From CNN:
Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Posted: 8:17 AM EST (1317 GMT)
ANNAPOLIS, Maryland (AP) -- The daughter of conservative Republican Alan Keyes referred to herself Monday as a "liberal queer" and urged support for gay and lesbian young people who have been deserted by their families.
Ha ha, you've got to love irony. This just goes to show you that if you preach and preach your bullshit long enough, and shove enough of it down someones throat their whole life, that it will eventually backfire on you. Let this be a lesson for all you conservatives out there who obsessively talk about homosexuality to their kids all day.
Heres what Alan Keyes said about Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter in an interview:
Mike Signorile: "So Mary Cheney is a selfish hedonist, is that it?"
Alan Keyes: "Of course she is. That goes by definition. Of course she is."
Alan Keyes thinks the only reason to get married is to procreate, and that love and sex have nothing to do with it at all. I guess all the married people out there without kids are just walking perverted ids according to this theory.
23 comments:
I find it interesting that at the top of your blog you say you want to "reach people who are not subject to other points of view." You say you want people to realize they "don't have to conform to labels" and that "they can believe in something because of the way they feel." On the surface I would give you props for this attitude. I firmly believe you can convince your opponents more using actual communication than just by calling them names.
But further research would make it appear that you are the one who is not open to other viewpoints.
Your rhetoric, instead of promoting open-mindedness and attempting to convince, is rife with labels and statements that you know will be offensive to the very people you are trying to "reach." this seems somewhat self-defeating.
All I've ever gotten from you is a variety of angry retorts dripping with sarcasm (annoyingly posted on two-month-old blogs, so I usually don't even know what you're responding to).
I suppose you could say the same of me, and that's fine. I am merely trying to insert a little humor into the opinions I assure you I hold because of how I feel, not because of who I spend my time with. I am not trying to convince anyone to come around to my way of thinking, but simply expressing my opinions, admittedly to mostly people who agree with me.
But if I were trying to convince you I was right, would I not try communicating with you instead of insulting your intelligence?
There is no intelligence in the attitude of the haves and have nots. This is the lasting outcome of this administration. Was this country not already subdivided enough. Why do we now need to be divided over an issue that is not even that important to most Christians. There is a reason they call marriage an instutution, and who in there right(HA HA) mind would want to be placed in an instutution?
But if some people are crazy enough to want to join this group, then more power to them, they will only be fueling our lawyer society when they realize that marriage is not for them.
So in short what is the problem with gays marrying? In the long run they will only be putting more money into the system. And we all know that America's only concern is money.
RE: Sandy
True, I actually heard that the 1st two lesbians who got married in MA have already filed for divorce.
Don't be silly. Speaking as a confirmed right wing nut-job, I can tell you that Republican sex is a gas. Christian sex is even better. I know because I've had all kinds. I've had premarital, hedonistic, unbelieving, incestuous, non-consensual, and homosexual sex. And now I've finally had married, forgiven, God-honoring, spirit-conjoined sex. I can tell you from experience that the latter is better.
You cannot dispute with me until you've had them both, too! :-) If you doubt what I'm saying, I dare you to step down from the throne of your life, bow your knee to the Lord Jesus, marry a Christian spouse of the opposite sex, and then come back and tell me I'm wrong. Heh. (Note: Anyone who claims to have approached this comparison from the opposite direction--i.e., first Christian, then hedonistic--is simply misguided. You cannot truly bow your knee to Jesus and then later give yourself to hedonism. Sorry, but you're just kidding yourself. Since you were never a real Christian, you never had Christian sex.)
For us Christians who stand against homosexuality, it is not about disliking sex or hating homosexuals. It is about acknowledging some basic fun facts, such as:
1. Boys have an outie located at the junction of their legs. Girls have an innie in exactly the same location on their bodies. "Hmmm..." says the thoughtful observer. "You suppose this was designed to go in there?" Thus we acknowledge the obvious design.
2. We note that when the obvious design is followed, both physical pleasure and progeny result. The human race continues.
3. We observe that two homosexuals, left to themselves in a tropical paradise, cannot possibly continue the human race. It ends right there. We see this as Nature's statement regarding the advisablility of such unions.
4. We believe that boy humans and girl humans differ, not just physically, but psychologically and spiritually as well, in ways that complement each other. When they join together, their fundamental differences synergize like reactive chemicals and the whole becomes greater than the sum of the parts. However much they may wish to, or pretend to, homosexuals cannot participate in the same kind of transaction any more than water reacts with water.
5. We observe that when bodies attempt to join homosexually, the puzzle pieces do not "fit" together the way Nature (the Founders would add, "and Nature's God") intended. Homosexual sex does not comfortably lend itself to facing one's partner, full body-to-body, and looking deeply into his or her eyes while copulating. Thus they are denied a spiritual side of sex that sets humans apart from the animals.
6. Because homosexual puzzle pieces do not fit together as Nature intended, they must invent new ways to capture physical gratification. These involve inserting body parts into orifices that are not designed to accomodate them. This violation of the obvious design leads to a host of ailments to body, mind, and soul.
7. We acknowledge that, ultimately, there is no such thing as the privacy of one's bedroom. If, as has been said, a butterfly flapping its wings in Australia can eventually lead to a tempest elsewhere in the world, why should we think that things done in the "privacy of our homes" would not effect society at large?
8. We observe that even homosexual relationships attempt to mirror heterosexual ones. That is, one partner usually assumes a more feminine, submissive role, while the other assumes a more masculine role. This, in itself, bears silent testimony to the way it ought to be: one male, one female.
9. Finally, we acknowledge that God, the designer of human bodies and relationships, said homosexuality is morally wrong. To revisit the old but true cliche, God did not create Adam and Steve.
10. If you prefer an evolutionary model, consider the fact that homosexual unions cannot survive beyond one generation, so they do not work even from a Darwinian perspective. No matter how you look at it, homosexuality can only temporarily exist in an evironment that originates from, and is maintained by, a heterosexual Universe.
And that's why we call it a "perversion."
So there. :-)
The definition of hedonism is the "Pursuit of or devotion to pleasure, especially to the pleasures of the senses." His criticism of gay and lesbian behaviour is consistent with what he believes from his very conservative point of view. So while "selfish hedonist" may be somewhat redundant, it's consistent with what I've heard or read from him (I live in Illinois too and endured last year's Senatorial debacle). You don't have to agree with it. I doubt that he condones his daughter's behaviour and comments but I'd guess loves her just the same. Our children don't always fall in line with our ethical, moral, and political values. This doesn't mean that parents should compromise those values.
Many of Keyes politcal positions bother me quite a bit. But I admire a person that answers questions honestly, consistenly and directly.
Here's Keye's response to the criticism:
As for the his remarks about the vice president's daughter, Keyes said he didn't see what all the fuss was about.
"They asked me a question about the platform's opposition to gay marriage, and I gave what I think is the right and true argument to justify it, and when they applied that argument to Mary Cheney what was I supposed to say?" he said.
"Was I supposed to say, 'Oh, well, this applies to everyone but the vice president's daughter because we give special privileges to Republican children?"
Read these articles... I think the message is clear and consistant.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/15/keyes.daughter.ap/
and
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/9577411.htm?1c
So there is no such thing as a man or a woman? Wow, I'm gonna have to go tell my old biology and psychology teachers that they're full of crap and don't know what they're talking about.
But if the entire world wants to be white men, then they too are all full of crap because there is no such thing by your reasoning. So everyone is striving to be something that only exists in their mind because it makes them feel inferior to others? I should probably tell my sociology teachers that they're full of crap as well.
You gotta wonder about someone who calls others "confused" who think there is such a thing as men and women. Campaniella pretends not to believe that words have objective meanings, but I'll bet in practice she has to submit to reality. Suppose she is ever robbed, for example, and the police ask her to describe the culprit. "Was it a man or a woman?" they ask. I suspect that Campaniella would not retort, "Officer, those words have no meaning. There are no such things." The police could then justifiably respond, "As it turns out, there is no such thing as robbed, and no such thing as you, so we're going to take a donut break now."
Campaniella, since words have no objective meaning, allow me to compose a final crushing reply:
Banana social cloud, the ranger grass bullet with negroponte, ala thoroughbred. Take that!
(BTW, no fair complaining that I refer to you as a "she." Remember, that word has no meaning, so anything will do. I picked the word "she" for our less enlightened readers who might have been confused if I had refered to you as "egg plant" or something else equally arbitrary.)
I wasn't arguing for or against homosexuality, I was pointing out the irony of the situation. I also have to wonder if Alan himself may be somewhat responsible for this. Typically young people tend to rebel against their parents beliefs. I personally was not exposed to the constant banter of "Gays are going to hell" or "Adam and Steve" like Keyes daughter was so it was never an issue for me, therefore something I never thought about. I suppose if you hear it everyday, you'll eventually become curious about it, no matter the subject. I don't know maybe she was just born that way, but it's still entertaining, and ironic.
And one more thing; it was ridiculous that the Republicans would scour the country looking for another black man to run against Obama. Over 50% of Illinois population in around Chicago, and we would never vote for a Bible thumper like Keyes, and the rest of the state is too conservative to vote for a black man no matter how much of a Jesus freak Republican he happens to be. I don't know what they were thinking, other than that Jack Ryan was like the X rated version of Bill Clinton and I guess they needed to find a guy with "moral values".
Yes there are immoral Republicans who fondle women too, look up Jack Ryan and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
By the way, any arguement that starts with "God says", is like starting an arguement with "Allah says" or "The Tooth Fairy says", it doesn't hold water until you can prove there is a God, and that he is in charge of me.
Wow. Kudos to you for starting such a heated little debate with only a short post. God and homosexual rights??? Nice. :)
Sorry, I'm not biting on your invitation to prove the existence of God. Engaging in that argument multiple times taught me that people cannot be convinced against their will. If you cannot see the existence of God in his creation, what can I do beyond that?
The Bible does not try to prove God. It simply says things like:
“Since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature–-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
And:
“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”
However, if you’re a genuine seeker and not just an angry atheist trying to force God out of hiding by denying He exists, then I recommend that you think deeply about the nature of the cosmos, the Big Bang, and quantum mechanics. Many scientists who explore these things deeply see in them a requirement for God to exist. I personally found God one night, alone in my apartment, while thinking about the fact that matter and energy are interchangeable, and neither can be created or destroyed. Nothing can exist, yet here we are. For me, this was sufficient proof for the existence of a transcendent being.
First of all just cause your parents teach ya somethin your whole life doesn't mean that its bad or that if you turn away from it it's because of that. My parents are Christians and have raised me that way since I was a baby. I've been sheltered alot...(just ask Neemund) but I actually like it. At least I'm not one of those pregnant teenagers.... Also I love God and would never turn away from Him.
Now to the other topic of Homosexuality. It's wrong! It's grose! Sex out of man wife marriage only leads to pain. We also weren't made to have it. Notice the people who do often end up with STDs. Also we weren't made for homosexuality if we were two guys would be able to have kids together or two gals. That's just not how we were made.
If ya think about it it just doesn't make any sense to be homosexual or to have sex out of marriage.
So anyways I'll save myself for marriage (to a guy:)And just cause my parents always shove it down my throat that homosexuality's wrong I'm not gonna go do it.
Hopefully some day you'll find out how much God loves you.....
What do you mean "we weren’t made to have it"? Do you mean we weren't made to have sex? And you back that statement by saying "that’s why people end up with STDs"?
So I guess with that rationale people weren't made to eat meat since it causes heart disease, clogged arteries and obesity. I guess you could also say people were made to live underground since the sun causes sun burn and skin cancer.
No one is saying you have to be gay. I don’t think anyone in this discussion is gay. When you get older you will find that there is more to sex than procreation; I am not married and have never had problems that came from having sex. Again, I am not saying you have to go out and have sex with a girl. Premarital sex is completely normal and common, not painful; it happens everyday and we’re all still here.
You also said that we weren't made for homosexuality because you can't have kids that way, but there are plenty of homosexuals who have had kids. Do you fly in planes? Well maybe you shouldn't; if we were made to fly, we would have been born with wings right?
So how is that less of a sin than what you are talking about? Both are "unnatural".
Some anonymous blogger said: "We observe that when bodies attempt to join homosexually, the puzzle pieces do not "fit" together".
I have to disagree. I've hardly seen anything that fits together in a more beautiful way than two women in a "69" position. Clearly, this is something that God intended.
I guess I'll go ahead and jump out of this blog now.
Toad734 seems to ignore entire paragraphs and portions of sentences in order to keep trying to make points that have already been addressed, such as whether Christians think sex is bad or ugly, or whether there are good reasons to believe homosexuality is a perversion of Nature.
Campaniella throws up a thick smokescreen of college-speak rather than deal straightforwardly with concrete issues. Apparently, if I am simple-minded enough to think that "homosexuality" means, for example, 2 men having sex with eachother, then I am just not being subtle and sophisticated enough. It is clear that her goal is to bog the discussion down with over-intellectualism.
And then there's Patrick, who reads only far enough into a paragraph to find something to mock.
Clearly this place is not like the ancient Greek Aereopagus, where participants gave others the courtesy of full engagement.
So, ByeByeBye. Nevertheless, have a great day!
There are now 5 postings on this blog from an anonymous poster. Whether or not that is all one person, I don’t know, but assuming you are one of the posts talking about how homosexuality is wrong, based on what "god intended" then I have addressed that. If you want to talk about another topic other than Alan Keyes, his anti homosexual views and his lesbian daughter then post another blog and email us the address; I would be more than happy to share my thoughts, as would most of the other people on here.
By the way, many many more scientist have studied the universe, creation and the cosmos, and come to the conclusion that there is a rational explanation to every facet of our universe. Very few have studied our universe scientifically and came to the conclusion that god made the earth in 6 days. Most scientists come to their conclusions by measuring and studying empirical evidence; there is no empirical evidence in the creation theory.
If you want to talk about homosexuality not being natural or a "perversion of nature", I don't really care either way, as I said earlier, if we were intended to fly, we would have wings. Does that mean humans flying is a perversion of nature? Why do other male dogs try to ass rape my dog? Why are there lesbian penguins? I don't have the answer to that, other than it has nothing to do with Gods intentions. If you want to start a blog about nature, let me know.
Not arguing right now whether homosexuality is considered immoral right now, how about looking at it from a medical perspective. Even in 2005 the American Psychiatric Association has provisions in its diagnostic manual to diagnose homosexuality as an official psychological disorder. Due to its politically incorrect nature, it no longer has its own category but may still be clinically diagnosed as a subset of a sexual identity disorder. There aren't a huge number of people who enter into treatment because they believe that they are a diagnosable homosexual, but the same can be said for people checking themselves into treatment because they think that they are schizophrenic.
Re: Neemund
Actually the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by psychiatrist to diagnose mental illness, the DSM III(now 4) dropped homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses when it was written in 1980. The two previous versions, the I and II, classified homosexuality as a deviant mental illness.
Now that doesn't mean you won't find some homosexuals with mental problems, I have met very few gay men who were not abused as children. That abuse, especially if it is sexual in nature, disrupts the sexual and mental development a child immensely, confusing things such as sexual identity, gender roles and how they interpret affection. I don't think these people were either born gay, nor did they decide to be gay, they were made that way.
This is all just my opinion based on empirical evidence I have seen first hand. I would love to hear someone’s thoughts on this that has some actual experience within this subject.
“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.” — attributed to Julius Caesar
RE: Im with jesus
So what does George Bush have to do with this discussion?
At 11:28 PM, Anonymous said...
Don't be silly. Speaking as a confirmed right wing nut-job -- DEFINITELY NOT A CHRISTIAN THEN. -- , I can tell you that Republican sex is a gas -- WITHIN THE BONDS OF MATRIMONY? -- . Christian sex is even better -- WITHIN THE BONDS OF MATRIMONY? -- . I know because I've had all kinds -- DITTO THE ABOVE QUESTION-- . I've had premarital, hedonistic, unbelieving, incestuous, non-consensual, and homosexual sex. And now I've finally had married, forgiven, God-honoring, spirit-conjoined sex. I can tell you from experience that the latter is better. -- TRANSLATION: AFTER SHE SOWED HER WILD OATS AND HAD HER FUN. NOW SHE WOULD PREVENT EVERYBODY ELSE FROM DOING THE SAME. --
You cannot dispute with me until you've had them both, too! :-) If you doubt what I'm saying, I dare you to step down from the throne of your life, bow your knee to the Lord Jesus, marry a Christian spouse of the opposite sex, and then come back and tell me I'm wrong. -- THERE ARE MANY GAY CHRISTIANS. THE LORD CAME TO ME THROUGH A HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP. IF YOU DOUBT IT, ASK HIM ABOUT IT. THERE'S A REASON FOR CENTURIES PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING GOD WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS. AND, OF COURSE, THE LORD WOULD PREFER THAT HIS PEOPLE HAD MARRIED STRAIGHT SEX BUT I'M SURE HE LOOKS AT THE OVERALL PICTURE. HE IS THAT SMART. AND, HOMOSEXUALITY CERTAINLY CAN'T BE ANY WORSE THAN SOLDIERS MURDERING PEOPLE FOR OIL IN AN UNJUST WAR. WHO DOESN'T HAVE HIS CROSS TO BEAR. PARDON THE PUN. -- Heh. (Note: Anyone who claims to have approached this comparison from the opposite direction--i.e., first Christian, then hedonistic--is simply misguided. You cannot truly bow your knee to Jesus and then later give yourself to hedonism -- HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY? -- . Sorry, but you're just kidding yourself. Since you were never a real Christian, you never had Christian sex.)
For us Christians who stand against homosexuality, it is not about disliking sex or hating homosexuals. It is about acknowledging some basic fun -- CHRISTIANS AREN'T SNIDE. -- facts, such as:
1. Boys have an outie located at the junction of their legs. Girls have an innie in exactly the same location on their bodies. "Hmmm..." says the thoughtful observer. "You suppose this was designed to go in there?" Thus we acknowledge the obvious design. -- YOU COULD SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT THE PENIS AND THE ANUS. THAT'S WHY COUNTLESS MEN AND WOMEN ENGAGE IN ANAL SEX. I KNOW THIS FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE AND FROM THE ENCOUNTERS I'VE HAD IN THE CYBER REALM. AT LEAST HALF THE TIME, THE GUY WANTS TO DO ME IN THE BUTT.
2. We note that when the obvious design is followed, both physical pleasure -- SEE ABOVE COMMENTS. -- and progeny result. The human race continues. -- YOU NAZIS (PARADING AS CHRISTIANS) MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE THIS BUT YOU SEEM BENT ON ANNIHILATING EVERYBODY WHO'S NOT A NAZI/CHRISTIAN.
3. We observe that two homosexuals, left to themselves in a tropical paradise, cannot possibly continue the human race. It ends right there. We see this as Nature's statement regarding the advisablility of such unions. -- THEY ARE, LIKE MOST HETEROSEXUALS, INTERESTED PRIMARILY IN PLEASURE. THEY'RE NOT CONCERNED WITH THE PROMULGATION OF THE SPECIES, ONCE AGAIN, LIKE MOST HETEROSEXUALS. WHEN A MAN AND A WOMAN HAVE SEX THEY'RE NOT THINKING "OH, WE MUST GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY!" THEY'RE ONLY THINKING ABOUT GETTING OFF. AND, THE BULK OF PREGNANCIES ARE ACCIDENTS AS A RESULT OF SEX. NOT WHOLESOMELY PLANNED FOR LIKE YOU CONFUSATIVES/AMERINAZIS WOULD HAVE EVERYONE BELIEVE.
4. We believe that boy humans and girl humans differ, not just physically, but psychologically and spiritually -- EVE PROVED THIS BUT WAS IT A GOOD THING? NEVERTHELESS, I'D HAVE TO SEE SOME PROOF OF THIS. -- as well, in ways that complement each other. When they join together, their fundamental differences synergize like reactive chemicals and the whole becomes greater than the sum of the parts. -- I CAN EASILY MAKE THE SAME CLAIM ABOUT MY MEN ON MEN SEX. -- However much they may wish to, or pretend to, homosexuals cannot participate in the same kind of transaction any more than water reacts with water. -- AN OBVIOUS FALSE ANALOGY COMING FROM A WANNABE PHILOSOPHER. --
5. We observe that when bodies attempt to join homosexually, the puzzle pieces do not "fit" together the way Nature (the Founders would add, "and Nature's God") intended. Homosexual sex does not comfortably lend itself to facing one's partner, full body-to-body, and looking deeply into his or her eyes -- WHO DOES THAT? IT'S PLUG IN, PULL OUT AND GO TO SLEEP. -- while copulating. -- OF COURSE IT DOES. -- Thus they are denied a spiritual side of sex that sets humans apart from the animals. -- MOST HUMANS ARE VERY SIMILAR TO ANIMALS. --
6. Because homosexual puzzle pieces do not fit together as Nature intended -- YOU STILL ON THIS RANT? -- , they must invent new ways to capture physical gratification. These involve inserting body parts into orifices that are not designed to accomodate them. -- THE ONLY TWO ORIFICES YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT ARE THE MOUTH AND THE ANUS. DON'T WOMEN LOVE TO GIVE BLOWJOBS? IS THAT UNNATURAL? AND, AS I STATED BEFORE, NUMEROUS MEN AND WOMEN ENGAGE IN ANAL INTERCOURSE. -- This violation of the obvious design leads to a host of ailments -- THE JURY'S NOT IN ON THAT YET. IT MAY BE DECADES BEFORE WE KNOW IF AIDS WAS CREATED AND DISSEMINATED BY REAGAN/BUSH. -- to body, mind, and soul.
7. We acknowledge that, ultimately, there is no such thing as the privacy of one's bedroom. If, as has been said, a butterfly flapping its wings in Australia can eventually lead to a tempest elsewhere in the world -- I SAW THAT MOVIE TOO. LET'S STICK WITH REALITY. -- , why should we think that things done in the "privacy of our homes" -- PERHAPS CAMERAS WOULD HELP. OH WAIT ... SOME PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE CAMS. -- would not effect society at large?
8. We observe that even homosexual relationships attempt to mirror heterosexual ones. That is, one partner usually assumes a more feminine, submissive role, while the other assumes a more masculine role. -- JUST BECAUSE YOU PLAYED PRIMARILY THE BOTTOM DOESN'T MEAN IT'S COMMONPLACE. MANY GAYS ARE VERSATILE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? IF YOU DOUBT WHAT I'M SAYING, PERUSE THE GAY CLASSIFIEDS. -- This, in itself, bears silent testimony to the way it ought to be: one male, one female.
9. Finally, we acknowledge that God, the designer of human bodies and relationships, said homosexuality is morally wrong -- MANY THINGS ARE IN GOD'S EYES. BUT HE KNOWS WE'LL NEVER REACH THE BAR THAT JESUS CHRIST SCALED. I WANT YOU CONFUSATIVES/AMERINAZIS TO TELL ME WHY HOMOSEXUALITY IS YOUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. THE BIBLE DOESN'T WARRANT THAT. THE BIBLE CONDEMNS GREED AND VIOLENCE (THE TWO PILLARS OF MODERN AMERICA) BUT I NOTICED YOU DIDN'T GO ON A RANT ABOUT THAT. HOW COME? AND, THE WAR IN IRAQ. IF YOUR CHRISTIANITY WAS THAT ACUTE, YOU'D IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE THAT AS AN UNJUST WAR FOR OIL. I EXPECT YOU TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. -- . To revisit the old but true cliche - CONFUSATIVES/AMERINAZIS LIVE FROM CLICHE TO CLICHE. YOU HAVE NO ORIGINAL THOUGHTS, ONLY THOSE INFUSED INTO YOU BY THE MILITARY AND THE POLICE. -- , God did not create Adam and Steve.
10. If you prefer an evolutionary model, consider the fact that homosexual unions cannot survive beyond one generation, so they do not work even from a Darwinian perspective -- NO ONE'S EVER CLAIMED OTHERWISE. HUMAN BEINGS HAVE SEX FOR FUN. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY. AND HUMANS ARE ALWAYS INVENTING NEW SEXUAL HORIZONS. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE O. -- . No matter how you look at it, homosexuality can only temporarily exist in an evironment that originates from, and is maintained by, a heterosexual Universe. --
And that's why we call it a "perversion."
So there. :-)-- I LIKE HOW SO MANY SCCs (SOCALLED CHRISTIANS) UTILIZE THE PASSIVE/AGGRESSIVE ATTACK POSTURE. IS IT BECAUSE, AS IN EVERYTHING ELSE, THEY CAN'T BE FORTHRIGHT? TRYING TO SOUND NICE WHEN IT'S OBVIOUS YOU'RE NOT IS DECEITFUL. ISN'T THAT SATAN'S DOMAIN; DECEIVING PEOPLE.
IN JESUS' GLORIOUS AND HOLY NAME,
DEAN BERRY -- REAL AMERICAN
"So what does George Bush have to do with this discussion?"
I utilize every forum I can. Live with it.
In Jesus' Glorious and Holy name,
Dean Berry -- REAL American
This conversation is obviously not just going to go away quietly into the night. So, I guess I would have to agree with a lot of what "IM WITH JESUS IS SAYING" and although it wasn’t the point of this particular posting, it is my number one curiosity about Christian values; why do they not care about war, death, famine, divorce, murder, rape, child abuse / molestation (maybe because their the ones doing the molesting), greed, addiction etc. These are issues that affect billions of people. Gay marriage only affects roughly 400,000 people in this country. Why is that one your battle cry? Aren't there other issues that will actually affect you personally or at least, affect the multitude weather they like it or not? Gay marriage doesn’t affect anyone except for the people who want to do it.
When was the last time someone came up to your house and told you that your marriage no longer meant anything, or that you had to become homosexual, or you had to get with another man?
It's never happened, but there has been a knock at your door, asking you to send your children off to die in a war, there has been a knock at your door telling you that your privacy is no longer of importance, there has been a knock at your door telling you that you can no longer watch and listen to certain things on the airwaves, there has been a guy on the street asking you for change in order to get something to eat, there is a woman in your life, that you personally know who, has been raped, so why not focus your energies elsewhere, and try following some of "Gods" basic, and clear cut commands and laws?
Post a Comment