote my senior theme on why gay marriage should be legal. I have since re-evaluated my views.
You know nothing of my personal relationships, so it is laughable at best that you feel the need to illegitimize them in order for me to fit inside your paradigm.
You keep making statements without evidence. Instead of telling me that I am wrong, explain why I am wrong.
xppc –
that is not an answer to my question. If gays are in fact not interested in marriage, and just seeking sexual anarchy and a way to spread homosexuality, how do you explain the many, many gay couples who have been in long term, monogamous relationships and raise happy, healthy, straight children?
Anon, pick a name and stop the name calling.
If I were to say “Anon’s an idiot” I would have the insult deleted.
You can attack ideas, but not people.
is anon Somg since he once told Jill she was fat.
Bug off anon – no likes you!
“I never, EVER said you had to “accept” their lifestyle, Patricia. Abortionists get married.. don’t they? Doesn’t mean you have to “accept” their lifestyle. I’m sure they don’t care whether you accept them personally or not.”
you don’t have to SAY, Josephine, the statement is implicit in the actions taken by the same-sex community.
They want their civil unions called “marriages”. They are NOT. A marriage is and will always be, between one man and one woman.
And btw, I don’t accept the lifestyle of an abortionist either – which consists of going to work, killing 20 to 30 babies per day under the guise of “healthcare” and making enough money to live very well off.
And Josephine, if you are basing your value system on the UN declaration of rights? What can I say? Those are man-made rights Josephine. You are a Catholic woman and you KNOW better. You know the legitimate rights that God has given to all people. Marriage is NOT a right – it is a vocation – a calling to give a gift of ourselves to another. Same-sex attracted persons cannot do this in the normal natural way. It is a distorted relationship and a distortion of this vocation. This distortion was reflected in the statement by Ellen D. when she said that they “aren’t able” to get pregnant. Jill correctly pointed out that likely BOTH of these women could have the children they want if they were in a true marriage.
Oh, and I don’t “google” honey….
Well, my post got eaten up in the bandwidth issue, but suffice it to say…Anon, stop now. Pick a name, stop insulting or you will be banned.
No, Anon is from Delaware. SoMG is from NY.
I’ve unpublished anon’s comments.
Go jasper!
Having ones genitalia reassigned does not change ones gender. You would, at the very least, have to alter chromsome combinations to biologically alter gender.
My sister asked me the other day if I had any friends who were homosexuals (She used used the euphemism ‘gay’ which is an acronym for ‘good as you’.). I replied that I did not know if any of my friends or acquaintances were homosexuals, but I did have two friends, one male/one female, who were former homosexuals.
My sister looked at me like I was insane. I might as well have told her that I had two friends who used to be asian or arabian but now are black or indian.
The homosexual ‘lobby’ will not tolerate this idea of changing your sexual preference/orientation because it necessarily involves an act of the will, as opposed to an irreversible accident of nature.
There was fellow who was being interviewed on who claimed to have been a homosexual for many years, but reverted to heterosexuality. A male homosexual called in and asserted the fellow had never been a homosexual.
The fellow responded by revealing how many hundreds of male sex partners he had been with.
What are the acceptable ‘bona fides’ to establish ones homosexuality?
I have another sister who is a physician. She used to be a bit of a feminist, till I challenged her to do a little research and see what the majority political ideology is for the feminist leadership. She found they are primarily female homosexuals who are predominantly ‘liberal’.
My sister stopped contributing financial support to the organizations these gender challenged females represented.
My sister did her internship at Parkland Hospital in Dallas, Texas. She told me about an emergency room physician who proudly displaye a collection of foreign objects that had personally removed from the colons of male homosexuals. I am sure he ‘treated’ females homosexuals who were similarly afflicted, as well as heterosexuals of both genders. But these would have been the exceptions.
If that is what butters your biscuit, then go for it, but do not come to me seeking my permission, tolerance, approval, encouragement, blessing or participation.
John Wayne said, “Life is hard. It’s really tough when you’re stupid.”
When two or more homosexuals are joined in marriage, who gets the remote control?
yor bro ken
Posted by: Shep at November 24, 2008 4:47 PM
…how do you explain the many, many gay couples who have been in long term, monogamous relationships and raise happy, healthy, straight children?
————————————————–
The same way I explain other urban myths, like santa claus and the tooth fairy.
yor bro ken
The homosexual ‘lobby’ will not tolerate this idea of changing your sexual preference/orientation because it necessarily involves an act of the will, as opposed to an irreversible accident of nature.
absolutement!
I am surprised to learn there are more former homosexuals than current homosexuals. People that have had homosexual activity that don’t do it any more. No wonder they blow a gasket and claim it can’t be changed. Those that changed are embarrassed to say they were doing bad things before.
Question for lauren. If they were born that way, couldn’t we gather specimens from 6 siblings and take them to a lab and have the lab tell us which are male, female or gay?
They could even say none were gay.
About 25% of male homosexuals are capable of long-lasting partnerships. Casual, shallow contacts with strangers are more frequent; 28% of male homosexuals reported having more than 1000 partners. (1)
They sure act like they do not want marriage
George Takei, the actor who played Sulu on Star Trek recently acknowleged that he was a homosexual.
Jay Leno was interviewing William Shattner and asked him how long he had known Takei was gay.
Shattner said it obvious almost from the beginning of Star Trek. When all the other crew members set their phasers to stun, George would set his to ‘stunning’.
yor bro ken
Elton John, meanwhile, thinks that he and other homosexuals should be content with civil unions.
“I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership,” John said Nov. 11 in New York, USA Today reported. “If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership. The word ‘marriage,’ I think, puts a lot of people off.”
from USA Today Nov 11/08
Said John, “You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.”
ken, lol
you can’t quote William Shatner -even us Canadians are embarrassed by the man!
anonymous pick a name
the only problem with civil partnerships is they are not recognized federally. there is no federal marriage, but there are federal laws surrounding marriage (immigration, taxation etc) that fall back on the states’ marriage definitions. so within a state a civil union is equivalent but federally it is not. if civil unions were adapted into the federal understanding of marriage i think a lot of people would find them sufficiently equivalent to marriage. of course there will still be the separate-but-equal argument but i think that recognizing civil unions at the national level would solve the separate-and-unequal argument.
As Christians we know that the gay lifestyle is not what he intended. If he did, then two women or two men would be able to have a baby. Since they cant (at least not the natural way) its not part of God’s plan for us.
Although the gay lifestyle is quite widely accepted by society now, many people are repulsed by the pregnant “man” and his “wife”. That is beyond sick.
According to the Bible God eventually judged nations and people who accepted these perversions as normal. In today’s society its actually encouraged.
How long until we are judged again?
Marriage is a privilege, not a right. If it were a right in the sense that Josephine refers to, then every single person who wanted to marry but couldn’t find a suitable mate has his/her rights violated.
anon at 6:08 was me. Sorry.
Joanne: someone, maybe Fr. Groeschel has said that if we are not judged, then God owes an apology to Sodom and Gomorahh.
Homosexuals do not really want marriage.
Gays don’t want committment. Gays do NOT define marriage correctly. Gay researchers Mcwherter and Madison studied 156 homosexual male couples that had been together from 1-37 years. They found all or 100% if them had been unfauthfull in the first 5 years. Some one posted about gays having a low divorce rate in MA. They ask the wrong question. If straights cheat, there may soon be a divorce. If gays cheat they expect it. Acting like unfaithfull barnyard animals is not how we define marriage.
They more studies we have, the more reasons we see homosexuality is deviant behavior and marrigage won’t solve a single problem.
Getting married won’t heal bi-polar disorder either.
xppc, what does bipolar disorder have to do with any of this?
can someone PLEASE BAN anon. Mod’s were are you guys?
sorry to tell you this, but there is NO bible belt Ontario
idiotka!
Anonymous posts will be deleted.
Please email all mods when you need us. :)
What is with this “sexuality” thing anyway? If I had to choose between having sex with a mean, disgusting man or a kind and loving woman I would probably choose the woman.
I think first and formost love transcends sex and goes right to the soul. Love is based on mutual caring and understanding. You don’t love someone because of their body, that’s just lust. You love someone because they make you soup when you’re sick or they love the way you always have a minute to talk. I never loved a man because he was a male, I loved him because of his spirit.
Looking back I fall in love really easily but I fall out of it probably faster. Maybe that was just lust then? We need to divide those two, they are not in the same category.
If I had to choose between having sex with a mean, disgusting man or a kind and loving woman I would probably choose the woman.
Well I’ll be danged…
Jess, now that I think of it, so would I.
LOL, Doug.
Jess, my cat probably loves you, because you just inspired me to go give her a head scratch and kitty treat.
Jess: why would you copy that quote? Really.
And I say, give a hug to a CHILD who needs it.
Erin all cats love me because I smell like hamster.
And there don’t you feel better : )
Why don’t you group hug with an animal AND a child. It isn’t an either/or situation.
sorry to tell you this, but there is NO bible belt Ontario
idiotka!
Posted by: Patricia at November 24, 2008 7:06 PM
_ _ _ _
Oh yes there is, “Idiotka.”
Hey, if we’re posting pictures, then I have one for Jess.
Yay Doug! My parents and I are going to see it when I come home for Thanksgiving : )
And why was my last comment deleted? I just said that there is nothing wrong or evil about being fat. It shouldn’t be used as an insult, we all have different body types and as long as we take care of ourselves we are going to be beautiful.
Oh! I love the little hamster!
Marriage is a privilege, not a right. If it were a right in the sense that Josephine refers to, then every single person who wanted to marry but couldn’t find a suitable mate has his/her rights violated.
Posted by: Fed Up With Obama at November 24, 2008 6:25 PM
Err, a right isn’t something you HAVE to do. I mean, am I violating my rights to have an abortion by not having an abortion? Should I go get pregnant? :)
Lauren. I gave examples of how you’re wrong. You and Patricia insist marriage is a religious sacrament. Patricia said I should ‘know better’ than to thing it’s a legal thing. Guess what, to some people marriage isn’t a religious thing. That’s why satanists can get married. That’s why people can get married for greencards. So,.. don’t say I didn’t give you reasons. Marriage is a right that Americans have, and it’s being denied to a big group of them. You don’t want to see that as FACT, even though it is.
Jill,
Listen to this:
http://f2a.org/radio/Download%202008-11-24.htm
http://WWW.OBAMACRIMES.COM
Please post something about this on your blog.
More People need to know about this issue!
Posted by: Patricia at November 24, 2008 5:59 PM
ken, lol
you can’t quote William Shatner -even us Canadians are embarrassed by the man!
—————————————————-
I am not Canadian, (my wife is) but William Shatner would make me proud if I was. I don’t know his sexual preference, or his political philosophy, or where he is on the ‘life’ issues, but the guy is brilliant.
I only knew him as Captain Kirk for the longest time. I have since seen him in youtube clips on other shows that predated Star Trek, but the first I saw him shine after Star Trek was an appearance of Fresh Prince of Bellaire.
I had no idea he could be so funny. So un-Kirk.
Then there is the classic, ‘I am Canadian’.
yor bro ken
Ken- I won’t deny that the man is a decent actor and quite witty, but by all accounts he has a serious diva-complex!
William Shatner: I am Canadian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOnQROgk1IM
yor bro ken
People all need to write to US Supreme Court Justices ASAP (They must send a type or handwritten letter by mail; no email or faxes) and tell them to uphold the US Constitution.
For what I understand, the Justices will read your letters.
http://WWW.OBAMACRIMES.COM
Josephine, you do know that it is illegal to get married just to get citizenship right? We explained that marriage is both a civil and religious contract and proposed that those who do not wish to enter the religious contract should stick to the civil.
This is the same view as Obama and Biden, so I don’t know why you’re so set on attacking me.
Marriage for greencards happens though, honey. :)
I don’t care what Obama and Biden’s views are.
Marriage IS NOT always a religious contract! Don’t say that BS to me, because you KNOW it’s not. If there was a measure on the ballot to ONLY allow marriage between a man and women who follow a specific religion… would you say that’s right? What about two people who get married when they’re young and fresh out of a Christian college, but then never have anything to do with religion again.. they go on to not follow the teachings of any church… should that marriage be dissolved?
I wonder why more Christians aren’t in favour of civil unions for everyone and religious marriage for those who choose it. That way you could weed out the huge percentage of people in heterosexual unions who do not view marriage as even remotely resembling traditional Christian teachings on, say, birth control, and who would never seek it out.
Do you really want to associate your marriages with theirs? After all, if same-sex marriage somehow diminishes yours, the roughly 50% divorce rate among hets doesn’t bother you?
My husband and I would gladly have chosen a civil union over “marriage,” but the government dictates otherwise. For us, it was thinking we’d move to the States. I’m American/Canadian, and he’s Canadian, and while we were common-law legally in Canada, it’s something INS would never accept. None of that changes the fact that we’ve been monogamous for 15 years and didn’t feel much different after the wedding ceremony (though I have to say it was quite moving at the time).
I’m agnostic; my husband’s atheist. We hold down jobs and pay our taxes, like most people. We’re also huge fans of birth control.
Is that your picture of heterosexual marriage? In the eyes of the government, mine is as valid as any other heterosexual couple’s.
Is the hostility toward civil unions about boosting the numbers?
Mary II absolutely NO ONE in Ontario EVER speaks of the Bible belt Ontario. And if they do, it is considered in SOUTHERN ONTARIO or parts of CENTRAL ONTARIO, not northern Ontario.
In fact the area north of the green line has only one major city, Sudbury. The rest is small towns and alot of PreCambrian rock.
We don’t have the kind of uniform society that you have in America.
Josephine, I am not talking about legal rights. I am talking about marriage as a vocation. This makes is much more than a contract and something very sacred.
In contrast to my views on the government’s role in marriage, my views on love are a lot closer to Jess’s post about caring for someone. Also, wanting to create a family, whether it involves two people or more (or a couple of companion animals if kids aren’t in your future).
Not everyone can do the traditional Western family group, for whatever reasons. I’m firmly in the camp that love should be celebrated, no matter what.
Also, wanting to create a family, whether it involves two people or more (or a couple of companion animals if kids aren’t in your future).
ok,a couple with animals is a family. Sweet! People just get weirder all the time. Will you send them to college? Pleaasssse!
Do you really want to associate your marriages with theirs? After all, if same-sex marriage somehow diminishes yours, the roughly 50% divorce rate among hets doesn’t bother you?
.We know gays do not respect marriage. In a study of gays together 1-37 years, out of 154 all of the gays had had sex outside the relationship in the first five years. Barnyard fidelity. “Open relationship”? No we do not have 50% divorce rate. Most normal people have never divorced. a few have divorced several tims. In gays, they cheat without bothering to divorce.
If gays are so hostile to man and wife marriages, why would they want what we have so much?
Actual the Non christians do not even get married so they don’t have divorce percentages.
Nope we will see the homosexuals split the gates of hell wide open and calling the JUDGE on The throne a bigot won’t make a bit of difference.
We have a duty to follow righteousness and not let the gay movem,ent force their unrighteousness down our throats.
“Josephine, I am not talking about legal rights. I am talking about marriage as a vocation. This makes is much more than a contract and something very sacred.”
To YOU. To MANY,MANY people it is just a LEGAL CONTRACT. How can you not just admit that, when you know about pre-nups. ANOTHER contract, in case your marriage fails.
Terezia,
would you mind if I married the twin girls down the street? If we all loved each other? How about if I married my sister, you know, if we were in love? ..
no Josephine, to you it is a contract. But to many many millions of people the world over and throughout history it is has been a vocation and something very sacred.
ok,a couple with animals is a family. Sweet! People just get weirder all the time. Will you send them to college? Pleaasssse!
Patricia, to a couple who very much wanted children but were unable to have them, companion animals might be the only family they will ever have. That’s not our situation, but it is the one foisted onto two couples I know. I’m happy to say they’re taking their life situation in good grace and making the best of it. I’m also glad they’re not reading your comment.
You’re right Patricia. I’m the only person that thinks it’s a contract… what was I thinking?
Patricia, you didn’t answer my questions.
If there was a measure on the ballot to ONLY allow marriage between a man and women who follow a specific religion… would you say that’s right? What about two people who get married when they’re young and fresh out of a Christian college, but then never have anything to do with religion again.. they go on to not follow the teachings of any church… should that marriage be dissolved?
Patricia, to a couple who very much wanted children but were unable to have them, companion animals might be the only family they will ever have. That’s not our situation, but it is the one foisted onto two couples I know. I’m happy to say they’re taking their life situation in good grace and making the best of it. I’m also glad they’re not reading your comment.
Posted by: Terezia at November 24, 2008 9:29 PM
How disgusting. So bestiality is now called companion animals?
would you mind if I married the twin girls down the street? If we all loved each other? How about if I married my sister, you know, if we were in love?
Jasper, are the twins of age? If so, and if polygamy were legal, I’d say do whatever makes you and the twins happy. Same for incest (among consenting adults). Just watch out for hereditary problems if you decide to procreate with close family members.
How disgusting. So bestiality is now called companion animals?
xppc, your “analogy” only works if you’re talking about pedophilia with your own children. And if so, words can’t express my liberal, agnostic disgust.
I support legal contracts between any two people, or more than two people, or animals, or inanimate objects, or whatever perversity floats your boat. Make it easier for the gays to form legal contracts. Let two old women (non-lesbians) who live in the same apartment form a legal contract, too.
Let bisexual love triangles form legal contracts. Let orgies full of sickos form legal contracts. Let Farmer Bob form a legal contract with his sheep. Who cares?
But it’s not marriage.
Jasper, are the twins of age? If so, and if polygamy were legal, I’d say do whatever makes you and the twins happy. Same for incest (among consenting adults). Just watch out for hereditary problems if you decide to procreate with close family members.
Posted by: Terezia at November 24, 2008 9:33 PM
You have no moral foundation. You halp us see why the gay marriage is so wrong and disgusting. It is not based on a moral foundation but on pure lust. No wonder they spread disease so fast.
If there was love and respect, they wouldn’t pass their diseases along. They would have consideration of he oher person. The sexual deviates are incredibly self centered.
Let bisexual love triangles form legal contracts. Let orgies full of sickos form legal contracts. Let Farmer Bob form a legal contract with his sheep. Who cares?
But it’s not marriage.
by: John Lewandowski at November 24, 2008 9:
The bible calls them given over to a reprobate mind.
Most of the top 10 serial killers were homosexuals. It is just another form of pleasure seeking. Hitler was gay and had syph.
Terezia,
you wouldn’t be opposed to polygamy or incest, would you?
You have no moral foundation. You halp us see why the gay marriage is so wrong and disgusting. It is not based on a moral foundation but on pure lust. No wonder they spread disease so fast.
xppc, you have an uncanny ability to read things in posts that weren’t even there! Amazing!
you wouldn’t be opposed to polygamy or incest, would you?
Actually, I’m personally opposed to both. But I also know it’s none of my business what consenting adults choose to do to other consenting adults in private. That’s for the consenting adults and God to judge.
Advertisement
LONG BEACH, CA (LifeSiteNews.com) – Coadjutor Bishop Jaime Soto of Sacramento shocked his unsuspecting audience at the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries conference with a keynote speech that gently but firmly condemned the homosexual lifestyle as sinful, and celebrated extra-marital chastity, according to the California Catholic Daily.
“Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals,” Bishop Soto told the conference, “but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all. For this reason, it is sinful.” Bishop Soto also urged Catholics to support Proposition 8, a ballot measure to protect marriage as a sacred covenant between a man and a woman.
At least five people left during the bishop’s speech, according to witnesses.The bishop drew praise and allayed the fears of faithful Catholics, who had expressed concern when Soto first agreed to attend the conference. On its website, NACDLGM advertises its goal “to welcome gay and lesbian Catholics into the Church” while condoning an actively homosexual lifestyle. But neither Sacramento Catholics nor conference attendees had anticipated that the bishop, who is expected to take over the diocese of Sacramento at the end of November, would eschew the usual tone of the conference in such a dramatic fashion.
Bishop Soto began his speech with a meditation on Jesus as he is frequently portrayed in modernity – the compassionate, lenient benefactor found in the Gospel miracle accounts. “This can oftentimes lead us to the conclusion that Jesus always said ‘yes.’ He always gave people what they wanted. He was an agreeable person,” said the bishop. This, however, is not the complete Gospel picture of Jesus, he warned.The bishop recalled how Jesus rebuked Peter for trying to dissuade him from the suffering of the Cross. “Jesus does not give in to the expectations of Peter or the expectations of others,” said the bishop. “He has firmly planted in his heart the expectations and desires of his Father in heaven. He says ‘no’ to Peter and challenges Peter to take up a greater ‘yes,’ to take up his cross and follow him.”
Bishop Soto emphasized Paul’s injunction “do not conform yourselves to this age,” observing that it may be particularly tempting to deviate from one’s faith in the area of sexuality, due to the fact that “the nature of love has been distorted” in modern times.”If you cannot have sex than you cannot love. This is the message. Even more destructive is the prevailing notion that sex is not an expression of love. Sex is love.” This view, says the bishop, “robs the human person of the possibility of ever knowing real love.
“Sexual intercourse between a man and a woman in the covenant of Marriage is one expression of love to which the human person can aspire, but we are all called to love. … The human desire to love must lead us to the divine.” The path to the highest love, said the bishop, “is the path of chastity.” The bishop said, “Love leads us to ecstasy, not as a moment of intoxication but rather as a journey” to God and oneself through self-gift. “Desire tempered and tested by ‘renunciation, purification, and healing’ can lead us to God’s design.”
Only then, well past the halfway-point of the speech, did Bishop Soto first utter the word homosexual.”This is true for all of us. It is also true for men and women who are homosexual. We are called to live and love in a manner that brings us into respectful, chaste relationships with one another and an intimate relationship with God. We should be an instrument of God’s love for one another.
“Let me be clear here,” said the bishop. “Sexual intercourse, outside of the marriage covenant between a man and a woman, can be alluring and intoxicating but it will not lead to that liberating journey of true self-discovery and an authentic discovery of God. For that reason, it is sinful.Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all. For this reason, it is sinful.” After Bishop Soto finished, the room sat in stunned silence, other than a smattering of applause, two audience members told California Catholic.
Many took to the microphone to express their dissatisfaction at the bishop’s words, and anger that the bishop did not focus on “the value of our lived experience” as homosexuals. Two of the speakers, a man and a woman, thanked the bishop and agreed with his statements.The bishop, though urged by the chairman that he was free to leave, stayed on to listen to conference attendees who wanted to respond to his speech individually.
“On behalf of the board, I apologize,” said a board member of the association to one of the tables, reports California Catholic. “We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said.”
Wow, Eileen.. way to post that the Catholic church doesn’t believe in gay marriage. ‘Cause we didn’t know that already.
“Actually, I’m personally opposed to both. But I also know it’s none of my business what consenting adults choose to do to other consenting adults in private.”
why? you just said it’s love that matters? You’re not opposed to it being legal are you?
I thought that it might help to know something of why it doesn’t.
It doesn’t matter though, Eileen. Marriage as in the LEGAL contract, should be allowed.
Civil unions and marriage aren’t equal.
Separate and equal doesn’t exist.
“But I also know it’s none of my business what consenting adults choose to do to other consenting adults in private.”
Right, it’s none of our business. That’s why gay marriage should not be legal. Legalizing gay marriage makes it our business.
Is two heterosexuals getting married YOUR business? It’s not mine. :)
Oh God, how amazing it is to see the “Catholic” Josephine continue to live a lie.
patricia I am from Ontario and you are dead wrong that absolutely no one from ontario refers to the bible belt. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Hm, how amazing it is to see the “Catholic” John judge and antagonize.
why? you just said it’s love that matters? You’re not opposed to it being legal are you?
I see good reasons to oppose both polygamy and incest. I wouldn’t support them being legal. However, if they were, I wouldn’t sweat it, because I don’t much care.
I’d probably never know about it anyway. I’m not in the habit of discussing my sexual habits over the watercooler at work.
Considering that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of society, yes, it is my business.
Wow, how amazing is it see “Catholic” Josephine cite Democrat Party talking points as if they were Catholic teaching.
Is two heterosexuals getting married YOUR business? It’s not mine. :)
Posted by: Josephine at November 24, 2008 10:00 PM
Actually it is so expressed on wedding invitations and in the ceremony.
1 Kings 15
11And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father.
12And he
took away the sodomites out of the land,
and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.
I pleased the Lord to run the gays off.
1
Hey, Josephine, is their a “Catechism for Democrat Catholics” that I don’t know about? Y’know, one that says opposing the right to life is A-OK, and that gay marriage is awesome?
“Actually it is so expressed on wedding invitations and in the ceremony. ”
I’m just going out on a limb here, but since you brought up MURDERERS while talking about homosexuals.. I’m guessing you’ll never be invited to a homosexual wedding. Too bad.
MARRIAGE is the foundation of society?! Are you speaking in generalities?? If so.. no, it’s not. You’re wrong, and you can’t EVER prove you’re right.
And.. I’m “citing Democratic talking points as if they were Catholic teaching”? You know Obama and Biden are NOT for gay marriage, right? You are aware of that?
“It doesn’t matter though, Eileen. Marriage as in the LEGAL contract, should be allowed.”
Actually, it should matter to you if you are a Catholic.
When did I oppose the right to life?
When did I say gay marriage is okay to the church?
The LEGAL SYSTEM has nothing to do with what is right and wrong in the eyes of a church. Remember back to history class, when they taught you the big deal about America was the right to religious freedoms?? Remember that? Being married to the state has nothing to do with being married in the eyes of God.
“I’m just going out on a limb here, but since you brought up MURDERERS while talking about homosexuals.. I’m guessing you’ll never be invited to a homosexual wedding. Too bad.”
St. Paul did it first.
“And.. I’m “citing Democratic talking points as if they were Catholic teaching”? You know Obama and Biden are NOT for gay marriage, right? You are aware of that?”
Of course. I suppose you disagree with him on that, then?
Eileen, just because I’m a Catholic doesn’t mean everyone is, and doesn’t mean I should be allowed to impose RELIGIOUS beliefs on someone who follows a different religion.
I completely disagree with Obama and Biden on gay marriage. I don’t think a civil union is right. It’s separate and different, and therefore not equal.
But Josephine, as a Catholic you are promoting something that is in contradiction to Church teaching.
“The LEGAL SYSTEM has nothing to do with what is right and wrong in the eyes of a church.”
Not according to Catechism 2273. So please, whence this Democrat Catechism which says that the Church doesn’t care what our politicians do?
Also, since you make such a statement, I am certain that you condemn any effort by Catholics to oppose war. After all, they can’t force their religion on other people. We have a separation of church and state in this country!
And.. I’m “citing Democratic talking points as if they were Catholic teaching”? You know Obama and Biden are NOT for gay marriage, right? You are aware of that?
Posted by: Josephine at November 24, 2008 10:08 PM
Obama stands for everything queer.
Dear Friends,
Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club’s Pride Breakfast and to congratulate you on continuing a legacy of success, stretching back thirty-six years. As one of the oldest and most influential LGBT organizations in the country, you have continually rallied to support Democratic candidates and causes, and have fought tirelessly to secure equal rights and opportunities for LGBT Americans in California and throughout the country.
As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.
For too long. issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It’s time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.
Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today’s celebration. I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
The gays are not confused about his support of gay marriage.
Considering that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of society
John, do you have a non-Bible-based reason to believe that?
Seriously, why is there not more talk of separating civil unions from marriage? It is the most obvious way to separate the true believers from the sinners.
While the two are tied up in government, you’ll keep seeing people challenging it. If they were separated truly, I can guarantee you that, with the exception of a few fringe nutbars, very few unbelievers would be seeking the “sacrament” part of marriage.
That’s not really a problem for anyone, is it?
Josephine, do you also completely disagree with Obama and Biden on the FOCA, on the Mexico City Policy, and on embryonic stem cell research, and will you lobby Obama and Biden to change their positions on these issues?
“Considering that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of society”
“John, do you have a non-Bible-based reason to believe that?”
Yes. I have two eyes, two ears, and a brain. It should be self-evident. It’s like the sky being blue and grass being green. Here’s a thought experiment for you. Imagine what the United States would be like without heterosexual marriage. Think about it.
Josephine, I freely admit that tons of marriages are not religious affairs. That’s why I think that marriage should be a multifaceted system where the state governs civil unions and the church governs “marriage.” Everyone who wants to enter into a marital contract goes through the state, and those who want a spiritual marriage go through the state and also their spiritual tradition.
This seems like the best compromise on the issue.
As for a marriage that falls away from God, isn’t that grounds for annulment in the Catholic Church?
Terezia, it looks like we agree.
No, John, the foundation of a society is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all.
Human reproduction is just how the species gets propagated.
You’re right, Terezia. “Life” and “reproduction” have nothing to do with each other.
Terezia, if the species stops reproducing, there is no society to support.
The family is an important institution, I don’t think anyone is seriously debating that fact.
The question is “what constitutes a family?”
Hi Lauren,
Thought I might say something about annulments — annulments are granted on the grounds that the marriage didn’t exist in the first place, There is more to it obviously, as far as what the reasons may be, but not enough time to get into it. Just didn’t want any confusion about annulments vs. divorce. If the couple or one of the people involved simply falls away from God is not a reason for an annulment.
What does this post have to do with being pro-life or not pro-life? Once again, you are marginalizing the pro-life movement by alienating just the people we need to bring into the tent. You are once again preaching to the choir. The choir will not give us enough votes to pass pro-life propositions. The choir and its political agenda makes the general public who do not share that agenda think pro-life has nothing to do with them. You, Jill, are guilty of undermining the progress of the movement. I believe that increasingly. I believe you are emptying the tent.
“You, Jill, are guilty of undermining the progress of the movement.”
Shaddap.
Tom,
This post indirectly points to the fact that many people view children as a commodity and a right to have or not have: that children are property to obtain at will or to dispose of at will. A poor, confused woman thinks that she should be a man but doesn’t go as far as completely destroying every vestige of her femininity so that she can be pregnant and give birth.
Eileen, I don’t know that much about the Catholic marriage sacrament. I just knew that annulments can be granted after years of marriage in certain circumstances.
Tom, I agree and disagree. Technically homosexuality is a side issue that does not have the importance of abortion. However because of assisted fertility treatments as well as the nature of sexuality that leads to abortion, the two sometimes cross paths.
While I feel that homosexuals need to hear the gospel like everyone else, I don’t have the urgency to promote change that I do with abortion. As long as no one is dying I can live with lifestyle choices. However, enter killing into the mix and I’m no longer as tolerant.
Lauren, if you believe “Everyone who wants to enter into a marital contract goes through the state, and those who want a spiritual marriage go through the state and also their spiritual tradition.” then why can’t gays be married in the eyes of the state, and not the church? Why can’t we allow that? I would NEVER, EVER think a Catholic church should have to accept gay marriage. I’d NEVER recommend that. But not everyone in America is Catholic.
“Josephine, do you also completely disagree with Obama and Biden on the FOCA, on the Mexico City Policy, and on embryonic stem cell research, and will you lobby Obama and Biden to change their positions on these issues?”
I disagree with them on FOCA and the Mexico City Policy. I COMPLETELY, 100% disagree with them.
Josephine,
Why do you defend the Church’s teaching on abortion but you don’t in regard to homosexual marriage?
OK, one last question.
Josephine, considering that you disagree with Obama so strongly on gay marriage, on the FOCA, and on the Mexico City Policy, why do you so strongly support Obama?
I only strongly disagreed with McCain on one issue – embryonic stem cell – and that alone was enough to make me have to hold my nose to vote for him.
You, on the other hand, seem to be ecstatic about Obama’s election, in spite of the fact that you have extreme disagreements with him on issues that you consider to be very important. Why is that?
Josephine, they can, but I think the system needs to be overhauled to reflect the civil and spiritual sides of marriage.
Eileen, I’m an American. I believe EVERY PERSON has certain rights. I don’t think ANY PERSON has the right to violate the right of another. I think KILLING A PERSON is a violation of their rights. Don’t you?
I don’t think two gay people being married is violating anyone’s rights.. do you? I think not allowing gay people to get married when straight people are allowed to be married.. I think that is violating a persons right of freedom of religion.
John, if you haven’t noticed our country is in a terrible, terrible state. If you haven’t noticed, we are a complete JOKE to almost every other nation. Did you see the poll of over 100 world leaders who said they would be so disappointed in America if we elected another Republican? Haven’t you ever heard the Winston Churchill saying?
“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart; if you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35– you have no brain.”
I agree with Obama on every issue except abortion and gay marriage. I disagree with McCain on EVERY issue except abortion(kind of.. he’s still not pro-life)
I picked the candidate I thought would be best. You can’t really call McCain pro-life, can you.. in all honesty?
“John McCain openly embraces embryonic stem cell research. In 2000, he boldly said he did not favor the overturn of Roe v. Wade. John McCain was a member of the infamous “Gang of 14″ senators from both parties whose purpose was to oppose pro-life, strict constructionist judges.
Speaking of judges, John McCain voted for the pro-abortion justice, Stephen Breyer, and the radical, pro-abortion, ACLU attorney, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. So much for the argument that we need John McCain for the sake of appointing conservative justices to the Supreme Court. For that matter, Republican appointments dominated the Court that gave us Roe v. Wade and the one that later gave us Doe v. Bolton. Proving, once again, that the Republican Party, as a whole, has no real commitment to the life issue.”
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin465.htm
Err, a right isn’t something you HAVE to do. I mean, am I violating my rights to have an abortion by not having an abortion?
–posted by Josephine November 24, 2008 8:45 PM
Josephine, I never said a right was something that had to be exercised. Your example of violating your own rights is pretty lame.
According to your line of reasoning further up in this thread, anyone who wishes to exercise the “right” of marriage is entitled to get married. So if a single woman wishes to marry a single man but doesn’t find one, her right would be violated because she wanted to get married but couldn’t find the right guy. She wants to exercise her “right” to marry but can’t. Therefore, I stand by my statement that marriage is a privilege but not a right to which each and every person is entitled.
This is my favorite part, personally:
“If all of the above is not enough, as a senator, John McCain has repeatedly voted to fund pro-abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood with federal tax dollars. In fact, McCain has voted to use federal tax dollars to support abortion providers at home and overseas. Yes, this “pro-life” senator (along with “pro-life” President, George W. Bush) has significantly increased federal spending for abortion providers to levels eclipsing even the appropriations authorized by President Bill Clinton and his fellow Democrats.”
We are just going around in circles here, I’m afraid. The state can’t redefine marriage. Josephine, Bobby has recommended some good Catholic reading. Why don’t you try delving into some of it before you make up your mind?
I don’t want Catholic reading. WHY do you keep suggesting Catholic reasons that gay marriage shouldn’t be legal. This is AMERICA. Freedom of religion. Do you think freedom of religion should only apply to Catholics?
I suggest it, Josephine, because you are a Catholic and we are not to leave our faith at the doorstep of the Church when we leave it — we are supposed to take it into the world. And because, the Church has very sound reasons for teaching what it does.
Lauren, “Josephine, they can, but I think the system needs to be overhauled to reflect the civil and spiritual sides of marriage.
Posted by: lauren at November 24, 2008 10:51 PM”
I’m fine with that. If they want to take away marriage for EVERYONE, and EVERYONE in the eyes of the state has a civil union, and then they go to a church(if they’re able) to get “married” fine. In that sense, then I have no problem gays being denied marriage. As long as marriage was strictly a religious sacrament. As of now, it’s not just a religious sacrament. It’s a right that for some reason, only straight people have.
Eileen, what do you not understand about freedom of religion?
Like I said, do you only believe Catholics should be able to enjoy the freedom of religion?
Josephine, I didn’t ask you why you hate John McCain and Republicans. I asked you why you support Barack Obama.
And, the answer seems to be, you enthusiastically support Barack Obama precisely because you hate John McCain and Republicans. It figures. I really should have known all along. I’m not going to go into the rest of the stuff about McCain’s votes, the misrepresentation of the Gang of 14, and all that. It’s not important in this discussion.
The point is, Josephine, that hatred of McCain and Republicans doesn’t justify enthusiastic support for Obama. I hate Obama, but that doesn’t mean I was an enthusiastic supporter of McCain.
You, on the other hand, are extremely happy about the victory of Obama. Had McCain won, I would have been happy that the greater evil lost, but I would have been preparing to do battle with the lesser evil.
If you truly hate McCain as much as you seem to and if everything you said about Obama is true, you too should have been happy about McCain’s loss, but not so much about Obama’s victory. You too should have intended to celebrate the defeat of McCain, but then prepared to oppose Obama’s radical pro-abortion positions.
But I have not seen anything like that from you. Instead, I have seen you do nothing but praise Obama, make excuses for Obama, and use Democrat Party talking points and lies to bolster the Democrat Party in your own mind.
That’s why I have a problem with you. As always, it’s the dishonesty. SoMG was an extreme pro-abortion lunatic, but I didn’t have a problem with him. Why? Because he was honest about it. That’s all I ask.
Dishonesty? What dishonesty, may I ask? Part of the reason I was SO enthusiastic Obama won was because A.) John McCain LOST and it felt GREAT.
B.) I’m in the freakin’ military. Obama wants us to stop getting sent to war. Since I don’t believe in the war that’s currently going on, that is a BIG deal to me. It effects me personally, my daily life.. the lives of many, many people I know.
That’s why I voted for Obama.
Lauren:
You wrote, “because of assisted fertility treatments as well as the nature of sexuality that leads to abortion, the two sometimes cross paths.” I don’t quite follow this, I’m afraid. Assisted fertility treatments lead to abortion? How is that? My sister in law had assisted fertility treatment and the wonderful triplets — my nephew and two nieces — just turned 18. And the nature of sexuality leading to abortion? How about my attorney and his partner who adopted two little girls, now happy, well adjusted adults, one in college, one getting married? That was two abortions very likely aborted, two girls raised by two wonderful men who have had a much longer and better partnership that many of the marriages I know.
Then you wrote, “I feel that homosexuals need to hear the gospel like everyone else.” Well, as I’m a pro-life Jew, that leaves me out, I guess, as to me the gospels are some beautifully poetic and moving teachings with no binding authority.
Plus, in my fairly thorough reading of them, I haven’t yet found a reference to homosexuality.
Tom, you are Jewish? May I ask what the Jewish view of gay marriage is?
Josephine,
Judaism doesn’t have a central body that dictates a uniform opinion. The Rabbi at my Reform synagogue will perform marriages of gay couples; many won’t. Conservative and Orthodox Rabbis would be extremely unlikely to perform gay marriages, but there will be as many opinions on the matter as there are Rabbis — as I said, there is no central authority in Judaism: it’s all about individual study of the texts and discussion, discussion, discussion.
Their is no such thing as gay “marriage”.
Marriage is between a man and a woman.No matter how many times the phrase gets used it will neverbe possible. The only time it can be used correctly is when it os preceded by “there is no such thing as”.
Josephine,
P.S. I love your post about how you feel about the Obama victory. Here’s to challenging the Right’s exclusive claim to the pro-life agenda!
Tom, thanks for explaining that. I don’t mean to sound stupid, but I had nooo idea the view your religion had on it. That’s really interesting.
Its funny that you’re so pro-life when it comes to straight people, but when it comes to GLBT folk you seem to draw a line in the sand. It’s been said that the easiest way to destroy a child’s sense of self and sense of security is to destroy his parents. Such a destruction of a child’s psyche on your part begs the question : are you pro-life for all children or just the children whose parents have politics that you approve of?
Josephine,
You enlisted. You knew what you were getting into.
I thank you. You are doing a service for our country and I hope you realize how many people are grateful to you. You now have the Commander in Chief that you wanted. Good luck with that.
If there was a measure on the ballot to ONLY allow marriage between a man and women who follow a specific religion… would you say that’s right? What about two people who get married when they’re young and fresh out of a Christian college, but then never have anything to do with religion again.. they go on to not follow the teachings of any church… should that marriage be dissolved?
Posted by: Josephine at November 24, 2008 9:31 PM
the fact is, that regardless of religion or any other beliefs, a true marriage can only be between a man and a woman. It is that way because it has been designed biologically to be so. One does not have to have a belief in religion nor be a rocket scientist to recognize this. Your position is divorce from reason and actually takes the position of secular humanism which is your religion of practice, Josephine.
And in case you didn’t know Josephine, the Catholic Church DOES RECOGNIZE civil marriages between a man and a woman. It is simply not a sacramental marriage in the eyes of the church. But the CC does recognize the committment the man and woman made to one another in front of a witness or witnesses.
Oh, and asitis, what state is Ontario in? lol
“No matter how many times the phrase gets used, it will never be possible”. Ha! Watch how quickly that statement is going to make a fool out of you John. Thanks for the great explanation Tom about the Jewish view. PS I also like it that Jews don’t go around trying to convert everyone.
“What state is Ontario in? lol” Huh?????
Correction: comment @ 6:42 referred to truthseeker not john
asitis,
Gay “marriage” will truly never give gays what they really want, which is acceptance by all of their lifestyle.
Mr Tengo we are prolife for ALL children and that is why we are SO against the Beattie situation.
Every child has a right to be born, and every child has the right to be raised in a home with a mother AND a father. Sometimes things don’t work out that way and it is the fault of the parents. But to deliberately CHOOSE this situation for a child is sad. It is also terribly degrading to see that some man has sold a part of himself over the internet for a woman to USE in this manner. He has been degraded because he is nothing more than an object supplying a product. The entire scenario is so distorted – one only needs to look at the mutilated body of Beattie to see this.
That’s not what truthseeker said Carla. He said gay marriage will never be possible. As for TOTAL acceptance. Well, no unfortunately that will never be possible because there will always be bigots.
I was not responding to what truthseeker said. If and when gay marriage happens there will still be those who disagree and will never accept that lifestyle.
It is easier I suppose to call those that disagree Bigots.
I remember Rae Days and before 7 Eleven when we all had a Mac’s Milk and Mayor Mel Lastman and Suzy Shier and when the Beer Store was Brewers Retail…… Just in case you still think I’m not from Ontari-ari-ari-o! Patricia. I’m sorry, who’s the idiot? I can’t hear you.
What we are watching with the Beattie situation is the “right” to bodily autonomy being carried to grotesque extremes.
We have a woman who, on the one hand destroys the external signs of her feminity, replaced by a male trait – facial hair, while retaining the internal evidence of her womanhood – her uterus and ovaries.
Then, since she has no “male” partner to impregnate her and give her the child she wants, in another act of bodily autonomy she seeks sperm on the internet. After all, having a child is her “right”. Damn the consequences to the child(ren) being raising in this situation.
What is disturbing is that as a society we have sunk so low that we can only watch with a kind of horrified fascination and laud this pair for their “openness” and “courage” to go beyond the absurd.
oh so you are Canadian libertine. Well I should have known. And from Toronto, the most liberal city in Canada other than maybe Vancouver and it’s no wonder you like to think of the north as the bible belt. lol talk about a bigot!! haha!
oh and btw, asitis, Canada does NOT revolve around toronto.
Do you even know the mayor of any other Canadian city from that time period? I’m betting NOT!
asitis is a woman too.
maybe one who’s had an abortion?
or lives the lesbian lifestyle?
“Josephine,
You enlisted. You knew what you were getting into.”
I feel that’s a little hypocritical Carla. She may have been pressured into joining, or she may have gone willingly and then had a change of heart. Please don’t be so quick to judge.
And I hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving if I don’t come here before then : )
“Considering that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of society, yes, it is my business.”
I don’t know about that. And also what society? There are different societies in the world. I think our society is based highly on our economics, as in we’re capitalist and our society highly reflects that.
Considering that heterosexual marriage is the foundation of society, yes, it is my business.
Posted by: John Lewandowski at November 24, 2008 10:03 PM
Amen!!
The day they promote teaching it in schools to our children, it not only becomes public but it becomes our business. the peoples business. I will tell the public that Obama is wrong and the schools are wrong and the gay marriage is Detrimental in every way to a healthy society. It is not hate. It is truth. I have data that shows the crime, murder and domesic violence to support my claim.
Where’s the data xppc?
patricia you should just stop. You are just looking like more of an idiot. Wrong on all counts. Not from toronto. Not Canadian. Not
Lesbian. Never had an abortion. Don’t consider Northern Ontario
the bible belt.
There is no draft, Jess. We are not talking about a coerced abortion. We are talking about enlisting in the service.
Happy Thanksgiving, Jess!!
Proofin’ the prez: Who’s in charge?
Constitutional lawyer says electors have duty to investigate citizenship
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81944
JOIN THE FIGHT AND SIGN THE PETITION!!!!
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550
Be sure ot spread the petition FAR AND WIDE!!!!
Ellen Degenerate is an example of what is wrong.
She is two faced. When is the last time she had a black Christian church leader on her show that opposed gay marriage and debated him?
Where are the gays in all their hot air protesting at Mosques?
Where is Obama speaking agianst their protesting? Their AGRRESSIVENESS??
Why aren’t these radicals protesting Elton John? He opposes gay marriage. Ask people not to buy his music and blacklist him.
Tom, assisted fertility treatments often lead to the destruction of life. IVF often creates lives that are later either destroyed or put into eternal staisis, and fertility drugs often create more children than doctors feel can be safely carried which results in selective abortion.
The gospel has implications for Jews because it is the fulfillment of prophecy. Of course, we can go around in circles about this, but I believe that Christ is the God of Israel, in human form.
Tom, there are tons of scriptures that show that God does not agree with homosexuality. I needent list them because everyone is familiar with the text. Though, if you would like I can. I’m betting that you are twisting words and stretching interpretation in order to make the text fit your world view.
then stop making false posts and accusations asitis because you know nothing of the canadian situation
so stop misleading people on the board that you do simply by throwing aroung a few names which mean nothing to these people
and the picture you posted did demonstrate that northern ontario is the bible belt stupid!
thanks, maam!
lauren:some consider that frozen embryos are most likely dying
I know there is a program where couples can donate their “excess” embryos to couples who can’t have children but what the success rate is from this I don’t know
I know of a couple where the wife has had 13 implantations and only 2 pregnancies – 1 which did not go to term and 1 currently underway but which the baby is not developing properly.
Carla maybe her family was pressuring her into joining the service. Are you saying you can’t be coerced without being threatened with violence or jail time?
Alright I have to go but have a wonderful week everybody! And remember, the best kind of Thanksgiving dinner has the turkey as a GUEST not a main course!
http://www.adoptaturkey.org/
“Here’s to challenging the Right’s exclusive claim to the pro-life agenda!”
Nobody would be happier than me if people on the left actually were pro-life. But, they aren’t, as they willingly and happily support the most pro-abortion candidates of all time.
It is not an exaggeration to say that Obama is the most pro-abortion US Senator, EVER. And yet, those of you on the left are ecstatic about his victory. So when you claim to be pro-life, that is dishonest. When you claim to be pro-life, but then celebrate the election of Obama because you think maybe he won’t send you to fight in a war, while his opponent might possibly have sent you to fight, that is dishonest, too.
Stop lying and I’ll stop insulting you. Keep lying and I’ll keep insulting you. That’s all.
“Carla maybe her family was pressuring her into joining the service. Are you saying you can’t be coerced without being threatened with violence or jail time?”
Well, the left is always telling us that only idiots who dropped out of high school and can’t find work join the military. I guess Josephine agrees with that, being a Democrat and all. Or as John Kerry put it in his infamous “botched joke”, if you do badly in school, you end up “stuck in Iraq”.
Now they try to attack Mormons. How intolerant.
SAN FRANCISCO — California officials will “investigate” whether the Mormon church accurately described its role in a campaign to ban gay marriage in the state.
The California Fair Political Practices Commission said Monday a complaint by a gay rights group merits further inquiry.
How can you remain separate and violate the privacy of the church?
Why don’t we ban John Lewandowski? He’s only here to insult people. Maybe he’s a closet pro-abort? He’s certainly trying his hardest to push people away from the pro-life movement.
Why don’t we ban Jess? People with only half a working brain cell shouldn’t be playing on the internet, anyway.
Eileen, what do you not understand about freedom of religion?
Like I said, do you only believe Catholics should be able to enjoy the freedom of religion?
Posted by: Josephine at November 24, 2008 11:22 PM
Josephine,
(One of the points that I was trying to make is that you mentioned that you are a Catholic — it is important for Catholics to know what the Church teaches and why. By supporting homosexual lifestyles and marriage you are in direct opposition to what the Church teaches. One cannot pick and choose what they want to follow if they believe that it is the church instituted by Christ. The teachings of the Church are based on reason, they are not arbitrary teachings based on some kind of superficial sentimentality or emotional appeal.)
This is not about freedom of religion or actually freedom “from” religion, which is what you are asserting. It is a moral issue. Our laws are based on morals precepts. Homosexual marriages are immoral, they twist the whole meaning of marriage. Whether you believe it or not, they are pushing for marriage to legitimize their lifestyle. No one is trying to prevent them from entering into civil unions. Laws could be made in their favor for marriage but it still would not make their situation morally right and they will never be truly happy.
People who support politicians who support the following describe themselves as “pro-life”:
-Unrestricted abortion all over the planet
-US taxpayer funded abortions all over the planet
-US taxpayer funded research on human embryos
-Forced participation in abortion for healthcare providers to go along with forced funding of abortion by taxpayers
-The same kinds of government-expanding economic policies which left America stuck in the Great Depression for over a decade
Therefore, when such people claim to be “pro-life”, what are they actually? LIARS.
Saying that you support Democrats because you’re pro-life is like saying that you support Republicans because they want to get out of Iraq.
asitis: I remember Rae Days and before 7 Eleven when we all had a Mac’s Milk and Mayor Mel Lastman and Suzy Shier and when the Beer Store was Brewers Retail…… Just in case you still think I’m not from Ontari-ari-ari-o! Patricia. I’m sorry, who’s the idiot? I can’t hear you.
HEY I remember “Brewers Retail!”
Bad thing was, we’d get into a little town, and then the Liquor store would be on the opposite end of town from the Brewers Retail…..
:: Sleeman’s :: yum ::
patricia WTF are you talking about? False posts and accusations? I know nothing about the cdn situation???? That’s idiotic (yet again) I onlylived there for 36 years – not long enough? And that wasn’t me who posted the map idiotka.
Doug, good old LCBO!!!! And I agree, Sleeman’s rocks! Here’s an interesting bit you might not have heard… I remember when they first started selling their brew the story was the cdn mint tried to sue them for using the beaver like on the nickel. Turned out that the original Sleeman brewer was using that logo before the mint! Being Canada, I don’t think they counter sued.
Oops! Is it okay to say beaver on this site
Lauren,
So a loving couple who desperately want a couple shouldn’t take advantage of assisted fertility treatments? Do you realize what you are saying? You are saying my beautiful precious niece and nephews shouldn’t be alive. How can you say that?
My wife and I were fortunate that we didn’t have to turn to science for help — but we would have had we needed to.
As for “The gospel has implications for Jews because it is the fulfillment of prophecy. Of course, we can go around in circles about this, but I believe that Christ is the God of Israel, in human form”, well, no, it isn’t the fulfillment of prophecy from my point of view, it’s just a beautiful text. Your insistence that your beliefs are true for everybody is chauvinistic — how can you presume to know what’s true for anybody besides yourself?
And then there’s the attitude of the gospels toward homosexuality: there is not one word from Jesus on the subject. Not. One. Word. Some in Romans, some in Leviticus, but from Jesus himself? Nothing. If it was so important, why did he neglect to address it? Not a rhetorical question — I’d love to know.
Eileen, according to your logic.. one cannot be American and Catholic both. As an American, you should support gay marriage. Equality? Religious freedom?
AND, to clear things up:
I’m in the National Guard, not the Army.
I graduated high school. I’m not a drop out, John.
I’m a pre-med student at the University of Illinois.
Now, why I joined the Guard? I don’t like taking money from my parents. I wanted to “make it” all by myself. I could’ve applied for scholarships, but I wanted to do something important.
I will tell you this: a good way to piss off everyone in the military is to say “you knew what you were getting into”.. because I will tell you a lie we were told. THERE WILL BE NO MORE DEPLOYMENTS TO IRAQ. “WE WON”. WE’RE WITHDRAWING! That is what we were told. I prayed, and PRAYED John McCain would lose because I don’t want to go to Iraq. I would go to Afghanistan without a fight. I agree with our reason for being there. Do you realize how many times the reason for being in Iraq has changed?!
Josephine,
Bless you for clarity and truth.
Josephine, I admire you. Lauren, you’re so far off the deep-end you aren’t helphinh the pro-life movement you know.
Tom, I am saying that we should not create life if we must destroy life to do so.
If a couple decides on in-vitro and implants all of their viable embryos, I don’t have a problem. If a couple uses fertility drugs, conceives multiples, and carries all of the children, I don’t have a problem.
I have experienced infertility and miscarriage, so I understand the heartache, but I do not believe we should kill in order to create life.
Tom, everyone believes that their views are correct. That’s why they hold them. It isn’t chauvanistic to try to spread what you believe to be the saving truth to others. I wouldn’t have much faith if I read God’s commandment to spread His gospel and said “eh, I don’t think He really means that, I mean what if people get offended? Better to bury my treasure and sit on my hands!”
God indeed does condemn homosexuality. He says “Lev 18:22-23 “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.” Lev 20:13 “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.” God and Christ are One, so the levitical condemnation of homosexuality extends into later condemnations by followers of Christ.
It is clear that God views homosexuality as sinful. To claim otherwise isn’t being honest. Someone can reject God, but to profess to believe in Him and His teachings while simultaneously ignoring His Word isn’t being spiritually honest.
Asitis, how am I “so far off the deep end?”
I am for civil unions. I have the exact same views on homosexual marriage as Obama and Biden. I’m hardly outside of mainstream America. In fact, I’m probably more permissive to homosexual marriage than the average American.
I don’t agree with the destruction of life, be it from abortion or in-vitro. This isn’t a radical idea either. Being a moderate conservative Christian isn’t being “off the deep end.”
Astis, if you want to see “off the deep end” go find some posts from Yllas. Now THAT is off the deep end. Of course, I think she’s just a pro-choice troll pretending to be pro-life.
Homosexuality is not about life
Homosexuality is not about love.
Every time a gay lies and has sex with another gay claiming to know they have aids and thinking just maybe protection might not fail, they are guilty of attempted murder. If the protection does fail and the other person gets aids, they have sentenced the victum to a long, slow painful death. Happens every day.
(same for fornicators that are straight and selfish enough to want sex and take risks on protection)
Aids is an example of the wages of sin is death. It is not know to be transmitted sexually between virgins that abstain.
Remember this whole gay topic is pro death. The leader of NARAL
(Washington, DC)– “The attempt to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriages is a direct attack on the fundamental American right to privacy. The U.S. Constitution protects individuals’ decisions about marriage, procreation, contraception and family relationships – and that’s how the majority of Americans like it.
NARAL Pro-Choice America urges the Senate to stop President Bush’s attempt to block civil liberties in order to please his right wing base. We strongly oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment and are proud to stand side-by-side with our colleagues in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community to oppose this outrageous proposal.”
###
Lauren,
Thanks for your reply, but you didn’t answer my question. Why, in all four gospels, does Jesus say not one word about homosexuality?
As for Leviticus — Leviticus also says that for a woman to wear a man’s clothes is an abomination, and she should be stoned to death, so if you’re planning to wear slacks and a shirt today, I suggest you add a Kevlar vest to that, and maybe a helmet. Leviticus also says, very very clearly, that we are not to eat shellfish or pork. Planning on sausage in your stuffing this Thanksgiving?
The verse about homosexuality isn’t in any bolder type than the one about never touching pigskin or various kinds of animal sacrifice. If it’s all absolutely true, how can you pick and choose?
But most of all: what about the absence of any mention of homosexuality in the gospels, if it’s that important?
Doug, good old LCBO!!!! And I agree, Sleeman’s rocks! Here’s an interesting bit you might not have heard… I remember when they first started selling their brew the story was the cdn mint tried to sue them for using the beaver like on the nickel. Turned out that the original Sleeman brewer was using that logo before the mint! Being Canada, I don’t think they counter sued.
Oops! Is it okay to say beaver on this site?
Ha! Yeah, asitis, I think you’re okay on that one.
Have to laugh – I remember two of my guys going to the LCBO one day. There was a permit problem with the Ministry of Environment (we work on electrical transformers and the oil they contain) and our job got delayed five days. “Big Party” is an understatement.
They get to the parking lot, and they’re just a bit early. 9:58 a.m….. 9:59 a.m…..
:: tick :: tick :: tick ::
10:00…. 10:01…. Time to start beating on the door…. Probably lucky they were sold any after that.
Aids is an example of the wages of sin is death. It is not know to be transmitted sexually between virgins that abstain.
Posted by: xppc at November 25, 2008 11:30 AM
or lesbians…..God’s chosen people.
asitis: Lauren, you’re so far off the deep-end you aren’t helpin’ the pro-life movement you know.
I gotta disagree with you there, though, asitis.
It’s a given that different people believe different things, but Lauren is quite reasonable and smart – a good reader and listener as well as good at putting across her own points.
She also doesn’t go off on the loony-toons ranting we see so much of here.
(Although it might be fun to see her really get all fired up…) ; )
You’re on to me there Doug! ;)
XPPC,
“Aids is an example of the wages of sin is death. It is not know to be transmitted sexually between virgins that abstain.”
So is AIDS still the wages of sin for a woman or a man who abstains from sexual relations until marriage, then has a partner who gets HIV through extramarital relations and then infects him/her?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for those people who got it through tainted blood transfusions?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for those people who were raped by someone who was HIV-positive?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for the valiant firefighter who, while struggling to extricate someone from a burning building to save his/her life, was exposed to that person’s blood and is now HIV-positive as a result of that exposure?
Sound reasoning, Enigma. I think you’re giving XPPC too much credit, though. They’re really just into nutjob stuff.
Josephine:
Marriage is not a “right”. It is a privilege granted by God.
Marriage represents the relationship of the bride of Christ, the Church, to the groom, the Son of God.
In God’s Kingdom, the only relationship God has deemed as being worthy of representing this is that between a man and a woman. Christ is the head, the husband is subject to Christ and the wife is subject to the husband.
Messing with this is an act of total and utter rebellion towards the Creator of the Universe.
You think you can mess with Him and not get burned, go right ahead. I seriously warn you that you bring God’s wrath on your own head for doing this.
Trevor,
I know.
All that I ask is that people think. Sometimes though, it really seems that even that is too much.
Tom, I’ve been kosher for parts of my life and have prayed abundantly about wearing pants. In fact, for a significant time I did not.
Ultimately, after careful reading of scripture, I came to the belief that only the commandments repeated in Christ’s Covenant were to govern our lives. Homosexuality is condemned again and again in the New Testament and as such is something that is considered sinful.
God’s revelation through the apostles shows us His standard for our lives.
“Why don’t we ban Jess? People with only half a working brain cell shouldn’t be playing on the internet, anyway.”
This is an example of why John should be banned. He can’t think of any good arguments, he can’t even carry on a conversation. Everything dissolves into petty personal insults. He says almost nothing relevant to the pro-life movement and the little he does say that is relevant is riddled with foul language and made up words.
No wonder no one takes this site seriously anymore and the intelligent pro-lifers (mk) all left.
XPPC,
“Aids is an example of the wages of sin is death. It is not know to be transmitted sexually between virgins that abstain.”
So is AIDS still the wages of sin for a woman or a man who abstains from sexual relations until marriage, then has a partner who gets HIV through extramarital relations and then infects him/her?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for those people who got it through tainted blood transfusions?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for those people who were raped by someone who was HIV-positive?
Is AIDS still the wages of sin for the valiant firefighter who, while struggling to extricate someone from a burning building to save his/her life, was exposed to that person’s blood and is now HIV-positive as a result of that exposure?
Posted by: Enigma at November 25, 2008 12:11 PM
sure enough. Blood transfusions: the sin of someone else. It is why blood banks don’t accept donations from queers.
The firefighter is punished for the sins of another.
..These non Christians don’t get it. They claim privacy rules. No it doesn’t About the time you get someone sick, the public health department shuts down your restaurant kitchen. About the time someone decides to pass diasease in a bedroom, the helath department should be in there and shut ‘er down.
See sinners think their sins do not effect someone else. Not very bright.
The rape case you mentioned? Happens with gays every day. See, sins often are not alone. there is often more than one sin. I knew a man that molested his child and infected the child with the AIDS virus.
This board is about abortion. It has no less than 1 sin involved and another sin (killing the baby conceived out of rape) doesn’t negate the earlier sin of rape.
Also, Tom you are not released from these laws, so what is your justification for rejecting Levitical law?
No, well there are still a few intelligent pro-lifers on here, but they seem more inclined to make snap judgments and lean toward close-mindedness. Maybe we should look past the personal pettiness and focus on the big issues?
Thanks, Doug :)
“I’m so proud to be a part of this event,” said Kate Clinton, the host of the 10th anniversary awards ceremony. “Lesbian health had been totally neglected before LAP came on the scene. It’s been so successful at shining a major spotlight on women’s health issues-and especially the
alarmingly high rates of HIV transmission among lesbians.
How appropriate we’re using the week of World AIDS Day to commemorate the Lesbian AIDS Project at GMHC by honoring these remarkable women in the fight against AIDS.
Hal, why do they have high infection rates?
XPPC, I’ve always heard that lesbians have very low rates of AIDS because of the fact that they have a lower risk of blood transfusion than even heterosexual couples.
It would certainly be interesting to see why their AIDS numbers are increasing.
“alarmingly high rates of HIV transmission among lesbians.”
I wish RSD was hear to give his opinion. He said HIV is created through homosexual male sex. If that is the case then why the increase of HIV in lesbians?
I would guess it has something to do with the lack of education and awareness of female contraception like… um… well you know. The opposite of the condom, the condom for women. Obviously it wouldn’t be spread if they weren’t having sex and/or having sex only monogamously with a partner who was unaffected.
I investigated the lesbian AIDS issue a bit. It seems that the vigorous use of …er…phalic replacements… can sometimes allow a blood line to open up for infection.
um but wouldn’t the dildo hhave to HIV +ve lauren? Oh right… That must me what they mean by “sexual aids”!
Enough. Please. I will start deleting if we can’t stop spiraling on this thread…
Asitis, the dildo is used by both parties. If one is infected and then the other uses it, the other becomes infected.
Or is the lesbian thing doing the spiraling? Because lesbianism is relevent to this topic.
People really shouldn’t share them then lauren. Anyway we can’t stop people from engaging in harmful behavior. We can try and educate them and keep them informed but other then that there’s not much that can be done. Unless you have some suggestions?
Does anyone find it strange that in Nazi Germany even though many homosexual males were sent to the concentration camps no lesbians were ever sent?
Josephine,
You can’t be for certain “rights” that are not consistent with Church teaching. Let’s put Catholicism aside. You are still attempting to redefine what marriage is by promoting marriage for homosexuals.
Jess, I think lesbianism is typically (even now) less obvious than male homosexuality.
Astis, if you want to see “off the deep end” go find some posts from Yllas. Now THAT is off the deep end. Of course, I think she’s just a pro-choice troll pretending to be pro-life.
Posted by: lauren at November 25, 2008 11:28 AM
Now Lauren,
I think your a pro choicer hiding as a pro lifer.
At the long end of your religious beliefs, one comes to the fact that your God doesn’t need humans to exist.
Creating humans was/is his choice. He could do with or without them. Kinda like the pro choice argument about needing human beings to exist or not. It’s a choice.
Just to be sure you don’t think I’m making up your former words about God needing human beings to exist.
Does God need humans to exist Lauren?
Does anyone find it strange that in Nazi Germany even though many homosexual males were sent to the concentration camps no lesbians were ever sent?
Posted by: Jess at November 25, 2008 1:44 PM
Hitler was a homosexual male and not a lesbian.
Actually we do not know how many lesbians were sent.
Of course he does. They created him.
Oh, now I’m in for it ;)
Lauren,
You kept kosher, you didn’t wear pants, then you made a decision about what interpretation felt true and spiritually fulfilling to you — which is exactly what I have done with my approach to religion and scripture. Having made that choice — having decided what is true for YOU — how can you possibly not allow others (I.E., homosexuals) the same pick-and-choose approach? Have you so much pride that you can say that your picks and choices are THE picks and choices?
But let’s get down to what’s really at stake here: every time somebody vocal in the pro-life movement says that there is only one way to God, the movement loses support. Which means more babies die.
Asitis, that’s true. God is a construct with it implied that there is a “need” on the part of God. Well, naturally those that dreamed it up would feel that way.
Lauren,
As for my rejection of Levitical law — I see the Bible as a fantastic compendium of wisdom, insight, humor, drama, tragedy, guidance. To take it literally is to reduce its power — it would be like insisting that the historical Hamlet had to have done and said all the things Shakespeare has him doing and saying for the play Hamlet to have meaning and power. Like you, I choose the things that have meaning and power to me, so I didn’t eat pork or shellfish — mostly as an identification with all my ancestors who followed those laws, and suffered and died for their beliefs — but I don’t sacrifice heifers and I won’t stone to death somebody who works on Saturday.
Tom, my “pick and choose” decision were based on scripture. God explains to what we are bound throughout the New Testament. Although the gospels do not specifically address homosexuality (though they do discuss adultry of which homosexuality is a subscript) the writings of the apostles *do* condemn homosexuality as a sin. I see the writings of the apostles to be as much cannon as the gospels, and thus my interpretation of scripture includes them.
I did not just go through the Tanak willi-nilli picking and choosing what laws to follow and what to set aside. I read the OT, Read the NT, and observed what Christ said we were no longer obligated to follow.
You don’t sacrifice heifers because the Temple was destroyed, but honestly I don’t understand Reform Judaism’s rejection of certain scripture very well.
As for the pro-life movement, I don’t think it even necessarily needs to be tied up with faith. Athiests can believe that murder or stealing is wrong even if they do not profess to believe in any sort of higher being. I believe that it is important to spread God’s message to everyone because it is a message of Grace.
I actually thought of converting to Judaism about 5 years ago when I was having some real questions about Christianity. After reading through scripture, I found that I did have a differing view than most Christians regarding God’s nature, but that ultimately I believed Jesus to be the fulfillment of prophecy and God made flesh.
Ultimately it is a bigger calling to spread the gospel than to fight social injustice, but I try to do both as much as possible. I reach out to people outside of Christianity with the pro-life message, but I also try to reach people with God’s message.
Oh yeah, Yllas, you caught me. I’m totally pro-choice, that’s why I’ve spent the last 4 years involved in the pro-life movement trying to change the pro-choice tide of our nation.
Yep, because I believe in the Oneness of God I must be pro-choice!
Flawless logic, yllas!
As an aside, I believe Tom is pro-life too. Oh no, he’s Jewish and also believes in Oneness theology. How is this possible? He must not *really* be pro-life right?
Also, all of those trinitarian congregations that support abortion must just be super-secretive pro-lifers since they’re triune beliefs obviously make them pro-lifers!
This is fun, let’s keep making up completely random, unbiblical statements to bash people with whom we disagree.
they’re should be their. I got distracted halfway through the sentence and changed the last part. Sorry.
Does anyone find it strange that in Nazi Germany even though many homosexual males were sent to the concentration camps no lesbians were ever sent?
Posted by: Jess at November 25, 2008 1:44 PM
how do you know this strange fact, for sure?
The pregnant woman who thinks she is a man is psychologically ill.
patricia! Welcome back!!!!
asitis: 36 years in Ontario, well thank God you moved outta here, one less libertine to ruin our country. You can work on ruining America now.
go back to hanging out at the beer store with your pal, Doug….
and you don’t know squat about Ontario or the rest of Canada darling.
“Marriage is not a “right”. It is a privilege granted by God.”
Ah, so you didn’t get a document from the government when you got married? Nothing changed about your taxes? Your insurance? :) Marriage is a privilege from God IF YOU BELIEF IN GOD. Not everyone does. Just because YOU DO, you shouldn’t PUNISH the people that don’t. It’s not your place.
Eileen, I think I’ve had this same discussion with you three different times, and you say the same thing over and over. You think it’s okay to force your religion on others. I don’t. That’s the difference between us, and I don’t want to have the same conversation with you again. It’s gettin
Josephine,
do you believe polygamy or incestual marriages should be legal?
By the way…
Jess, you’re pro-choice, correct? I’d like to think I’m not a “stupid” pro-lifer. :(
asitis, tom.. thanks dudes. :)
Carla: I think every time I mention something about the military you say you’re grateful before actually saying what you want to say. I know you are, you don’t have to tell me every time. (I appreciate it, REALLY! And I thank you.) But, I remember it’s always you that says it, and I don’t want you to feel like you have to say that or I’ll think you’re a jerk. :)
Josephine,
do you believe polygamy or incestual marriages should be legal?
Polygamy– sure, if everyone is consenting and over age, why not? It’s America. Some religions are cool with polygamy.. who are we to say we don’t care what you’re religion says? I’d be ticked if the government told me I couldn’t take communion at church.
Incest– no. If that’s part of someone’s belief, I understand– but the baby could have serious, serious medical problems that wouldn’t be there had it not been an incest person. (Does anyone watch 30 Rock? The one with Pee Wee Herman?)
Josephine,
Many couples have problems with disabled kids Jo.
Why are you against incestual marriages? Most of them don’t want to have any kids. Who are you to exclude a group of people from being married?
Jasper,
Many couples do have problems with disabled kids, you’re right. But many of those can’t be prevented. Don’t you agree that anything to prevent a child from being disabled is good? If incest couples agree to take every possible measure (including vasectomy/getting tubes tied) then fine. As long as they’re not harming children, I don’t have a problem with it at all. Well, I do PERSONALLY.. but, I think it should be allowed.
Well Lauren
Of course your for life. But, when one ask you about God needing humans, he doesn’t.
God is for choice about human life too.
in fact, you and abortionist are united in human life being a choice Lauren. If you believe your own words about your belief in a God, that doesn’t need human life either.
He needs humans not, you keep tell humans they need to stop their not needing humans by the act of abortion.
Quite contradictatory.
In a strange way, abortionist and those that get abortions, are acting on the same principle that you do Lauren. Humans are a choice. Humans can exist or not exist.
Does God need humans to exist Lauren?
Search your bible, find where God needs humans to exist. Then maybe you can preach about humans needing unwanted life to be allowed to live, by not getting a abortion, and have a consistent pro life ethic, that includes your God belief,
I don’t know squat about Ontario nor the rest of Canada, Patricia????? My, you’re a sore loser!
Sweetie, you should move down to the US. You’d be moe at home here- so long as you stuck to the swath down the middle of the country and some of the south.
And I would love to have a beer with Doug. He sounds like ally more fun than you!
Jo,
Ok, thanks for your honesty.
Yllas, you seem to make a sport of putting words in people’s mouths.
When I read what you write I imagine someone working themselves up into such a frenzy that their head bursts.
You need to calm down and stop reading wildly crazy things into what everyone says.
No, Josephine, I don’t want to force my religion on others. Many people are opposed to same sex marriage based on moral grounds and not necessarily religious grounds. I will agree to a truce! :)
Eileen, I will too. :)
Yllas, you seem to make a sport of putting words in people’s mouths.
When I read what you write I imagine someone working themselves up into such a frenzy that their head bursts.
You need to calm down and stop reading wildly crazy things into what everyone says.
Posted by: lauren at November 25, 2008 6:36 PM
No Lauren, We can go over it again, but when asked if God needs humans to exist, you failed to answer from knowing that God needs not humans to exist. God can exist alone. In Isolation.
Those are your words Lauren.
Those are Chris’s words.
Does God need humans to exist Lauren?
Search your bible, find where God needs humans to exist Lauren.
I am waiting to see you post some bible verses that simply says, God needs humans. Period.
I’m in no frenzy,never have been,even though the invectives and hate speech flowing from asking a simple question that asked if love can actually exist in Isolation.
Which led to asking if God needs humans to exist.
Oliver eventually said that God doesn’t need humans to exist. Chris said that “God could durn well do what he pleases, I think god doesn’t need humans to exist”.
I’m not reading anything but your words and others who have answered my questions and used them to ask another question about humans needing to exist.
You were asked that question Lauren,
Does God need humans to exist Lauren?
You failed to answer because you know God doesn’t need humans to exist.
But, really Lauren, a simple yes or no to the above question is all that is needed and not some baloney about me getting into a frenzy, replying with typical anti Catholic slurs, and a stereotype about Voodoo Catholics.
You have been asked twice if God needs humans to exist Lauren and your the one playing games with answers life “Flawless logic”, and more non answers to a simple question.
I’m trying to get you to be a better Christian able to answer that God needs humans to exist, as a fetus needs a mother to exist, and not make humans a choice, as your God does and did Lauren.
But your pride is blinding you Lauren. Years of really not thinking about what you really believe when asked if God needs humans to exist. That God is a love that really is so lovable that in the end, He doesn’t need humans to exist to be this love you talk about Lauren.
What greater lie is there but to believe that God doesn’t need anything to exist, beginning with you and the trillions of souls since humans began to exist. All those souls which also don’t need to exist for God to be Love.
That is what abortion is Lauren. Exactly the spirit, the thinking that precedes the action.
You think I’m pro choice Lauren, but your God is the first pro choicer, and He needs not humans to be that love, which is actually that Love that can exist in Isolation, Alone.
Don’t you see it Lauren?
It is soo obvious. You must begin with God needing human life. You must always tell a pro choicer that God wants human life from before time began. Saying God loves you is perverted(defintion; to be led a stray) if in the end at a believe that God doesn’t need humans to exist.
I at least got Oliver to crack his mind open a little when he wrote “I guess he doesn’t need humans to exist” And that prideful Chris wrote “I think God doesn’t need humans to exist”.
You better start quoting that Bible, that beings with some quote, that God needs humans to exist for there to be love, since this world is drowning in humans not needing humans as a loving act and choice.
Lauren,
I think that your thinking and mine are much closer together than one would think on first glance.
Yllas, you obviously have some reading comprension issues. You’ve always been talking to me. Oliver is my husband and occasionally I post under his name on accident. I did so while talking to you the first time you went on the “does God need people to exist” kick, and then posted immediately afterwards that “Oliver at such and such time was me.”
But in answer to your question, No, God does not need humans to exist.Obviously. God existed before He made humans.
Tom, you’re probably right.
That wuld obviously correct lauren….. unless it is humans that created God. No one knows for sure.
LONDON — British officials were investigating Wednesday how a man managed to repeatedly rape his daughters and father nine children with them without being stopped by the authorities.
The 56-year-old man was sentenced Tuesday to life in prison for what a judge called “the worst [case of abuse] I have come across” in 40 years.
“To say that we were shocked to find the level of abuse perpetrated by this person is an understatement,” said Jayne Ludlum, director of children’s services in Sheffield, the family’s hometown. “It is hard to comprehend how this could happen in today’s society.”
Ludlum said Sheffield authorities had launched an investigation.
Pro choicers pro deathers are protecting privacy here. How dare they enter this family’s bedroom.
I say put the man in neutral.
the abortion crowd defends rape by over reaching pricavy laws. They do not report rape even in the case of child abuse.
LONDON — British officials were investigating Wednesday how a man managed to repeatedly rape his daughters and father nine children with them without being stopped by the authorities.
The 56-year-old man was sentenced Tuesday to life in prison for what a judge called “the worst [case of abuse] I have come across” in 40 years.
“To say that we were shocked to find the level of abuse perpetrated by this person is an understatement,” said Jayne Ludlum, director of children’s services in Sheffield, the family’s hometown. “It is hard to comprehend how this could happen in today’s society.”
Ludlum said Sheffield authorities had launched an investigation.
Pro choicers pro deathers are protecting privacy here. How dare they enter this family’s bedroom.
I say put the man in neutral.
the abortion crowd defends rape by over reaching pricavy laws. They do not report rape even in the case of child abuse.
“Yllas, you obviously have some reading comprehension issues.”
To say the least…
That one’s irrationality never seems to end.
It’s odd, because Yllas is intelligent, at least at times, well-read, and knows a lot of religious theory.
Yet when somebody talks to Yllas, there is this huge onset of fantasy in Yllas’s mind, instantly, leaving reality far behind.
I think that reality is painful for Yllas, and any sort of escape is attractive.
Does he really believe this nonsense he writes or is he just pushing buttons? Relatively new here so I don’t know his history.
asitis, I don’t know. I think he’s just pushing buttons, but for all I know he could be a real person. I approach him as a troll, and thus show much less respect than I would to someone who I believed had genuinely held beliefs.
They do not report rape even in the case of child abuse.
Posted by: xppc at November 26, 2008 9:06 AM
“It emerged that in 1998 one daughter rang Childline, a charity to help abused kids, and asked for assurances about being able to keep her children if she came forward. When Childline could not make that guarantee, the daughter did nothing more to raise her plight.”
No “pro-choicers” were involved in this, dude. She wanted to keep her kids, and she couldn’t get a guarantee.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/25/court.rapes/index.html
But in answer to your question, No, God does not need humans to exist.Obviously. God existed before He made humans.
Posted by: lauren at November 26, 2008 8:05 AM
Yes, it was a choice. God doesn’t need humans to exist. Does God need to love humans Lauren?
What’s wrong with me writing to you and no answer from pride that;
It is soo obvious. You must begin with God needing human life. You must always tell a pro choicer that God wants human life from before time began. Saying God loves you is perverted(defintion; to be led a stray) if in the end you believe that God doesn’t need humans to exist.
You better start quoting that Bible, that beings with some quote, that God needs humans to exist for there to be love, since this world is drowning in humans not needing humans as a loving act and choice.
I find you thinking about you God, and his not needing humans to exist, or anything to exist, to be the exact same thinking of one who aborts human life.
Fact is, it makes a mockery of the Second Trinity coming down here and dying for things that don’t need to exist for their to be Love. Since your God needs only himself to exist for their to be Love.
Then again, you don’t have a Trinity, so it must be that God broke a piece of himself off, and then proceded to come down to Earth and actually say a few words and disappeared back to Heaven. Where he was glued on to God,melted back on, or now is a separate God made from God, but really not needing Jesus to exist too, since God needs not even that “new piece of Creation” to exist. I do believe, that you believe that God created Jesus right, Lauren? That Jesus didn’t exist before God created him, right Lauren? And please Lauren, I’m not talking about his flesh.
Another words Lauren, Jesus was a choice. A choice that needed not to exist for love to exist. See the analogy Lauren? You really are pro choice.
What the hell, yllas? Who is the “second trinity?”
Are you disputing the fact that we are created beings, and that God existed prior to our creation?
My belief is that Christ is the Word made flesh. This belief comes from:
John 1:1-4,14
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.
3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made
…
14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[d] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
I don’t believe that “God broke a piece of himself off, and then proceded to come down to Earth and actually say a few words and disappeared back to Heaven.”
I’ve explained my beliefs to you a hundred times, but let me do it again, slowly.
Ok, let’s start in Genesis. WE are introduced to God, the creator of the universe. He created the universe, but existed before it’s creation. He can most certainly exist without us, but choose to create us and love us.
We begin to understand the nature of God through Deuteronomy 6:4 that states:Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
Now, throughout the OT, God appears to various people through different manifestations. He appears as the pillar of smoke, the burning bush, etc. We understand that God is able to show Himself to us through physical manifestations, though we do not see His “true form” if you will.
Later in Isaiah (and elsewhere, but for expediency I’m just going to pick out one messianic prophecy) we see that God intends to come in the form of a man.
Isaiah 6 says “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. ”
This clearly shows that Christ *is* the God of Israel, YHWH.
Through Christ (Yeshua) God came as man. Yeshua is both 100% YHWH and 100% man. Yeshua isn’t merely a “part” of YHWH, or some sort of avatar, he IS YHWH.
However, the fact that He is 100% God does not take away from the fact that he is 100% man. He is both.
Thus the crucifixion of Yeshua is not simply some part of a larger Godhead being crucified, but rather the God of Israel sacrificing Himself for His people.
Since you seem intent on somehow making God’s oneness have relation to Abortion, consider this. God choose to sacrifice Himself for His people. Even if, and especially if, He did not “need” the people, He still was willing to die for them. This is antithetical to pro-choice thinking which refuses personal sacrifice.
I was just reading stuff I missed. Lauren, you have actually “prayed abundantly” about wearing pants????
11:11am UK, Tuesday November 25, 2008
People infected with HIV could be implanted with microchips after lawmakers in Indonesia backed tagging them.
Microchips as small as this one could be implanted into Aids sufferers
Legislators in the archipelago’s remote province of Papua said they supported a bill requiring some patients to be fitted with chips to monitor the disease.
Health workers and Aids activists called the plan “abhorrent”.
Of course we know the HIV positive people seek to have sex with others and by so doing endanger lives. I think this is a splendid approach to traking dangerous people. This group is responsible for hundreds of times as many deaths than people with gun carrying permits.
Lauren; What the hell, yllas? Who is the “second trinity?”
Calm Down Lauren, your working yourself into a frenzy.
You don’t believe in the Trinity anyway Lauren. You have no understanding of the Trinty, and what you know of the Trinty is based on negating the Trinity anyway. You are a anti-Trinitarian based form of worshipping the God that makes human life a choice of that God.
For multi billions of those that are Christians, the second Trinity is Jesus. You can guess what the other two parts of the Trinity are if you were not be soo anti-Trinitarian based Lauren.
I don’t believe that “God broke a piece of himself off, and then proceded to come down to Earth and actually say a few words and disappeared back to Heaven.”
Well, if God is made of One substance, then he broke a piece of his One substance off, and made it flesh.
But, are you disputing that God returned to his abode, and be truthful, Jesus/God really didn’t speak to many words while on Earth?. We have exchanged more words then Jesus spoke.
Your God is gone, long gone for two thousand years and has never returned to this Earth in any form accepted by you.
On the other hand, Bobby B. has God return in a sacrament known Holy Communion. You don’t need that Lauren, cause your logical mind rejects such mumbo jumbo.
Good for you Lauren, It confirms that God doesn’t need humans to exist since he really ain’t got the time to show up for his humans he made by choice. One time is enough.
Everytime a person says they saw Jesus anywhere in the world, you must deny that seeing, since you know God never needed those humans anyway to exist. Especially those crazy Catholics, right Lauren? It’s nothingmore then VooDoo.
You know that the children of Hal will eventually realize that their life was nothingmore then a choice Lauren.
And Hal will try and inflate his ego by saying they are precious, a precious choice, but nothingmore then a choice to exist because of Hal.
Hal is their God, seen, talking, walking, and depending on Hal for existence for many years of theie life. Giving and taketh away.
Hal can make another one like them, and take the one’s out he did not want. Hal the lesson of Proverbs 22:11.
Once upon a time a comedian made the world laugh from his routine that had his father say; ” I can take you out and make another one just like you”. “I thought my name as Damit, and Jesus Christ growing up”. Today he wanders about being ridiculed for trying to stop black youth killing themselves and not being able to write or speak English.
Soo Lauren, God made all humanity as a choice. Some exist, some don’t, their existence depends on a choice.
When a person decides exactly as your God decides, that human life is a choice, you go into a frenzy Lauren. Why Lauren? Where did they learn that human life is a choice?
It is soo obvious. You must begin with God needing human life. You must always tell a pro choicer that God wants human life from before time began. Saying God loves you is perverted(defintion; to be led a stray) if in the end you believe that God doesn’t need humans to exist.
You better start quoting that Bible, that beings with some quote, that God needs humans to exist for there to be love, since this world is drowning in humans not needing humans as a loving act and choice.
Still waiting Lauren.
Astis, yes, based on these verses:
Deut 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God
and
1 Tim 2:9-10 – In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
Ultimately, I felt that because the command against “mens” apparal is not repeated in Timothy, wearing modest pants cut for a woman’s figure was ok. However, I don’t wear a lot of jewelery, and I keep my hair long.
The hair issue is based on
1 Corinthians 11:15
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
I sometimes also cover my head during prayer, but I believe that this scripture shows that my hair is enough a covering for my day to day life.
I don’t doubt it’s writtten in the bible that thou shalt not wear pants. it’s just that I can’t believe someone would actually pray about that. C’mon. I can’t imagine what it has to say about women working, getting an education, making their own decisions, choosing to live as a single……You must be a busy women with all that praying all the time over everyday stuff.
Yllas, I was saying “what the hell” based on your wild misrepresentation of my views.
I was raised in a trinitarian church and I never heard mention of the “second trinity.” Perhaps it’s not as common a phrase as you seem to think.
You are either ridiculously dense, or being willfully ignorant.
Again, I’ll speak slowly. When God reveled Himself to Moses and crew as the Pillar of Smoke, did He “give part of Himself” to becoming the Pillar and then lost that part forever? No, He showed Himself through that manifestation and remained Himself after he hid the manifestation.
If someone puts on a mask to meet with a group of people, and then takes the mask off, are they any less of a person than they were before they put on the mask? Of course not. Likewise, God is no less God after coming to Earth in human form. He is just as much God, and just as present as ever.
He poured out His Holy Spirit in order for us to reach deeper communion with Him. God isn’t dead just because His human form was crucified.
Are you just not reading anything I say and just posting a canned response when you see my name? I’ve quoted various scripture, but because you are exceptionally dense, let me quote another.
Gen.1-1
1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Obviously God existed prior to our existence and made a choice to create us. His need of us has no bearing on the fact that he made the choice to create us. I could really need food, but choose not to eat. Every action is a choice, and our creation was no different. It does nothing to lessen our innate worth, and if anything is even more powerful to realize that we were chosen of God.
By the way, if God doesn’t make choices, why would he call the Jews his “chosen people?”
Astisis, It has to do with how I present myself to the world. Once the decision is made, it’s not like it’s something that I concern myself with daily, but it’s important to examine your life through the lens of scripture.
Actually, God has laid out a sort of “living guide” for women.Actually, there are two! Contrary to what some might assume, it actually encourages women to work to contribute to her family.
Proverbs 31:10
10Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.
11The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
12She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.
13She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.
14She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
15She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.
16She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
17She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.
18She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night.
19She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.
20She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.
21She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet.
22She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple.
23Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.
24She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.
25Strength and honour are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.
26She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.
27She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.
28Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.
29Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.
30Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
31Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.
Titus 2:3
3The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
4That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
5To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
Hmmm. That’s a whole lot of spindling and growing and fetching food and wearing of purple! Does it say husbands should be keepers of the home as well and good and obedient toward their wives?????? And what about women who choose not to marry?
astits,
In the New Testament, Paul says that men must loves their wives as Christ loves the Church (He laid down His life for His Bride — the Church).
Asitis, you have to understand that we are talking about an agricultural society. Growing food and making products were the jobs of the day. I think that modern implications can be any variety of occupations.
And of course there are commands for men! I just cropped them out of the quotes to show the guidelines for women. Here are the guidelines for men w/in the same chapters.
From Titus 2:
That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.
6Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded.
7In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,
8Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.
And, the entire book of proverbs discusses bibilical living for both men and women. :)
But no obeying his wife though?!
Of course I realize it was based on an agricultural society. A different time long ago when there were not too many options for women.
Asitis, there weren’t very many options for people in general. It has nothing to do with any anti-woman sentiment. The men and women worked hand in hand in agriculture.
Men are to obey God, and to love their wives as Christ loves the church. I.E. they are called to sacrifice themselves for their wives.
So women have to obey their husbands. But men don’t have to obey their wives. Not the world I live in.
I totally understand there were many options in general, and even less for women. That’s why some of this stuff in the Bible doesn’t work today.
Sorry, that should be “…were NOT many options…”
That’s not what truthseeker said Carla. He said gay marriage will never be possible. As for TOTAL acceptance. Well, no unfortunately that will never be possible because there will always be bigots.
Posted by: asitis at November 25, 2008 7:16 AM
No it is impossible by definition. Is a person a bigot because he says that light will never bring darkness? The truth is that you can’t just mind bend and liberalize your way into changing the definition of marriage. Question, if two women got married could one of them claim to be the husband?
Truthseeker don’t you ever get tire of going around and around on this? You are fixated on the so-called definition of marriage.
I think Lauren has a good point about civil unions. Let people get married, and then other people, if they want to have their own club where they practice religious belief that only people of opposite sex can be married in the sense of their religion, well – that’s fine too.
penis enlargement products