lol, ass-babies.
Crack me up.
Jared - So you liked the godhatesfags site, eh? He’s been here in Wyoming a few times now. Remember that Sheppard kid who got beat to death by those nice christian boys a few years ago, cause he was gay? The good reverend Phelps came to town then to demonstrate at his funeral service, and confront the grieving parents. He and his followers wanted to let Sheppard’s parents know how much god hates fags, and that their son was going to spend eternity in hell for being queer. Wonderful examples of christian teaching and tolerance, wouldn’t you say?
The good christian rev Phelps is right, of course. God does hate fags, the bible told him so. And everyone knows the bible is 100% right 100% of the time and should always be taken 100% literally. Right?
Anytime I begin to question my own agnostism, there is a Phelps or Falwell or ptr out there to reconfirm it for me.
PtDR: Just an FYI - I chose you for an example because you have an unwaivering bias in one particular direction. I used myself as an example because I have an unwaivering bias in separate direction. And Shitdisturber’s bias was his own entirely. I was and am not going to comment on the validity or these, to do so would be an exercise in futility. We each have our beliefs and though they may be different, under the LAW of the land we each have the same right to them and their expression.
Something someone said caught my eye…
LAW and MORALITY are separate, yet related creatures. Sometimes, what strikes us (as a society) as imMORAL compells us to create a LAW for it. That action no longer has the LEGAL status of neutrality and MORAL status of “evil” or “bad” but now takes on the LEGAL status of being ilLEGAL - and MORALITY matters not. Sure, YOU may still consider it to be imMORAL, but the person next to you who lobbied against the bill and thought of it as being MORAL has lost. That person will not suddenly consider the action to be imMORAL just because it’s ilLEGAL , but hopefully, they’ll obey the LAW of the land and not do said action. If they do, they have done something ilLEGAL and bear the consequences of ilLEGAL activity - MORALITY doesn’t enter the equation.
I do believe that governments have no right to outLAW crimes(actions) as imMORAL. They have every right to outLAW them as ilLEGAL though. The LAW is supposed to be impartial, equally applicable and equally enforceable to and upon all citizens and resident aliens of a country. Whereas MORALITY is completely subjective and varies from individual to individual. A crime isn’t always imMORAL but it IS always ilLEGAL .
Example 1: Is it imMORAL to protect your personal finances from hackers by using a firewall program? Certainly not. Then why are there bills in Massachusetts and Texas seeking to expand the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by means of outLAWing firewall software?
Example 2: Is it imMORAL for those of Asian descent to inherrit property in Kansas? Certainly not. But according to a 1920’s LAW, it is ilLEGAL . But, how did that happen?! Because at the time, the society demanded it’s MORALITY(anti-Asian morality at that) be enacted into LAW. Obviously, that MORALITY has since changed but the LAW remains (unenforced as it may be, it is still LAW).
In another 80 years people will be digging up our “anti homosexual marriage” LAWs… and laughing at how our current MORALITY made us look like fucking bigoted fools.
tme - I can’t believe I never noticed these bastards (godhatesfags.com). I Googled them and found out that it’s not a joke. That’s insane. I skimmed through their FAQ (as they request you to do before emailing them) and then emailed them about exactly what you’re talking about. I don’t see how the piddly few hatemongers they “convert” to Christianity outweigh the multitudes that they turn off to it.
I also found some knock-off sites like godhatesfigs.com. That was funny. I also thought a lot of their website was funny in all of the disclaimers and warnings that they had about acting against them. They are why I believe in a Hell.
Two things.
One, it is fucking hilarious that any asshole can get married in Vegas at the Elvis wedding chapel, get divorced two days later in New Mexico, have six kids, not pay child support, etc. and contribute to the 50% divorce rate.
yet.
Gay marriage might erode our society. (this idea seriously makes me ill)
Second, and oldie but a goodie.
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people
regarding God’s Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show and try to
share that knowledge
with as many people as I can. When someone tries to
defend the homosexual
lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22
clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding
some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.
- When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I
know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is
my neighbors. They
claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite
them? - I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as
sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think
would be a fair price for
her? - I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman
while she is in her
period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The
problem is, how
do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take
offense. - Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves,
both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring
nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not
Canadians. Can you
clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians? - I have a neighbor who insists on working on the
Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally
obligated to
kill him myself? - A friend of mine feels that even though eating
shellfish is an
abomination? - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination
than
homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? - Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar
of God if I have
a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear
reading glasses. Does
my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle
room here? - Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed,
including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly
forbidden by Lev.
19:27.? How should they die? - I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a
dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear
gloves? - My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of
two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to
curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that
we go to all the
trouble of getting the whole town together to stone
them? - Lev.24:10-16.
Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private
family affair like we do with
people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I
am confident you
can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is
eternal and
unchanging.
Beautiful, Rumbach. Absolutely beautiful.
The problem is the whole freakin’ socialistic nation we have assembled.
W(hy)TF does the government have to have any involvement or recognition of any kind of marriage? We need to cut back 90% of the shit we let the government do. If we did, whether or not it should be illegal would be irrelevant.
For the record, I am a Christian libertarian, so, while I think homosexuality is a sin, IMO, it is a sin between 2 consenting people and it is between them and God. No one is being forced into it. If you don’t think homosexuals should behave that way, talk to them, reason with them, debate with them, minister to them or whatever - why it is wrong, why it is dangerous, or whatever your reason is - face to face. Don’t be a coward and use the blunt weapon of the law. After all, the same reason you use the law is the same reason another can come along and use the law against you.
Bigprljamfan,
I wasn’t trying to come off quite as strongly as I did. However, I do believe that in choosing a religion at all you put yourself in a position that is pretty hard to explain.
What is it that makes you think this is true over anything else?
Seeing how Wicca is mostly some new-fangled (yeah yeah, it’s 50 bazilion years old) stuff I tend to believe that most if not all who believe in it have been “won over” by some aspect of the philosophy.
Even if you have had similar thoughts independently, I can’t see how you can say that why your thoughts are likely to have anything to do with the ACTUAL truth.
“And Rep- did it ever occur to you NOT to give someone grief over whatever religion they choose? Or, I’m sorry…“pick.””
This wasn’t really my intention, not in any serious way that is. You seem to make a fairly significant distinction between choosing something and picking it here, to me there is no difference, and I didn’t say “pick” to be demeaning. This may be some sort of language nuance that I’m not picking up (being from Denmark)
“What’s so weird about me “picking” Wicca? Would it be just as weird if I “picked” Christianity or Catholisism, or Buddhism?”
Not just as weird, as the exposure is much more massive, but just as much of a problem intellectually, yes of course it would.
What triggered me with it being Wicca was that Wicca is popular with the new-age crowd, and those people are idiots, I don’t consider you to be one (even though you probably will me in the future) so consider it friendly advice, to avoid guilt by association.
But in all fairness, I have a MUCH bigger problem with that PtrDR guy. Mostly in regard to his being a grade A lunatic.
SO PtrDR,
Let’s start off with this fatal little clipping.
“KARMA…Its not a question of MY morality. Its a matter of the morality of God…as revealed in the Bible.(and yes…the Bible is backed up by substantial evidence showing it IS true.”
Actually I guess the only problem is the last part, as the above would automatically be sanctioned if that were true. Basically you should probably post some of that “evidence” here, as your statement is EXTREMELY controversial. (Here’s a hint: The bible is not in any way proven to tell the true tale of the divine, and what’s more, it COULDN’T be proven, ever, even if it was true)
You go on with more of the same here.
“And yes…faith is important…but my faith is backed up by evidential FACT! Thats the beauty of it…the evidence factually is there IF you are openminded enough to look at it. The key is open mindedness.”
Before you can say mumbo-jumbo like this in a discussion you should establish the facts, you saying something is fact does not make it so.
And what is that crap about open mindedness? Your evidence wouldn’t happen to be something like “the miracle of creation can really only be explained by the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, so there!” would it?
"
And yes…I am well prepared for your “truth is relative” retort. Been there…heard that…"
Are you ready for the “you are a flake”-retort? Don’t pass something off as fact unless it is established to be so, and if you do, post the evidence that lead to your conclusion.
Ok so you range pretty high on the “religios nut”-meter. Let’s see how you do on the “fucking idiot”-meter.
“I dont’ think most homosexuals want to be married. The research says a vast majority of them are self admittedly NOT monogomous. Mulitiple partners is part of the lifestyle for a majority of the people in that lifestyle.”
Whoa Nelly! That gets you some pretty high marks right there.
Allow me to use an analogy here. It is my impression that most African Americans wish to marry within their race, should this then mean that it should be illegal for them to marry whites?
Another thing, ahelluvalot of heterosexuals are not monogamous either, should we ban marriage altogether based on this?
Is it completely impossible for you to see that even though what you say may (or may not, I have no idea) be true, it shouldn’t affect those that ARE monogamous, that DO wish to be married, and happen to be gay?
The below is sort of a mix where you reveal yourself as a “fucking idiotic religios nut”:
“Deezlodog…if I believe the Bible is true…and it is…there is evidence to back it up…and I love God and follow Him…I have gained everything!”
WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE?
Here you say something that makes sense, only trouble is, it isn’t possible to do what you propose.
“Consider yourself…if you choose NOT
to believe in God and the Bible …and it turns out to be true…you have lost everything! If you believe God and Bible and follow Him…and it all ends up being phoney…what have you lost?..nothing…”
It is not possible for me to choose whether or not I believe in God, I just don’t. When I was younger I tried to for the exact reasons you state above, but the idea of Christianity is as ridiculous to me as any fairy tale, so no dice.
Furthermore, you seem to be under the impression that only to options exist. How about Judeism, Buddhism, Islam etc.? They may as well have guessed the truth as John, Luke, Mark or Matthew, which leaves you with the same problem I have. If you’re wrong you may spend eternity in damnation.
Personally I don’t have a problem with that, in fact I think there’s a lot to be said for your eternal damnation, or at least occasional pokings by pointed sticks.
Gay people are none of your business, butt out of their private life. If you have to do anything just enjoy your self righteous attitude (like I do) and the (proven??) fact that they shall burn in hell.
/Jacob
Okay, I know that I am late in putting in my thoughts, but I think people are still missing a couple of good points here.
First off, let’s look at marriage as a contract. After all, that’s pretty much how the legal system looks at it. So, if we allow for a gay couple to get married (enter a contract), what happens if three people want to enter into one marriage. I mean, they are all consenting adults and should be able to, right? And how about polygamomy? I mean, why shouldn’t I be allowed to enter into multiple marriages or multiple contracts? And if we allow that, then why not allow for communes of people to do the same. Can that commune now choose to adopt a child. I mean, as Hilliary said, it takes a village.
And speaking of that, let’s say that a gay couple does get married and they want to start attending a certain church, does that church have to legally recognize them as a married couple even if it goes against their beliefs?
Now, how about a deeply baptist private school. Do they have to recognize the marriage when it comes to financial aid, living situations, etc?
Does everyone see where I’m going with this one? By allowing gay marriages, you automatically force groups or institutions that are opposed to it to accept it. Now, I can see someone already reaching for the racism defense on this one, but may I remind you that, unlike race, homosexuality has never been shown to be 100% genetic. So as far as we can all tell, there is still at least some choice in it.
It’s a great example of a slipery slope situation. Where do you decide to draw the line? With 10,000+ years of marriage being defined as one man and one woman, my vote is to leave it there.
I have no problem with the Supreme Court’s decision to ban anti-sodomy laws (for a variety reasons that the court didn’t even cover), but I do not see how this opens the door for gay marriage, and I hope it never does.
Somebody said it far better than I could:
Answering intimidating slogans
When people chide you for being unpatriotic, immoral or selfish because youre not involved in civic activities, are using too much energy, or arent giving your fair share, don`t be intimidated.
First of all, if you go along with a crusade because youve been pressured into believing its the right thing to do, or because its your duty, when will you have time to sleep, let alone pursue happiness? If youre going to be irrationally intimidated by such slogans, then shouldnt you do everything that</i> everybody<i> tell you is right? After all, how can you be sure whos right and who isnt when youre out of control and are basing your actions on the choice of others? Unless you make short shrift of such verbal nonsense, you`re certainly not going to have much time for a life of your own.
Second, always remember that the sloganeer`s statement is based on an assumption. If the assumption is incorrect, need I say more?
(…)
Needless to say, firsthand knowledge is not derived from newspaper articles or government reports. I certainly don`t possess such knowledge, you most likely do not, and I seriously doubt that any one person has all the necessary facts at his disposal to make such flat statements. (Speaking of flat, remember the experts once assured us that such was the shape of the earth.)
My approach is the exact opposite, a method commonly referred to as: scientific. I assume that nothing I hear is true and try to maintain that state of mental integrity until Ive seen proof with my own eyes. I dont have proof that theres an energy shortage; I dont have proof that theres a God; I dont have proof that everyman whos behind bars is guilty of a crime; I dont have proof that the ozone layer of our atmosphere is endangered by aerosol sprays or supersonic jets.
But I do marvel that so many people can be absolutely certain of so many things about which they possess a complete lack of firsthand knowledge - and in many cases very little knowledge at all. In truth, so-called experts have been wrong so often that one really has to be very foolish to make rash, time-wasting decisions based only on what others say. When people pressure you to join a cause, forget the slogans and frills and, instead, check the underlying assumptions. This will help prevent you from being swept along unthingkingly by the group`s non-factual (often guilt-inducing) rhetoric.
Dustin, you wrote:
My other problem with homosexuality, in general, is that it is abnormal. Meaning, it goes against nature and basic biological functions. As we all know two homosexuals cannot produce a baby. They cannot continue their genetic line. That goes against thousands of years of evolution
The biological imperative for sex as a solely procreative reference point is moot insofar as procreation for species survival is no longer necessary.
A lot of Het couples these days choose not to breed - by extension that argues against evolutionary development.
Fertility treatments and modern contraception methodolgies interfere with the evolutionary process and Darwinian concepts of “Strongest/ Fittest survival.”
[As a side note it is actually possible for a male to carry an implanted embryo to term. YOu may or may not know that a minute %age of pregnancies successfully develop outside the womb - few survive due to the lack of placental barrier protection and the increased bacterial rate outside the womb].
As for sexual activity - what is abnormal? Some people like getting dressed up in latex and beating each other, is more or less normal than a gay couple banging each other, because I don’t think the latex thing is part of evolution either.
The thing is, now that we choose our partners, the times at which we choose to have sex, have babies etc is socially, not biologically conditioned. It’s about choice, not much else, otherwise the guy with the biggest dick adn the biggest muscles would end up with a harem adn the rest of us poor bastards would [a] Be screwed and [B] Probably gay as we couldn’t get no female action.
CORY089: Your post reminds me the conclusion of Devil`s Advocate: maybe LAW is the new religion that will topple all others. ;0)
The Bible is the dogma of antiquity. Was Jesus a good teacher? Sure. Did he, as written, understand human truth? Sure. It isn’t to be taken literally, and there are people in government that are persecuting other individuals because of their individual choice. These persecutions are based on the blind acceptance of something that was written AGES ago. This is wrong.
Again, I don’t personally agree with the gay lifestyle and a variety of other things but it isn’t my choice, its someone else’s. As long as they aren’t affecting me, let them do what they want.
As an individual, I don’t see the purpose of treating married people any different than single people. There should be no difference for taxes or anything else; problem solved.
Its amazing what happens when nobody is segregated anymore. I would also like the IRS to stop raping me to support the government’s socialist policies because I happen to be smart and have a good paying job.
Like a gay person, I can find all sorts of ways that I am segregated and persecuted because of who I am. Even the playing field and make everyone equal (relatively speaking) and these sorts of problems disappear.
Sturat,
"By encouraging monogomous relationships you would actually be preventing the spread of disease."
I understand what you’re saying but there is no way of knowing for certain that legalizing gay marriages will encourage monogamy. After all, they are guys, whether they’re gay or not.
"Plus the last time I looked gays wereen't the only ones who spread disease through sexual contact. . ."
Not to get into a biology lesson but aids is more easily spread through anal sex. What do gay guys do...not that hard figure out.
"Again I say huh?"
When the hell did we legalize heroin? Or arae you referring to the decrimilization of marijuana? Please get your facts straight before you attempt to slander my country. . .
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't heroin or medical heroin legal in British Columbia. I've seen several reports about how Vancouver is having problems with the open use of heroin in certain parts of the city. Oh, and I could very easily slander Canada. I think you'd agree that Canada is not the same country that fought along side the U.S in WW II. Besides, I heard Canada dropped their Navy.
Sturat, morality must be legislated. Think of some of the countries in the past that have collapsed because of their decadent society. You might think gay marriage isn't a big deal, but I assure you it won't stop at gay marriage. Gay marriage will simply open the door for whatever else a person can think of. You think I'm paranoid but 20 years ago the thought of legalizing gay marriage would have thought impossible. Time will tell I guess.
Iscariot, hopefully the above comments will answer your post. I'm not against gay marriage morally, I just think it will open doors to things we won't want. Bestiality, Pedophillia, etc. Pedophillia will probably be next, especially with fucks like NAMBLA trying to lower the age of consent.
Dustin
I would just like to point out that if read the bible and apply even a slight bit of critical thinking, that God was pissed at Sodom and Ghmorra (sp?) not because they wanted to have gay sex, but because they wanted to gang-rape a couple of God’s angels. Its all about interpretation folks.
Does anal increase the odds of transmitting AIDS/HIV? I’ve always heard that the tops were pretty safe if they weren’t cut or anything.
JAREDNFS: Have no idea, but the radio here says that ‘Barebacking’ (?) (unprotected gay sex) is all the rage nowadays. Don’t know how far in the past this trend goes. Maybe it’s always been there. Should that be so, that could be an explanation.
Dustin, Who is to say that Homosexuality isn’t normal or part of nature just because they don’t reproduce? For all we know Homosexuality could be a natural occurance in nature to help keep the population down in a species so abundant such as humans. Just like disease, Homosexuality might be another one of natures tools to keep population in check. Until proved otherwise we should assume it is part of natures plan and not some immoral choice. Now I’m not calling Homosexuallity a disease so don’t go there. After all homosexuality does not just occur in humans. I have seen two male dogs having sex and I don’t believe animals are capable of being immoral.
DAN C - there have been articles in the past few months (I know Savage Love references them) about “bug seekers” - guys who get off on trying to receive HIV. Thus, barebacking is probably a little more common.
Rumbach…WELL SAID. Just classic. That was so fucking money!!