Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Discussion Topic: On Same-Sex Couples and Catfish Derbies

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

Field Notes
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

July 28, 2009

Discussion Topic: On Same-Sex Couples and Catfish Derbies

By Dave Hurteau

I’m not touching this one, except to say that this is bound to lead to a constitutional amendment defining the meaning of the term “couple” so that folks can run catfish derbies without confusion.

From Oregon’s Baker City Herald:
A gay rights group has accused the Huntington Lions Club of violating Oregon’s anti-discrimination laws by refusing a couples’ discount to two lesbians who entered the Club’s annual Catfish Derby this May. . . .

Mike Raney of Huntington, a Lions Club member and chairman of the catfish derby, said his decision to deny the $1 couples discount to the Corriere-Gooches had nothing to do with their sexual orientation.

“I wasn’t making any statement against lesbians, I’ll tell you that right now,” Raney said Friday morning. “I have nothing against them at all. I was just trying to run a catfish derby.”

Raney said he refused to give the couple the discount because he figured that if he did so he would have to extend the same offer to other pairs of anglers of the same gender, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Raney said he will write an apology letter to the Corriere-Gooches.

Okay, have at it.

Comments (102)

Top Rated
All Comments
from jay wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All of this over a lousy buck? How bout this; post their address here and I will personally mail them a check to shut them up.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Two things,

First-
The fact that anyone could waste the justice system's resources suing over $1 shows just how badly we need tort reform in this country.

Second-
I'm afraid our lady-loving lady friends have a valid legal argument even if their suit is incredibly stupid.

Assuming the derby was a public event, not a members only one (the article doesn't explicitly say), then anti-discrimination law requires them to treat strait people and gay people equally.

The argument that "then everyone would do it" really doesn't hold water either. The purpose of the couples discount is not enforce a particular social agenda, its to increase attendance by encouraging people to bring their significant others. Applying the discount to same sex couples actually aids in accomplishing this goal because opens it up to a wider range of people.

Furthermore, there is nothing stopping pairs of opposite sex people lying about their couple status fraudulently gaining the discount. What is stopping someone from saying their sister or cousin is their girlfriend? [insert redneck incest joke here] Why is the lion's club not fighting this fraud with the same gusto as homosexual fraud?

Plus, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of catfishermen would rather pay the extra $0.50 per person than announce to a room full of lion's club-members that Bubba Smith is their man-lover.

and for anyone who's still not sure that this is about discriminating against gays... here's a quote from Raney in that article...

"none of this boy-boy, girl-girl couples crap."

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kkeltic wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Just get rid of the couples discount.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

OK, I'll step down from my smartass perch for some serious commentary.

Every generation has it's shame. My father was a racist, my grandfather was anti feminist, my great grandfather shot Indians and my great great grandfather shot Union soldiers. I guess my generation will have to bear the burden of being homo phobes and one day after I'm long gone my children will look back and see how stupid I was.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

That's what oregon gets for allowing same sex freaks to " get married". When you allow morally corrupt people to start pushing society around and throwing hissy fit's this is what happens. You get the dregs of society that are non productive, want everything given to them and expect the government to protect them from people who don't see eye to eye with them.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Well, even if this Raney fellow doesn't support discrimination against homosexuals, we know rabbitpolice does!

"same sex freaks"
My, what a mature way describe people different than you!

"morally corrupt people"
as I said before, they are abusing the civil court system, but cite one source that tells you these ladies are "morally corrupt"?

"the dregs of society that are non productive"
cite one source that says these ladies are "non productive" I didn't see anything in that article about anyone's employment status?

"want everything given to them"
If you actually read the article, it says that all they are asking for is an apology and for all the lions clubs to "recognize their antidiscrimination obligations under Oregon law" what exactly is your definition of "everything"?

If you can't answer any of the above questions then its perfectly all right to admit that you just made it all up because you harbor a deep seated hatred of people who are different from you.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

That is the kind of people they are the ones that voted for oboma and a socialist AMerica if you want to defend them go ahead, they are the reason why this nation is in the strait it is in. I have a backbone and stand up for what I believe in I don't bow to the political whims of the time or the politically correct.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob81 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Rabbitpolice88,
Just as I've known plently of democrat gun-owners and republican union-members, I have also known more than one republican gay person. The article never mentions the couple's political affiliation. Methinks you shouldn't spout off about people you clearly don't know anything about.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All that I have said is true and you know it, you are just a liberal and want to just get along with everyone and let everyone do what they want and how they want. I wonder what would happen to Isreal if they thought that way?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I wasn't educated in government schools so therefore I was taught to think for myself and not be good little government subjects. I wasn't brainwashed into believing that there is no right in wrong in this world. THere is right and wrong and homosexuality is wrong.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob81 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"All that I have said is true and you know it, you are just a liberal and want to just get along with everyone and let everyone do what they want and how they want."

LoL! Allright, I think it is now clear rabbitpolice88 is a troll. Nice try sir...

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, I am one of those Christian conservatives from the south that carries a Bible and a gun in my pickup. Why don't yall go and see what the Bible has to say about homosexuals. I would say that Bob81 doesn't even believe in the Bible.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from weve_25 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

rabbitpolice88
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"That is the kind of people they are the ones that voted for oboma[sic]"
First off, that sentence doesn't make sense.
Second off, the name is spelled Obama
Third off, I will concede that gays tend to lean left politically, but so do college educated people, African Americans, and urbanites, why aren't you blaming them? they're all much bigger targets.

"they are the reason why this nation is in the strait it is in"
really? ... REALLY?
gays crashed the economy? cite your source?
gays lied about WMD's and got us into Iraq? all right under poor Mr. Cheney's nose?!? cite your source?
gays made North Korea test that nuke?! gasp!! again, please share your sources!?! (Kim Jong Il will be shocked!)

"I have a backbone and stand up for what I believe in I don't bow to the political whims"
Right! history has always shown that people who support equality for minorities have been cowards and the bigots opposing them have been brave, noble men standing up for what is right..... or did I get that backwards?

I'd say we can pretty safely say that historians will look back on gay rights and consider it the last big fight of the civil rights movement that started with woman's suffrage.

because...you know... women voters and desegregated schools... those are just "political whims"

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Hoo boy!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, ken.mcloud you are a liberal, a bush hater. Tell me do you even know what right and wrong is? Do you have any moral bearing whatsoever? Why don't you move to France where you would fit in with all the gays. You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"All that I have said is true and you know it"
"I wasn't educated in government schools"
So you're right because you say you are? no supporting argument or evidence needed? I'm glad to see they so thoroughly covered logic at that non-government school of yours.

"I was taught to think for myself and not be good little government subjects"
Actually what you're doing right now is EXACTLY "being a good little government subject" The president and both houses of congress oppose gay marriage and several other gay rights issues.

"I wasn't brainwashed into believing that there is no right in wrong"
So all of us who went to public school believe there is no "right and wrong"... cite your source? and what were all those detentions I got about?

"you are just a liberal"
"I am one of those Christian conservatives"
Actually, it looks like you got this one backwards. Conservatives believe in limited government and not having government cronies interfere with their lives(our position). Liberals believe in using government power to cram their social views down everyone's throats (your position)

I'm sure you don't get this often, but you're the liberal in this argument.

"I would say that Bob81 doesn't even believe in the Bible."
Leviticus 19: 17-18
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke [reason with] thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord."

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Um, that is not from the Bible, you are didn't go see what the Bible has to say about homosexuals either why don't you go do that take all the Bible not just the part that sounds good to you. You probably googled that one.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Yes, ken.mcloud you are a liberal"
If the definition of "liberal" is "people who don't agree with rabbitpolice" then I guess I am one. However, if you use any kind of meaningful definition of "liberal" then you're on the liberal side of this argument.

"a bush hater"
Darn right I am! and if you call yourself a conservative you should be too. That administration did more to increase government spending and shred the constitution than any administration since FDR!

"Do you have any moral bearing whatsoever? Why don't you move to France where you would fit in with all the gays. You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup."

Gee... that's an awful lot of built up hatred for someone who calls himself a Christian! Maybe you should talk to your preacher about that? or check the bible in your truck and see what Jesus had to say about hating people?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Well, you just shot yourself in the foot. Actually obama has spend more money than bush ever did, you are just lapping up what ever the liberal media tells you. That's whey under obama we went over a trillion dollars in debt for the first time ever. I guess you like socialism and how he is controlling the banks and GM and trying to have socialist healthcare too. You know exactly what liberal means in this country don't try and make it into something else. Hmm, did I ever say I hate you? Um no I didn't, that is just like a liberal putting words into other people mouths, taking things out of context and the like.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Leviticus 19: 17-18
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke [reason with] thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord.""

"Um, that is not from the Bible"

Really?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

This had degraded to the point where it is quite entertaining.

So according to your logic, if someone is anti-discrimination then they must also be pro-Obama, pro-socialism, and pro-government healthcare? care to support your argument?

Also, those of us who believe in limited government and supporting the constitution (whatever you want to call us) were against bush's policies since before anyone knew Obama existed.

anyways, you should probably run along, isn't there something on Fox News you should be watching?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Again look up what the Bible says about homosexuals! Just do that and all this arguing will cease.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

shane-

That's word for word out of the King James Bible. with the exception of the comment in the square brackets (of course)

Maybe our friend is using a different translation?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Again look up what the Bible says about homosexuals! Just do that and all this arguing will cease."

umm.... how?

It seems to me that the constitution is pretty specific about the whole "separation of church and state" deal?

The bible can dictate how you lead your life, it CANNOT dictate how the government deals with its citizens.

and by the way, the bible also says that you should sacrifice a lamb when you sin, stone your kids when they talk back, and that the earth is 6000 years old.

Should the government enforce these too?

what criteria are you using to select the ones you want enforced?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

kaboom, a total obama butt kissing liberal.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

oh and by the way the founding fathers meant separation of church and state to mean that there would be no state funded or run church. Like the church of England, Yet another falsehood you learned in government schools.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from peter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

the lesbos overeacted and the guy did nothin wrong

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"kaboom, a total obama butt kissing liberal."

wah? did you forget to take your medication? what the heck are you talking about?

"the founding fathers meant separation of church and state to mean that there would be no state funded or run church."

Its true that this is one of the things they wanted to avoid. But there were many other situations (like this one) they also wanted to avoid. Remember, the original 13 colonies were very religiously diverse. Many of the upper class (like the founding fathers) were deists, many in the New England colonies were Puritans, Pennsylvania was mostly Quakers, Maryland was mostly Catholics, etc...

and many of these groups came here originally because their home country forced a single religion on everyone. The founding fathers wanted to avoid any one of these religious groups gaining political dominance and forcing their religion on everyone.

If your statement is true and they only wanted to avoid a state-run church the why does the constitution say "Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion or restricting the free exercise thereof"?

It would seem that if they only wanted to prevent a state run church there would have been a much better way to word it.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ken.mcloud you voted for obama, because if you hate bush then you hate macCane and palan and all the liberal agenda stuff you have been gleaning from the liberal media in this country goes to show you are a liberal and I would wager you voted for obama, or did you vote at all?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from idduckhntr wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Who cares if they are gay or straight at least they like to be in the outdoors and they support hunting and fishing this guys just needs to not worry about a $1.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwaynez wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

It's a sign of the times, people want exposure and they want to find a way to either get rich quick or get their 15 minutes in the spotlight, no matter how petty the cause.

In order for you not to offend anyone you have to be very careful and cross your t's and dot your i's or else you leave yourself open to be sued by someone.

The legal system should take a stand against a waste of taxpayers money and the legal systems time and efforts when cases like this are brought before them.

I am all for equality and a fair shot for everyone, we all deserve a chance to take part in life in general, but we should not take advantage of loop holes that put someone else in a bad light for our own selfish gain.

I was running a tournament and one of my sponsors backed out because I did not state in the first draft of the tournament flyer that it was catch and release, they were afraid people would get offended if someone kept a fish instead of releasing it. I re-worded the draft and the sponsor came back on board, but they were ready to bail over one line being left off the poster.

Just my opinion.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

so first off,

The 2008 Republican ticket consisted of John Mccain and Sarah Palin. I'm not sure who these macCane and and palan people are? (by the way, I love how the C in the middle of the word is capitalized, but the m at the beginning is not)

All you have to do now is misspell "Biden" and you'll win a prize!!

As for who I voted for-
I'm surprised someone who declares themselves as such a strong conservative has never heard of the Libertarian Party?

I voted for Bob Barr, I'm not a big fan of the man himself, but I agree with his party's platform more than the other two. Plus, I don't live in a battle ground state, so the electoral college system means that my vote doesn't matter, so I might as well use it to support a third party that holds my beliefs.

but what does any of this have to do with the topic at hand?

Warning: its pretty clear that you don't have enough knowledge on the topic to keep the argument exciting, if someone else doesn't pipe up on the anti-gay side, I'm afraid this thread will loose its appeal.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

So you voted for a man who called our troops " occupying forces" and didn't think it was good to be in Iraq. If you can support a man who doesn't support our troops than you have some serious issues.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Reading this post has been like watching a bad tennis match: back and forth, back and forth...
I am kind of ashamed of some of the comments too. There has been some poor and utterly incomplete use of scripture. If you are going to quote the Bible, do so in context, and study the history of ancient Israel before you go hob-knobbing about Levitical Law- the laws were given for a specific reason that had many different implications then than they do now. But you would figure that out if you took it in context, with adequate background information and in its historical and metaphorical connotations.
Another tid-bit~ READ Leviticus 20:13. Then find the origin of the word "sodomy" then figure out what the Bible says happened to the place that "sodomy" was named after. Then read 1 Corinthians 6:9-20, and all of chapter 7.
Don't argue that the Bible has nothing to say against homosexuality. There is not comment supporting homosexuality in the Bible either- An no, David and Jonathan did not love each other sexually- it is a reference to one of three root meanings of love-"agape love"- again, look up the root and context for that.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

On to other issues. I would like to point out that "gay "rights"" is a great load of crap. Homosexuality is not an inborn predisposed existence. It is a choice. Why are we being barraged by these psychotic gay activist types over an issue that is not really valid in the first place?
Being a woman is a natural, honestly achieved, state of existence. Equality for women's rights makes sense. Being of a particular ethnic background is also a great and valid arena in which to support equality.
Being a homo is a lifestyle preference. Making laws that favor a lifestyle choice is no different than making laws that favor people who like the color red... and having the homosexual agenda thrown in my face at every turn is rather irritating, to say the least. I do not support any mandate that forces people to choose how they must live, so if you want to be gay- be gay, just don’t expect me to like you or what you stand for, and more importantly- what you stand against. Neither do I support laws that force me to make concessions about moral issues that I believe strongly about. It violates my right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to have to cater and bow to the gay lifestyle- it discriminates against me for being heterosexual.

As for gay marriage, this is a ridiculous proposition. Our country provides laws and regulations regarding the institution of marriage because it is a necessity founded in an institution that predates our Constitution by several millennia. As a Nation founded on Christian beliefs, the definition of marriage is derived from Genesis. This, again, predates the Constitution.

Taking religion out of the picture completely, how is homosexuality in any context in harmony with nature? It cannot possibly be right, or the species homo-sapiens would cease to exist. Being gay just aint okay. Those folks are confused, and I am no more interested in tolerating the widespread advertisement of homosexuality than I am interested in tolerating the promotion of communism, socialism, terrorism or any other "ism" that destroys the values that made this country thrive for the last 233 years. The homosexual agenda is a sure way to decay the basic traditional family unit, which has been the backbone of our society.

These gals have no right to claim they are married as a “couple” to benefit from a fishing derby discount. They should get back in the closet where they belong.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sb Wacker wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Gentleman I’m proud of you, the majority of you have shown yourselves to be educated, liberty loving, tolerant and educated men. In doing so have confounded the tired ‘bubba’ stereotype of the American sportsman. If anyone is going to reinvigorate the outdoor traditions, it’s you. Well played.

To Ken re Rabittpolice88

‘You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup’

Well there’s an offer you don’t get every day eh Ken?
I think he likes you but is too shy to say so.

Regards
SBW

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

There is that word "tolerant" again, another word for being soft and having no back bone.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ggmack wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I agree this is bull hockey. Seems to me that they were looking for an issue to exploit.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from logan.vandermay wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ranger2
well written.
I am also tired of having this shoved in my face. I could care less if someone is gay. I just get tired of the racism card being pulled out all the time.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from aragonnapoles wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

O.K. The apology was done,All We bloggers receipt a cascade of information about laws,moral,the bible etc.
Can we came back to outdoors?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ahh rabbitpolice, the things I miss because the laptop goes down...
For your information the word "lesbian" isn't mentioned even once in the Bible, so as far as that goes, Lesbians must be nearly perfected beings requiring no admonitions from YhWh at all. The Bible spends much more space admonishing heterosexuals than gay people.

Again I see this assumption that the Old Testament applies to persons who are not Semitic. The Old Testament is quite clear that Hebrews and Jews are the chosen of YHWH and not others. The only homophobic statements in the New Testament are not the words of Yeshua (Jesus) but of Paul, who never met Yeshua and often made stuff up as he went along. THERE IS NO CONDEMNATION OF HOMOSEXUALITY OF ANY KIND ATTRIBUTED TO THE ACTUAL RECORDED WORDS OF JESUS. I wonder often why supposed "christians" persist in claiming that the Bible excuses their personal hatreds.
I also wish to inform you rabbitpolice, that ones sexual preference is not and cannot be a choice, except for bisexuals. If you are a gay man, pictures of naked women will not excite you, however much one might desire such stimulation. Conversely can you, rabbitpolice convince yourself to get excited over pictures of studly men? If such behaviors were a choice, then it would follow that such choice would be possible, but "Richard" usually has a mind of his own, doesn't he?
Remember in the book of Acts, we find out that the first nonJew to accept christianity was an Ethiopian Eunich. Do you think for a moment he had a choice in the matter? Phillip certainly wasn't put off and appreciated the lift on the eunichs chariot!
Puzzeled about what Jesus had to say about eunichs?
Read Mathew 19,verses 11 and 12 (caution it isn't particularly homophobic).
As far as the cat fishin derby goes, if they want a couples discount it should apply to everyone or no-one. Be fishers of men!
Finally rabbitpolice, if you were homeschooled you are no advertisement for private schooling. Plainly, your education included no rhetoric and damn little spelling.
Perhaps whoever educated you, used the opportunity to inoculate your innocent mind with their own personal prejudices, as plainly you have been taught much that is egregiously inaccurate. Go back to school rabbitpolice, higher education broadens the mind, especially after a sufficient number of remedial courses. Do this and when you troll in the future you wouln't appear quite so much a fool.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ranger2, your arguments don't hold water either. A gay porson, male female or inbetween does not discriminate against you for being heterosexual, just for demanding to be treated equally under the law. Also, you have no right to impose your prejudices on anyone else. If you were actually a christian you would apply the Golden Rule, that you "love one another as I have loved you" instead of imposing your own moral perversion (homophobia) on others who would normally have nothing to do with you.
Homosexual relationships are NOT the the "threat to the American family". Divorce and the fact that people get married for specious reasons or do not honor their commitments to one another are the threat to families. The assumption that "gay marriage" is a threat is purest scapegoating by persoins who can't handle their own relationships.
As a trained Sociologist, I would suggest that a primary aspect of familial impairment is that the so called "nuclear family" never was a stable institution. It is certainly not "natural" to define a "traditional" family as Mom, Dad and some kids. The natural family unit for human beings is the extended family, where Mom and Dad live with Grandma and Grandad along with uncles and aunts (and their kids). The nuclear family was an institution that evolved in the industrial age, where extended families were excluded from company housing and extended families broke up as individuals had to move to follow employment. Now that the age of the industrial revolution is being superceeded by the age of information (and the industry goes away for good) the weaknesses of the nuclear family are being laid bare. The problem is that nuclear families lack the support system that extended families afford individuals. If mom needs to leave the kids to work, gramma and auntie can watch kids. If Dad has to go a hundred and fifty miles to fetch something needful, the family isn't undefended if uncle and grandpa are about.
Nuclear families are vulnerable by nature and tend to isolate people, it takes a village to raise a child.
Some will suggest that extended families are a relic of the agricultural age (now also gone Here, but not in most of the world) but by this token, one must expect new family structures to arise. Unsuprisingly, new familial structures are arising, families by choice for one; where persons choose their "families" and treat them like kin. Polyamorous familial situations are also not uncommon today, as people learn that loving another doesn't mean the lover is enslaved or owned by their partner and discover in themselves the capacity to love more than one or two other individuals at a time.
So there are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dealt with in your philosophies, Ranger2. I would also suggest you reread the words of Your Savior, and see where he actually sanctions your personal prejudices.
In other words, if you don't like homosexuality, don't have sex with men! Otherwise it ain't none of your business dude.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ranger2-

first off, thank you for an infinitely better thought out post than anything rabbitpolice had to say.

second off,
I firmly disagree that homosexuality is a choice, I'm unsure whether the cause is nature, nurture, or both but I've met a too many gays who were otherwise "normal" to conclude that they chose the make themselves societal outcasts.

as for the assertion that our species wouldn't exist if a small portion of the population was homosexual; its absurd! That small portion just doesn't reproduce, the rest of the species does, and life goes on. We have diseases that cause infertility, yet we're still around, think about it.

We have accounts of homosexuals going back to the beginning of recorded history (Ancient Egypt) and we have no reason to believe they didn't exist even before then. The species has been doing just fine.

as for laws "favoring" gay people-
You use that terminology quite often in your post, please name one? seriously, a single law. I can think of a couple that give gay people equality with strait people, but not a single one that favors gay people OVER strait people. Please enlighten me.

as for having it "thrown in your face"
I think you and I have some common ground here. Believe it or not (IRONY) a lot of people I know consider me a homophobe. This seeming contradiction comes from the fact that while I do think they should have equal protection under the law, the stereotypical hyper-feminine gay men get under my skin and bug me. A lot like hyper feminine, prissy, stuck up women do.

I can understand why the law requires organizations that take government money to treat everyone equally. The tax money came from everyone, straits and gays, so everyone should have an equal opportunity to benefit from it.

However, in cases like this one, I disagree with the discrimination law as it stands. I assume the Lion's club was not government funded in any way, it was just a private organization offering a public competition. In my humble (limited government) opinion, the pro-gay people don't have any more right to use the government's power to force their opinion on everyone than the anti-gay people do.

I know this will never happen, but I believe that if you are a private organization you should be able to spew as much hatred, bigotry, or ignorance as you want. As long as you're not forcing it on anyone. The job of stopping that kind of behavior should fall on peoples conscience / religion / moral compass, not on the government.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I wonder if the broads caught any catfish?!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from cverstrate wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

At the risk of sounding as stupid as the rabbit guy, I would also say that the lesbians are in the blatant wrong on this one. They only make their case worse in the eyes of common sense people everywhere by suing over a lousy buck.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I think that Raney made a mistake in not identifying the girl-girl couple and giving the buck discount. I applaud the couple for not making too big of an issue of it in only seeking a written apology. If this same thing had happened to myself and my wife, I would probably expect some sort of apology. I do get irked at the quirkey social status and demands to be recognized as a different demographic than the normal "couple". What would be the point of having a straight pride day and then feeling it necessary to get the towns mayor to sign off in approval of the event. Isn't it about being free to choose, and not being treated differently?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I guess this is the time when right becomes wrong and wrong becomes right. People start to loose all moral bearings and think the Bible is a joke. When you die and stand before your creator you will see who was right.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

To Bella,
I am in college have a job farming, people make choices in life and there are consequences for those choices. Don't even try and pass the bunch of bs off the gays can't help themselves or they were born that way. They made a choice, that is what life is, decisions you have to make.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Rabbit, having quoted the bible a bit here, am I to assume you're a christian? ANd if you are, how do you handle "treat others are you yourself would like to be treated"? Just curious.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

also, lets point something out here that seems to have slipped through the cracks. There are two separate issues being tossed around and they have nothing to do with each other.

#1)Should Christians accept gays?
#2)Should the government treat gays as equals?

Though I may disagree with rabbitpolice and rager2 on the first question, I will at least accept that there is a valid disagreement among Christians on the issue.

As for question #2, it has NOTHING to do with question #1. We DO NOT live in a Christian theocracy. The role of the government is NOT to enforce Christian dogmas. There are a whole lot of religions in this country. Many of them accept gays as equals and those people pay their taxes just like you do.

Using the government's power to force your religious views on those people is no better than what the English did by forcing their religion on everyone. Avoiding things like this was one of the main reasons our country was founded.

We ARE NOT a Christian nation! We are a FREE nation predominantly populated and founded by Christians!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

koldcut,
I tell it how I see it and I don't hold back. I expect nothing else in return. I do not mince my words and I don't mind when people talk to me the same way.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

When you get a little older and get to know more people you will notice that no two people are alike.

If I was to give a young person advice I would say to treat all strangers as friends. You'll be surprised how good people are regardless of the things you disagree with.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from weve_25 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Good advice buckhunter
People (including myself) are too quick to pass judgement on people who do things we don't agree with or understand. Judgement isn't ours to pass, sooner or later we will all be judged and each and everyone of us will get what we deserve.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I'm just throwing this out there, but I think Jesus would agree buckhunter.

Loving your fellow man makes the world a better place, regardless of whether or not they hold your religious beliefs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ken, I'm afraid that Raney wouldn't have given you the $1 couples discount for loving your fellow man. :)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Koldkut-

LMAO!

Thanks

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Don Mitchell wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

boy oh boy,has this been fun or what,? lol,

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

As I suggested previously, how could homosexuality be a choice and heterosexuality not be?
So Rabbitpolice you talk to God frequently and all He has to say to you is how wicked those gay people are? I begin to wonder about your vehemence, have you ever heard the term ego-dystonic homosexuality? It refers to gay men so filled with self hatred that they persecute their own kind. You are so insistant that homosexuality is a choice, did you make a choice to be heterosexual despite your natural proclivities and desires for hot manflesh? Do you still hate yourself for years of self repression and denial? You know rabbitpolice, that therapy is available (even though methinks thou dost protest too much) You can liberate yourself rabbitpolice, and finally hang those Tom o Finland posters in your den. You can drop the false front of a christianity you plainly have no clue about and go forth and gayly live your life to the fullest off hunting on Brokeback Mountain...with a close friend of course (bring lots of lube dude...)

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella,
you talk so crass and so crude as to be shockingly inappropriate in any company. You are a left wing radical who makes excuses for everyone's actions including your own. Instead of taking responsibility for your actions or making some one else do the same for theirs. I can assure you that I am in no way gay at all. You have no authority to talk about any religion because you don't believe in the one true God, Jesus Christ. You are either a pagan or you don't believe in any higher authority other than your own. tell me if I am not right. You also think that the Bush administration caused 9/11 which shows your inability to think rationally or have any common sense. You sir are like a piece of grass blown around in the wind witch ever way it blows strongest.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I find it interesting that this story is front page news on Lambda Legals website, Lambdalegal.org which is evidently a very large gay rights law firm.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FloridaHunter1226 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All over 1 dollar? Are you kidding me! I am not afraid that I believe that marriage is a bond between a man and a women... not a man and a man or vice versa. These are just people looking for money. I can not believe they would file such charges just for a dollar... they must have been really offended.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Oh bunnyman, I didn't start with the crass behavior, unless you think everything you write is picture perfect and everything I write isn't. I am pointing out the double standards that you plainly hold dear.
Since when do Christians only get to discuss religion? Somebody calls you out on your beliefs and you can dish it out but you can't take it! As far as Ego-dystonic homosexuality goes it is in the Diagnostic Standards Manual (every version since DSM#3) if you don't like it go yell at the American Psychiatric Association, I didn't invent it. And I do think though doest protest too much, really.
Using your twisted hateful version of Christianity to justify your hatred isn't what your Jesus had in mind, if you think you are actually practicing christianity by preaching any sort of hate you should go hang out with the Westboro Baptist heretics who even protest at the burials of our war dead! If you think yourself qualified to make pronouncements about dogma, did you go to seminary? (I had 5 years of seminary) If God talks to you personally and tells you such hateful things then I might suggest you see a shrink and get some antipsychotics, then the voices will stop for a while...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Oh and where do you get the inane notion that I think the neocons caused 1911, don't you actually read anything? I am by no means a left wing radical, I have some attitudes that are "left" some a little righty and a bunch of notions that are downright perpendicular to either. You have some peculiar notions or you are trying to be insulting and failing badly. Don't charicterize me, I am far too old to be a leaf in the wind, my roots run too deep. You say you are still in college? you a young sprout and likely ain't seen too much of the world yet. It ain't quite the way you think.
I'll say one thing, minds are like parachutes, they only work when open.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

By what you have written all over this website it is easy to tell you are a left wing radical. Good lord you think that Al Gore would make a good president, you believe in global warming you hate the "bushies" as you call them, you did not answer my question about your religion because maybe you don't want people to know. You think Bush could have prevented 9/11? well why didn't clinton get him when he had the chance. You have no sound reasoning for any of this.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, you did start the crude and crass talk. I never talked about such disgusting low down homosexual innuendo. You are the one with the filthy mouth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

You should be ashamed for even saying such things. What if a lady comes on the website and reads that crap? Everything I have said could have been said in front of a lady without her blushing from embarrassment.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from crm3006 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

rabbitpolice88-
Hey guy, I hate to tell you, but I have calculated Bella's stated history and accomplishments, and if you ain't figured it out yet, she has got to be about 323 or 324 years old! Now, I'm not sure where you are from, but where I'm at, that adds up to TROLL! Nothing else can live that long, be that crass and annoying, or know so much. Just be glad that she is in one of those damnyankee New England states that keep electing Kennedy the murderer and not down here where the good folks live. Love to hear the whine when you score points, though!

BTW, Bella, Neocons didn't cause 1911. John Moses Browning invented the worlds greatest handgun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

crm3006
Glad to hear from somebody from the South! I live in GA. I didn't realize until just now that bella is a woman, that is a little interesting.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella, Bella, Bella...

Where do I start? How about with you first spewage at rabbitpolice...

"For your information the word "lesbian" isn't mentioned even once in the Bible, so as far as that goes, Lesbians must be nearly perfected beings requiring no admonitions from YhWh at all. The Bible spends much more space admonishing heterosexuals than gay people."

This statement is plainly STUPID. The word lesbian was derived from the Greek Isle of Lesbos, from the poet Sappho. It was not traced to exist in language until the 1800s and did not become common until the mid 1900’s…therefore it was NOT A WORD when the Bible was written. Gay is not in the Bible either. HOMOSEXUAL is in the Bible… (which means lesbians too, DUH!) All references to homosexuality in scripture ARE admonitions. Why do you hold such high regard for lesbianism anyhow? I bet you wear the pants, and your girlfriend does the skirt thing in your “relationship” eh? Don’t try to play semantics here, you are out of your league.
The Bible does go on to admonish all heterosexual relations that are held outside of the original design of marriage between one man and one woman. Being a slut is as morally corrupt as being homosexual- let alone homosexual sluts, but that is another topic altogether.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Why do you think that the Old Testament is not for Contemporary Christians- Christ said Himself in Matthew 5:17, 18:

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
The early church only had the Old Testament, and the teaching of Christ to learn by. The New Testament Letters were not compiled as we know them for centuries.
If you want to really get down to the root of the Bible, Jesus Christ is a member of the Trinity, one with God, so he is as much the Creator as Yahweh. The Bible was an inspired writing, so Christ night as well have spoken the words recorded from His ministry on earth… which means Jesus detested homosexuality to the utmost.
Why must you persist to bad mouth Paul? The single most significant conversion experience known to man, and a man who did more to spread the Gospel than any other early Christian- you think he “often made stuff up as he went along”? Just because your feeble mind cannot grasp the inspired teachings of Paul does not mean you should bash his writings.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

One to the debate of choice and behaviors… ken.mcloud, this is for you too…
“…ones sexual preference is not and cannot be a choice, except for bisexuals.” Once again, an INSANE statement. The choice of performing sexual acts is no less a choice than choosing bologna over pastrami. I agree that homosexual tendencies can be the natural bent for people, but we never have fully understood many mental illnesses. What a person chooses to do about those tendencies is where the choice comes about. As previously stated, homosexuality is not in harmony with nature and choosing to engage in homosexual acts is WRONG. One’s organs do not call the shots, Bella. I am positive that you do not know the first thing about “Richard” anyhow. The mind is “Richard’s” keeper, not vice-versa. Any notion to the contrary is an excuse to be a relativist, vacillating, spineless coward that wants to blame their actions on anything but their conscious ability to make choices.
ken.mcloud- my reference to the natural selection process and homosexuality- I was referring to the hypothetical consideration that if all humans at a given point of time, were solely homosexual, the race would cease to exist. Yes, homos have been around a long time, but they do not reproduce and pass on their genetics or values to natural offspring, therefore under the context of homos propagating, it does not occur without heterosexual activity.
Using the Ethiopian Eunuch to support your argument for homosexuality is moot as well. Matthew 19 is how Jesus responds to the Pharisees questions about marital laws, and specifically divorce- you have taken it out of context entirely. Eunuchs were not intended to marry because they could not fulfill the consummation of the marriage relationship- they were not by default gay, but celibate. Men who are effeminate for what ever reason do not equate to being homosexual. I have no reason to be wary of effeminate men. Should they choose to not be homosexual.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

More on “gay” rights and its role in moral decay, especially regarding familial structure.
Bella, it is valid for you to bring up all the factors that you have regarding the decay of the extended family structure, that divorce, marrying for poor reasons, etc. are all problems. Gay marriage is simply one more mutation of the family structure that promotes immorality in society. No scapegoating involved, just calling a spade a spade. And by the way, your mistaken assumption that I cannot handle my own relationships could not be farther from the truth~ I am over a decade partnered with a wonderful Godly woman raising four children in a home of love, emotional security, moral integrity, and enlightenment. My wife holds it all together, really, and I do the best I can to support her. So don’t go popping of with the inadequacy of my ability to function in healthy, meaningful relationships, as designed be the Creator.
As for my own “moral perversion and personal prejudices” as you have pointed out, these are in harmony with Christ’s teachings. You are the one who is confused. Specifically, I never promoted the aggressive persecution of homosexuals. The government of God was established as a free will society- I live by that. But it is also not free from consequences. I have the capacity to “love the sinner…” but I do however “Hate the sin”. Good and evil cannot co-exist, so you have to choose one or the other, you can’t have both. Christ could not abide evil - After His temptation in Mathew 4:10 He said with a voice of pure, raw, authority, “AWAY FROM ME, SATAN.” He drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip. Twice. To the woman at the well in John 4:1-38, He read her guilt like an open book, laid plain her transgression, and bade her change her ways. To the adulteress in John 8: 1-11, He not only saved the woman’s life by keeping her from being stoned by the mob, He made her realize the depth of her iniquity, and His parting words were: “…Go now, and leave your life of sin.”
This is what has stirred my disgust. Our society has begun to take this attitude that there is not hard line in the sand when it comes to right and wrong. It is a relative morality, that encourages “your own truth”. “Do what works for you”. I certainly do not have all the answers, and I make my share of mistakes, but I have the courage to stand up and call wrong by its true name.
When people think that it is wrong to call homosexuality an abomination, wrong to chide its perversity for the sake of “tolerance”, and that I have to stand by idly and subject my children to this debauchery, then they have another thing coming.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

How do you ask, Bella, and ken.mcloud, do these anti-discrimination laws do that very thing? When California faced a bill in 2006 forcing schools to celebrate gay historical figures- (AB 606 and AB 1056), or the introduction of the pro gay curriculum centered around the book targeted to children about the gay penguins- “And Tango Makes Three” which was intended to be taught to children as young as 5. Or the antidiscrimination cases brought against people who refused services to homosexuals based on moral principles- like the photographer from Oregon (I believe) that refused work at a gay ceremony, because he did not support homosexuality. Gay “rights” laws are designed to effectively prevent people from exercising their conscience, because, “it might hurt Adam and Thteveth’s feelingth”. Once again, being homosexual is a choice, not a natural existence, and if I have to desist from speaking out against the practice, and refusing to be involved with homosexuals on any level, it violates my conscience, my freedom of speech, my freedom to choose an appropriate education for my children, and it threatens my non-gay lifestyle. Did you not hear any of the backlash from the homosexual community regarding the results of prop. 8? The homos had riots, attacked people, terrorized people and churches. They were the intolerants, they were aggressive, they were the ones who could not handle the fair arm of democracy.
If a person wants to be gay, go for it. But don’t expect me to throw out the welcome mat, and pat them on the back while telling them that it is their own reality, and that gay is okay, if it is okay for them. Forget it, being gay is not okay. I am willing to tell any homo that homosexuality is wrong, without bashing their face, or otherwise causing bodily harm. And I will not give them special status as a minority group, if they choose to be gay, they choose to be isolated.
I have done what I can to present the evidence- I am sure I missed plenty. I will not be surprised, Bella, if I did not change your mind, though. But that is okay, changing a mind like that is like changing diapers… it is putrid to start with, and no matter how much effort you put into changing it, it will be filled with the same old poop again before too long.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

And to the rest of you guys, have some backbone. We do not have to go out and beat the hell out of people for choosing to be gay, but calmly, firmly, stick to your guns; wrong is wrong.

And to clear up this buzz word: homophobic~
It is not really all that accurate. I am not "afraid" of homosexuals. They do not frighten me in the slightest. I have a conscious disrespect for their choice in lifestyle and have the courage to openly disagree with it, like I disrespect terrorists, and sleazy, slimy, liberal excuse making bottom feeders.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Wow, Ranger2 you sir are incredible! I know I am not the poster boy for the perfect argument in any way, or for anything else for that matter. I do however know what I believe, why I believe it and what is right and wrong. Thank you for the wonderful read, it is written clear as a bell.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Gee ranger2 your math must work like Bishop Usher's, but FYI I am 50, and a girl can get a lot done in half century.
The assertion is made that homosexuality is "unnatural" when in fact it is not uncommon in the wild , occurring in about the same incidence as in humanity, about 10%.
The assertion is also made that gay cultural heros are being pushed into school curriculums, How about Leonardo Da Vinci and Alexander the Great, shall we expunge them because of their sexual proclivity? How about J. Edgar Hoover (perhaps that one we might edit out). J. Edgar is your prime example of an Ego-Dystonic Homosexual and his particular pecularities ("Mary") were well documented.
I understand quite well that in your version of Christianity homosexuality is wrong but there are many many sects in Christianity see the homophobia as wrong, who is to say who the heretic is? Are any of you prophets, to grant new revelation? and if so, why should anybody listen to you? Again, if you read the words attributed to Jesus, not once does he condemn homosexuality. Only Paul does that, and he never met Jesus, not once so why should anything he wrote be considered gospel? The whole question as to which books should even be in the bible kinda hinges on the Byzantine Emperor Constantine, who ordered the counsel of Nicea (the convocation of Bishops that decided which books would be canon and which books excluded). As a result Books like the book of Jubilees and the book of Mary were considered apocryphal while Paul (who never met Jesus) was considered more politically acceptable and included. As a result of this the Koran contains more information about the young Jesus than the New Testiment does. But hey, Christianity has been tainted by politics since the day they nailed Jesus up.
As to what religion I believe in? I believe in them all, because Truth is everywhere and I have studied every religion from Buddhism to Zoroastrianism and I can say without qualm that every one of em is true to some extent. Every believer is just as fervent as you Ranger2, and just as convinced of the sanctity of their dogma. There are a few cults, created to mislead and exploit people ( the mormons, scientologists, the moonies) but even these had to have some particle of truth in them or they never would have attracted anybody. The be all and end all is that each of us interacts with Deity in our own way and therefore as we are not telepathic there is actually something over 6 billion different religions, as many as the minds of men. Organized religion is kinda like herding cats therefore because imposing some common dogma on society is always going to be effected by divergence of minds (but that is politics again). I understand that Ranger2 thinks his view of the infinite is the sole acceptable worldview but in the grand scheme of things my own position is just as valid and likely closer to the actual teachings of the great Rabbi Yeshua than the intolerance espoused by rabbitpolice. And no I do not like Paul, he was intolerant and misogynistic. Of course he was a Roman wannabe, which is why the "Roman" greek speaking Byzantines made sure he was included when the book of Mary was not. But who do you think could share more of the teachings of the Great Rabbi Yeshua than his Wife, Mary. Most Christians never look at the Bible as a history book and therefore never view it in the context of the times. We also are shortchanged because the bible has been retranslated by many different writers for many different ends. A common theme is to de-emphasise the Judaism. People seem to forget he read Hebrew in Temple and spoke Aramaic. When as a child he discourses with the learned men it is his Bar Mitzvah, the marriage at Caena was his own wedding and he had to be married in order to be a Rabbi (Jewish Law).
As far as the old Testiment goes (in particular your favorite bits of Leviticus) if you claim that some archaic Jewish laws are God's Commandments to be imposed on everyone then you have to impose them ALL. There are likely a few in there that are likely to crimp your style and some are just illegal these days. But You don't get to pick and choose, you are sinning if you wear a poly cotton shirt or if you eat Lobster or Pork Sausage (you do keep Kosher don't you?). Then If your Brother dies you have to marry his widow (even if she is a shrew and you don't like her). It's all in there, you can't deny it. If Old Testament Rules are to be obeyed then you gotta do em all. Besides if Homosexuality is soo bad why isn't it in the big 10 commandments, it just isn't there. Coveting your neighbors maidservant is Worse than being queer, because it made the Big Ten. You can't pick and choose from Old Testiment Rules merely to justify your own personal prejudices and I thought "Judge not, Lest Ye be Judged" was also words taught by Jesus himself. Seems like you do a lot of Judging for a supposed Christian, especially versus your fellow men, who is to say who is queer anyway today with all these Metrosexuals running about. I would wonder who made Ranger2 arbiter of right and wrong anyway.
I know what is right and what is wrong
What is Right is honest and true, right creates respect between people, as well asunderstanding and co-operation. it is right to help others and try to alleviate pain or suffering where you find it.
What is wrong is what hurts others and causes others pain. Telling lies hurts people and is wrong, as is manipulating others for selfish benefit. Pretty much every major religion has the same standards for what is right and what is wrong.Only Patriarchal Monotheistic religions have this thing about homosexuality. Buddhism doesn't have any problem with it and at last count there were still more Buddhists on the planet than fundamentalist christians. You cannot tell me that the New Testament is scripture but the Bardo Thodol and the Sutras are not. I understand that you are ethnocentric and self-rightious but in my book those are sins of the Ego that actually cripple efforts to understand and appreciate my fellow man and after all isn't that more along the lines of what Jesus and Buddha both taught?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Your comment above reminds me of the comment made by rabbitpolice: you are like a leaf in the wind, blowing wherever it will. The argument was weak. Religion is so complex and complicated that no human can understand it all, some of us just study harder than others, and whereby are less confused. Yes there is truth scattered amongst all varieties of religion, some just contain far more complete and objective versions of it. I guess the comment about Jesus being the Inspirer of ALL the scripture went by you as well, another one of those complicated God made flesh concepts that you are ignoring- so He did, through the writings of the prophets, speak against homosexuality.
Paul did indeed meet Jesus, on the road to Damascus, after the ascension, but I am sure you refute that, because you are busy trying to figure out which "truth" you want to fabricate for yourself.
Acts 9:1-6
1Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples. He went to the high priest 2and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.
3As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"
5"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.
"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6"Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."
I would say it was a meeting that left quite an impression on Paul, wouldn’t you?

As for what the scripture contains, if you have faith that GOD inspired the Biblical scriptures and has preserved it accurately over the millennia, as was proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls, then you would have confidence that the items that belong in it are included.

The 10 Commandments are a summary of two categories of Law, respect and love for GOD, and respect and love for man... the details of which are included throughout the rest of the Book... but you have to read it and have a sound understanding of it (as best a human can) to reconcile all of the passages that refer back to the Big 10. Keeping the Law is indeed complicated, and understanding historical, cultural, and the pre and post Messianic evolution of faith in God the Creator helps sort out the particulars. Once again, it is a matter of dedicated study.
And yeah, there have been many a great and accomplished homosexuals. They can be great people in many a regard, and their sin is indeed no greater a sin in the eyes of God's law than gluttony, profanity, or even forgetfulness. The issue is the destructive nature of their behavior, on both a personal, and societal level. Living in a constant state of sin, or separation from God, is a statement of rejection of God. This goes the same for live-in couples who do not marry- but that is not the primary salient point here. If homosexuality is kept to themselves it is a personal issue, if it is drug out into the public square as it has globally in recent years, it becomes a personal issue to everyone. Once again, keep it in the closet, and I will keep my beliefs in the closet, ere I say the battle is in full swing, and I, and the multitudes like me, did not fire the first shot.
I only arbitrate what I have come to understand from the teachings of Christ, nothing of myself. If I have piqued your conscience, it was from no personal motivation. I would rather we all lived in harmony, but because of the fallen state of this earth, that will only be for those who accept the grace of Christ and see the Kingdom.

And as for the age calculations, you miss-credited me with that statement, it was someone else. I will just comment that for a woman of 50, you really show a lack of maturity.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Hey, what about that cotton polyester Shirt Ranger, when Leviticus plainly commands that thou shalt not wear mixed fibers! It seems to me you have to do a lot of illogical headstands in order to have your religious beliefs all "work", but then you saeem to resort to the usual circular reasoning all fundies fall back on. Item #a is true because somebody said it was in the bible and the bible is the WofG. therefore if #a = #B then #B =#a no further research needed. But you haven't answered my two points either, they are inconvenient to your argument, one being that historically the "bible" as we know it was compiled at the order of Emperor Constantine and subsequently retranslated, re edited and revised frequently usually for political ends.For instance, if you prefer the King James version, do you consider James Stewart to be Divinely inspired? How can you claim something so frequently revised is any sort of uncorrupted truth? What version do you like, King James? The Vulgate? The Blue Jeans Bible? Or are you learned enough to read the original Aramaic and Classical Greek? I know Culdee Christians who do just that, and I respect their scholarship as well as the loving and nonjudgemental way they revere Jesus. But somehow you guys think JC gave you dispensation to judge your fellow mortals and I am still wondering where you get the sand to call hate mongering Christianity. Jesus did not say "love thy neighbor but hate those faggots over there". If you think homosexuality is a sin that is your perogative, but your only course of action then is to control yourself and not have sex with men. America is not and never has been a Christian Nation. America is now and always has been a secular state prohibited from favoring or mandating any faith or creed but patriotism. Imposing fundamentalist Christian dogma on persons who have their own religious beliefs is contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. If you want to live in a Theocracy go try Iran, here we have religious freedom and that means you cannot impose your hateful twisted homophobic excuses on folks who disagree with you especially when the guy you claim to follow said "Love one Another" and not the opposite. You cannot contradict the core teachings of Christianity again and again and claim to be Christian. One of the most Christlike men I have ever had the pleasure of knowing was an elderly blind gay minister with the Metropolitan Community Church, Although disabled every day he strove to bring comfort to the distressed and counsel to the confused, the man was a saint. Probably even more of a saint than Ranger 2! But my old friend Reverend George practiced the loving nonjudgemental kind of Christianity rather than the self rightious version you seem to espouse. I say you hate mongers are the Heretics and dear old Rev.George is the Real thing, regardless as to who's a queer and who isn't. You don't channel hate from God, Hate comes from some where else (perhaps you might guess). So who do you serve, really?
Oh and excuse my typo earlier (9-11 vs 1911) comes with my unique keyboarding style, guess part of my mind was on my beloved .45, indeed the best automatic handgun created by the mind of a man, too bad Browning was a Mormon...)
And I do think somebody could have prevented September 11th, the information warning about the potential attack existed, but the Bush Administration was asleep at the wheel. Of course part of the fault may lie that aircraft passengers have been so cowed by the potential for hijackers that they allow themselves to be held hostage by dudes with tiny boxcutters. I remember a few years ago when some fool attempted to hijack a Chinese airliner and was beaten to death by the passengers with winebottles. So yeah, I think September 11th could have been prevented just like I tend to think the politicians use of September 11th for promoting their own agendas was disgusting and using September 11th to trump up a war with disingenuous lies was treasonable.
But you Bible thumpers seem to like sinners in office, seeing as to the troubles conservative politicians seem to have with adultery of late. Oh but Obama, according to you prophets crying out in the desert is some kind of Antichrist already and he hasn't even had anybody tortured yet! Talk about double standards!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella,
This is a serious question, I have an application on my computer that allows me to zoom in on anything I want, are you gay? I am asking because your profile pic doesn't look like a woman. Some Americans did fight back maybe you recall United flight 93 that crashed in PA? Those men and women died defending their country, they were the very first casualties in the war on terror. The Bush administration was not asleep at the wheel, they were only in office a few months before 9/11, they had a bunch of crap to deal with from the Clinton administration. Again, if you want to blame someone for 9/11 why don't you blame Clinton for not taking him from the Saudis. Especially after the first trade center bombings. As to everything regarding the law in the old testiment from the Bible, we as Christians are no longer under the law. That happened when Jesus died for our sins and the vale was torn in two at the temple. All this to say that we live in a time of grace and are no longer under the law. That means we don't get struck dead because we take the Lords name in vain. What it comes down to Bella is either you believe the word of God or you do not. Either you believe That Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived sinless in this world and died on the cross for our sins. For those that would repent of theirs sins, knowing that they are at emnity with the Father and must repent of their sins and ask Jesus to forgive them and come into their heart or you do not. When you stand before Jesus when you die what are you going to say? I lived the best life I could, I tried to live with my fellow man in peace and harmony. That will not cut it, you must be born again. I (Jesus) am the way the truth and the life, no man comes unto the Father accept through me. John 14:6, For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God Romans 3: 23 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8 For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord Romans 6:23 Either you believe these words of the Bible or you do not Bella. It is a choice, a decision you must make, you accept Jesus, that he died for your sins or you do not.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

By "him" I meant Osama Bin Laden

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella dear, its okay, I am not a hate monger, I don't even hate you. I feel sorry for you, but do not hate you. I don't hate homosexuals. I vehemently disagree with them, and if you cannot accept faith or science as evidence, that is okay too. As I mentioned hate the sin, love the sinner... part of loving the sinner is, at times, pointing out the sin~ which people do to me on a regular basis~ which I appreciate. It is no reason to spit venom.
You should really look into the cotton poly shirt thing- there is a specific connotation that was relevant at the time, and understanding that would help you figure out why it was written, but I will leave that to you, as I have provided a plethora of scriptural evidence for my position, as you have attempted to do, and now you are saying that it is invalid. Which leads me to believe that you don't believe the Bible anyways. I am learning the Greek New Testamant, I do not KNOW it, but English works pretty well most of the time. You appear to me to be a Humanist by faith. Good luck with that, I hope it works out for you in the long run. I am pretty confident with my belief system.

I hope that you at least will reconcile that good and evil are polarized- one cannot abide with the other... the result of that understanding shoud at least direct people to strive to accept the gift of grace, the Love of Christ, and the will power to do what He commands.

I also sincerely hope this little converation does not leave you bitter. At least I know that I won't loose any sleep over it :)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I will admit I have encountered too many of the Westboro Baptist types and they always disgust me...
This is the internet and you are whatever you say you are. Whether I am gay or straight is nobodies business (other than my husband), Do I need to have a reason to defend the rights of my friends from what I see as bigotry and discrimination? I also don't think the be all and end all of human relationships should not be based on who penetrates who. I also disagree with the whole "father knows best" patriarchal chauvanism. My Feminism alone leads me to defend my queer friends and their rights and I get so tired of the hubris I see expressed by fundamentalists who insist that their illogical constructs be considered the only valid answer to complex situations.
Besides neither of you antigay type people still have any explanation as to why if being gay is soo bad why it isn't in the 10 commandments...God didn't care about sodomites in that chapter? Otherwise you are still picking and choosing the ones you like from Leviticus and not going with the whole program. I still think you are using scripture to justify your personal prejudices.
My biggest problem with the Old Testiment is that it suggests that God condones genocide. The wholesale slaughters committed by Joshua, the incidences where the Israelites take cities and kill every man,woman, child, sheep and dog. All at the command of YHWH.
How can such slaughter be considered the will of a loving creator. Any book that condones homophobia and genocide cannot be considered a useful guide to morality. My morality excludes both genocide and homophobia. Maybe you think the extermination of peoples is Godly, but I certainly don't.
I am glad to hear that the ranger and the rabbitguy aren't hate mongers, but how about the judging the fellow men business...Let he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from burnettjv wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

ken.mcloud,
Your argument also does not hold water. "anti-discrimination law requires them to treat strait people and gay people equally" They were treated equally because two heterosexual men would not have been able to get the couples discount either. Therefore, no discrimination against gays occurred. Also who is to say that those women weren't just saying they were a couple to get the discount?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth.Now the earth was formless and empty ,darkness was over the surface of the deep.In a place known later to become huntington.There he put into the water many great numbers of catfish.and it was good.And a multitude of people came to fish,these free and public waters.And this too was good.Then came about a derby of fish,For women,an man,alike.And there was a peacefull easy feeling.Two people of any sort are a couple,plain as apples,deer,or ducks,so let them fish.No matter who they love or how they vote.FISH ON.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

So true John A., the catfish do not care regarding the genderpreferences of those who hold the Rod. (singing...)
So Hold to the Rod, the fiberglass Rod, it is strong and flexible too, The Fishing Rod will catch fish from trout to Cod if you have a lure that will do...

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Hoo Boy or should I say Oy Vey!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

THANKS BELLA,I ENJOY YOUR POSTS.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Working definition of an evangelical christian: Knows all 10 Commandments and keeps none of them. Knows all 10 Amendments and wants none of them.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Tell me mike diehl, if that is the case why has there been such a big battle in several states between the gov. and christians to get the ten commandments in the courthouses? You sir are full of it.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Nope, I'm not. I've yet to meet an evangelical that didn't have themselves confused with god, and that's C1. As for posting the 10c in courthouses; as noted, most evangelicals talk alot about the 10c even though they don't keep 'em. But turning the 10c into a monument in a courthouse where one supposes the First Amendment matters shows considerable disregard for the US constitution.

Myself, I don't understand all the bullshit directed against homosexuals. My two sons would be safer in a room full of new orleans drag queens than in a room full of evangelical ministers. IMO, there's something about that sort of biblical-literalist authoritarianism that attracts pervs to the pulpit.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

you haven't known very many christians have you? I believe you are mixing the catholic churches priests with baptist preachers. Oh, and I love the way you give yourself the plus one, it's like blowing your own horn. Separation of church and state was put into place by our founding fathers to prevent the government from establishing a state run church, not to mean that government and religion can't have anything to do with each other. They have everything to do with each other. That is why the constitution and the bill if rights and all the founding documents have God in them ( imagine that) and you say that America was not founded as a christian nation?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

I FOR THE MOST PART AM AN IGNORANT MAN.UNEDUCATED AND CRUDE.AND FOR WHAT ITS WORTH I BELIVE THAT HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY.THUMBS UP MR,DIEHL.X2

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"you haven't known very many christians have you?"

Actually I have. The obvious hypocrasy of most evangelicals claiming to speak on behalf of god as though they have a priviliged voice pipe to the divine, the idol worship in which hordes of people fawn over TVangelists, and the stunningly gaudy icons that they create for themselves really strikes me as wholly at odds with both the letter and spirit of C1. I was raise congregationalists but it's the undeniable baloney of the organized churches that really put me off my feed, faith wise.

"I believe you are mixing the catholic churches priests with baptist preachers."

You haven't been keeping up with the news for the last, oh, four decades have you? I find it interesting that the authoritarian faiths ALL seem to have this problem. And it's really not limited to christianity. Where you have hierarchies of privilege and power, it attracts the worst moral elements of human society, in my opinion. I'm not saying that all the laity in the faiths are that way; I'm saying there's something inherently wrong and suspect about people who are that attracted to authority, IMO of course.

"Oh, and I love the way you give yourself the plus one, it's like blowing your own horn."

I had a +2 going for a while, but some chickenturd knocked me back.

"not to mean that government and religion can't have anything to do with each other."

You are not correct.

"That is why the constitution and the bill if rights and all the founding documents have God in them ( imagine that) and you say that America was not founded as a christian nation?"

America was not in fact founded as a christian nation. It was founded by people who included deists, christians of various faiths and some bona fide agnostics. Haven't researched EVERY conferee, but I would not be surprised if there were some people of Jewish faith too. The vast majority of them shared a suspicion of people who wanted to formally marry faith with politics. That is why, for example, the 10 Commandments aren't actually written into the Constitution. There's nothing in there about a national day off on Sundays (or whichever sabbath you want), there's nothing in there about roasting a lamb every time Congress meets because meat smoke is pleasing to the lord, etc.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

oh good lord, now you are just blowing hot air. None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles. You just believe that because that is what the government taught you in school. I am talking about actual ordinary every day christians the ones that are in church on Sunday instead of sleeping in. Not the tv preachers, I have no respect for them whatsoever. You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles."

If you'd actually read anything they wrote they'd tell you that for themselves. Where'd you go to school? A madras?

"You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs."

Huh? Which part was bs? The part about wankers being attracted to authoritarianism? I stand by it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles."

If you'd actually read anything they wrote they'd tell you that for themselves. Where'd you go to school? A madras?

"You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs."

Huh? Which part was bs? The part about wankers being attracted to authoritarianism? I stand by it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

You have no ability to present anything with class or maturity. You did not have a good answer for anything I wrote, not one. You just hummed and hawed around everything, If you can't come up with something better I will find someone else to debate with.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

"You have no ability to present anything with class or maturity."

That'd be a pot-kettle thing if in fact I had done anything w/o class or maturity, thereby sinking to your level. Look, dood, you haven't offered anything other than your opinion. I don't agree with your opinion about the philosophical origins of the constitution, having myself read the fed papers, many of jefferson's letters, as well as those of Adams, Franklin, Madison and others. The fact that you're attacking me rather than offering evidence illustrates your lack of knowledge in the matter, your lack of evidence to support your argument, and frankly, your lack of character.

"I will find someone else to debate with."

That works for me. We're trading opinions here. I'm not demanding that you buy mine but where you assert a privileged point of view you're just up an irrational creek, IMO. If you can't argue to the argument, rather than directing childish jibes at me, then really neither I nor anyone else need to hear from you.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

@Rabbitpolice -

Please bear in mind I have no desire to convert you to some other faith. I merely rebut your claims about christianity being the underpinning of the US constitution, and the derived modern political activism of evangelicals that seeks to make their faith (which I find very peculiar) into the law of the land.

One can research any number of founding fathers. Probably the most oft mentioned fellow is Jefferson. Here are some excerpts from his writings. Please note his extremely skeptical outlook on members of the clergy and peddlers of organized religion to intervene in political matters. Elsewhere you will see that Jefferson does on dozens of occasions assert that all faith is a private matter between a person and their notion of god. That makes Jefferson a deist, at least insofar as his public philosophy, and openly expresses a demand for tolerance of all faiths.

With that in mind, here are some key quotes, with references to which you may refer for extended reading. These came from a University of Virginia website.

I have ever thought religion a concern purely between our God and our consciences, for which we were accountable to Him, and not to the priests." --Thomas Jefferson to Mrs. M. Harrison Smith, 1816. ME 15:60
"From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:545
"Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle." --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1813.
"Whenever... preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put [their congregation] off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art of science." --Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:281
"Ministers of the Gospel are excluded [from serving as Visitors of the county Elementary Schools] to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions." --Thomas Jefferson: Note to Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:419
"No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools] inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:425
"I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith." --Thomas Jefferson to Michael Megear, 1823. ME 15:434
"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moor, 1800.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

BTW, the statement to PH Wendover is an explicit rejection of the efforts of religious activists to meddle in the affairs of teachers in such matters as, for example, biological science and the origins of species through natural selection.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from muddog wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

Rabbitpolice88.

Maybe you should spend more time remodeling your mobile home and less time attempting serious thought, you seem to have a tough time of it.
If you are a so called Christian then I want nothing to do with Christianity, you give it bad name…If Jesus were here today, gays would be the LEAST of his concerns.

Bella you are an Angle! Love your posts……..

My neighbors are a gay couple, one ex marine the other is a Police Captain. Both have Kids, both Hunt and both fish. They are the picture perfect example of what an outstanding citizens should be.

As for the Derby, who F#@KING cares?. Let them get the discount, to any observant you can tell they were discriminated against, FULL STOP. It seems as though the suit is not for the $1.00, duh, but for the principal. I say go for it. Very Unconstitutional. This is American damit, people are supposed to be FREE.

As a straight male I have NO issues with Gay couples hunting and fishing. I am not “threatened” by those who are different than I. Back woods hicks who cling to some age old homophobic archaic notion that we are all “threatened” by those who are different need to crawl back in their hole.

Using the Bible as a basis for your hatred is a cop out. You have a brain ( err I mean the one GOD gave you ), use it.

I will also defend those who do not support gay married but DO NOT push your old, sterile ideology on the rest of us.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

OK, I'll step down from my smartass perch for some serious commentary.

Every generation has it's shame. My father was a racist, my grandfather was anti feminist, my great grandfather shot Indians and my great great grandfather shot Union soldiers. I guess my generation will have to bear the burden of being homo phobes and one day after I'm long gone my children will look back and see how stupid I was.

+7 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

When you get a little older and get to know more people you will notice that no two people are alike.

If I was to give a young person advice I would say to treat all strangers as friends. You'll be surprised how good people are regardless of the things you disagree with.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob81 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Rabbitpolice88,
Just as I've known plently of democrat gun-owners and republican union-members, I have also known more than one republican gay person. The article never mentions the couple's political affiliation. Methinks you shouldn't spout off about people you clearly don't know anything about.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from idduckhntr wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Who cares if they are gay or straight at least they like to be in the outdoors and they support hunting and fishing this guys just needs to not worry about a $1.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from dwaynez wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

It's a sign of the times, people want exposure and they want to find a way to either get rich quick or get their 15 minutes in the spotlight, no matter how petty the cause.

In order for you not to offend anyone you have to be very careful and cross your t's and dot your i's or else you leave yourself open to be sued by someone.

The legal system should take a stand against a waste of taxpayers money and the legal systems time and efforts when cases like this are brought before them.

I am all for equality and a fair shot for everyone, we all deserve a chance to take part in life in general, but we should not take advantage of loop holes that put someone else in a bad light for our own selfish gain.

I was running a tournament and one of my sponsors backed out because I did not state in the first draft of the tournament flyer that it was catch and release, they were afraid people would get offended if someone kept a fish instead of releasing it. I re-worded the draft and the sponsor came back on board, but they were ready to bail over one line being left off the poster.

Just my opinion.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Two things,

First-
The fact that anyone could waste the justice system's resources suing over $1 shows just how badly we need tort reform in this country.

Second-
I'm afraid our lady-loving lady friends have a valid legal argument even if their suit is incredibly stupid.

Assuming the derby was a public event, not a members only one (the article doesn't explicitly say), then anti-discrimination law requires them to treat strait people and gay people equally.

The argument that "then everyone would do it" really doesn't hold water either. The purpose of the couples discount is not enforce a particular social agenda, its to increase attendance by encouraging people to bring their significant others. Applying the discount to same sex couples actually aids in accomplishing this goal because opens it up to a wider range of people.

Furthermore, there is nothing stopping pairs of opposite sex people lying about their couple status fraudulently gaining the discount. What is stopping someone from saying their sister or cousin is their girlfriend? [insert redneck incest joke here] Why is the lion's club not fighting this fraud with the same gusto as homosexual fraud?

Plus, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of catfishermen would rather pay the extra $0.50 per person than announce to a room full of lion's club-members that Bubba Smith is their man-lover.

and for anyone who's still not sure that this is about discriminating against gays... here's a quote from Raney in that article...

"none of this boy-boy, girl-girl couples crap."

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Well, even if this Raney fellow doesn't support discrimination against homosexuals, we know rabbitpolice does!

"same sex freaks"
My, what a mature way describe people different than you!

"morally corrupt people"
as I said before, they are abusing the civil court system, but cite one source that tells you these ladies are "morally corrupt"?

"the dregs of society that are non productive"
cite one source that says these ladies are "non productive" I didn't see anything in that article about anyone's employment status?

"want everything given to them"
If you actually read the article, it says that all they are asking for is an apology and for all the lions clubs to "recognize their antidiscrimination obligations under Oregon law" what exactly is your definition of "everything"?

If you can't answer any of the above questions then its perfectly all right to admit that you just made it all up because you harbor a deep seated hatred of people who are different from you.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

On to other issues. I would like to point out that "gay "rights"" is a great load of crap. Homosexuality is not an inborn predisposed existence. It is a choice. Why are we being barraged by these psychotic gay activist types over an issue that is not really valid in the first place?
Being a woman is a natural, honestly achieved, state of existence. Equality for women's rights makes sense. Being of a particular ethnic background is also a great and valid arena in which to support equality.
Being a homo is a lifestyle preference. Making laws that favor a lifestyle choice is no different than making laws that favor people who like the color red... and having the homosexual agenda thrown in my face at every turn is rather irritating, to say the least. I do not support any mandate that forces people to choose how they must live, so if you want to be gay- be gay, just don’t expect me to like you or what you stand for, and more importantly- what you stand against. Neither do I support laws that force me to make concessions about moral issues that I believe strongly about. It violates my right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to have to cater and bow to the gay lifestyle- it discriminates against me for being heterosexual.

As for gay marriage, this is a ridiculous proposition. Our country provides laws and regulations regarding the institution of marriage because it is a necessity founded in an institution that predates our Constitution by several millennia. As a Nation founded on Christian beliefs, the definition of marriage is derived from Genesis. This, again, predates the Constitution.

Taking religion out of the picture completely, how is homosexuality in any context in harmony with nature? It cannot possibly be right, or the species homo-sapiens would cease to exist. Being gay just aint okay. Those folks are confused, and I am no more interested in tolerating the widespread advertisement of homosexuality than I am interested in tolerating the promotion of communism, socialism, terrorism or any other "ism" that destroys the values that made this country thrive for the last 233 years. The homosexual agenda is a sure way to decay the basic traditional family unit, which has been the backbone of our society.

These gals have no right to claim they are married as a “couple” to benefit from a fishing derby discount. They should get back in the closet where they belong.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth.Now the earth was formless and empty ,darkness was over the surface of the deep.In a place known later to become huntington.There he put into the water many great numbers of catfish.and it was good.And a multitude of people came to fish,these free and public waters.And this too was good.Then came about a derby of fish,For women,an man,alike.And there was a peacefull easy feeling.Two people of any sort are a couple,plain as apples,deer,or ducks,so let them fish.No matter who they love or how they vote.FISH ON.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bob81 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"All that I have said is true and you know it, you are just a liberal and want to just get along with everyone and let everyone do what they want and how they want."

LoL! Allright, I think it is now clear rabbitpolice88 is a troll. Nice try sir...

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"That is the kind of people they are the ones that voted for oboma[sic]"
First off, that sentence doesn't make sense.
Second off, the name is spelled Obama
Third off, I will concede that gays tend to lean left politically, but so do college educated people, African Americans, and urbanites, why aren't you blaming them? they're all much bigger targets.

"they are the reason why this nation is in the strait it is in"
really? ... REALLY?
gays crashed the economy? cite your source?
gays lied about WMD's and got us into Iraq? all right under poor Mr. Cheney's nose?!? cite your source?
gays made North Korea test that nuke?! gasp!! again, please share your sources!?! (Kim Jong Il will be shocked!)

"I have a backbone and stand up for what I believe in I don't bow to the political whims"
Right! history has always shown that people who support equality for minorities have been cowards and the bigots opposing them have been brave, noble men standing up for what is right..... or did I get that backwards?

I'd say we can pretty safely say that historians will look back on gay rights and consider it the last big fight of the civil rights movement that started with woman's suffrage.

because...you know... women voters and desegregated schools... those are just "political whims"

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"All that I have said is true and you know it"
"I wasn't educated in government schools"
So you're right because you say you are? no supporting argument or evidence needed? I'm glad to see they so thoroughly covered logic at that non-government school of yours.

"I was taught to think for myself and not be good little government subjects"
Actually what you're doing right now is EXACTLY "being a good little government subject" The president and both houses of congress oppose gay marriage and several other gay rights issues.

"I wasn't brainwashed into believing that there is no right in wrong"
So all of us who went to public school believe there is no "right and wrong"... cite your source? and what were all those detentions I got about?

"you are just a liberal"
"I am one of those Christian conservatives"
Actually, it looks like you got this one backwards. Conservatives believe in limited government and not having government cronies interfere with their lives(our position). Liberals believe in using government power to cram their social views down everyone's throats (your position)

I'm sure you don't get this often, but you're the liberal in this argument.

"I would say that Bob81 doesn't even believe in the Bible."
Leviticus 19: 17-18
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke [reason with] thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord."

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Yes, ken.mcloud you are a liberal"
If the definition of "liberal" is "people who don't agree with rabbitpolice" then I guess I am one. However, if you use any kind of meaningful definition of "liberal" then you're on the liberal side of this argument.

"a bush hater"
Darn right I am! and if you call yourself a conservative you should be too. That administration did more to increase government spending and shred the constitution than any administration since FDR!

"Do you have any moral bearing whatsoever? Why don't you move to France where you would fit in with all the gays. You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup."

Gee... that's an awful lot of built up hatred for someone who calls himself a Christian! Maybe you should talk to your preacher about that? or check the bible in your truck and see what Jesus had to say about hating people?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

This had degraded to the point where it is quite entertaining.

So according to your logic, if someone is anti-discrimination then they must also be pro-Obama, pro-socialism, and pro-government healthcare? care to support your argument?

Also, those of us who believe in limited government and supporting the constitution (whatever you want to call us) were against bush's policies since before anyone knew Obama existed.

anyways, you should probably run along, isn't there something on Fox News you should be watching?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"kaboom, a total obama butt kissing liberal."

wah? did you forget to take your medication? what the heck are you talking about?

"the founding fathers meant separation of church and state to mean that there would be no state funded or run church."

Its true that this is one of the things they wanted to avoid. But there were many other situations (like this one) they also wanted to avoid. Remember, the original 13 colonies were very religiously diverse. Many of the upper class (like the founding fathers) were deists, many in the New England colonies were Puritans, Pennsylvania was mostly Quakers, Maryland was mostly Catholics, etc...

and many of these groups came here originally because their home country forced a single religion on everyone. The founding fathers wanted to avoid any one of these religious groups gaining political dominance and forcing their religion on everyone.

If your statement is true and they only wanted to avoid a state-run church the why does the constitution say "Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion or restricting the free exercise thereof"?

It would seem that if they only wanted to prevent a state run church there would have been a much better way to word it.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Reading this post has been like watching a bad tennis match: back and forth, back and forth...
I am kind of ashamed of some of the comments too. There has been some poor and utterly incomplete use of scripture. If you are going to quote the Bible, do so in context, and study the history of ancient Israel before you go hob-knobbing about Levitical Law- the laws were given for a specific reason that had many different implications then than they do now. But you would figure that out if you took it in context, with adequate background information and in its historical and metaphorical connotations.
Another tid-bit~ READ Leviticus 20:13. Then find the origin of the word "sodomy" then figure out what the Bible says happened to the place that "sodomy" was named after. Then read 1 Corinthians 6:9-20, and all of chapter 7.
Don't argue that the Bible has nothing to say against homosexuality. There is not comment supporting homosexuality in the Bible either- An no, David and Jonathan did not love each other sexually- it is a reference to one of three root meanings of love-"agape love"- again, look up the root and context for that.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sb Wacker wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Gentleman I’m proud of you, the majority of you have shown yourselves to be educated, liberty loving, tolerant and educated men. In doing so have confounded the tired ‘bubba’ stereotype of the American sportsman. If anyone is going to reinvigorate the outdoor traditions, it’s you. Well played.

To Ken re Rabittpolice88

‘You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup’

Well there’s an offer you don’t get every day eh Ken?
I think he likes you but is too shy to say so.

Regards
SBW

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from aragonnapoles wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

O.K. The apology was done,All We bloggers receipt a cascade of information about laws,moral,the bible etc.
Can we came back to outdoors?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

also, lets point something out here that seems to have slipped through the cracks. There are two separate issues being tossed around and they have nothing to do with each other.

#1)Should Christians accept gays?
#2)Should the government treat gays as equals?

Though I may disagree with rabbitpolice and rager2 on the first question, I will at least accept that there is a valid disagreement among Christians on the issue.

As for question #2, it has NOTHING to do with question #1. We DO NOT live in a Christian theocracy. The role of the government is NOT to enforce Christian dogmas. There are a whole lot of religions in this country. Many of them accept gays as equals and those people pay their taxes just like you do.

Using the government's power to force your religious views on those people is no better than what the English did by forcing their religion on everyone. Avoiding things like this was one of the main reasons our country was founded.

We ARE NOT a Christian nation! We are a FREE nation predominantly populated and founded by Christians!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from weve_25 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Good advice buckhunter
People (including myself) are too quick to pass judgement on people who do things we don't agree with or understand. Judgement isn't ours to pass, sooner or later we will all be judged and each and everyone of us will get what we deserve.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella, Bella, Bella...

Where do I start? How about with you first spewage at rabbitpolice...

"For your information the word "lesbian" isn't mentioned even once in the Bible, so as far as that goes, Lesbians must be nearly perfected beings requiring no admonitions from YhWh at all. The Bible spends much more space admonishing heterosexuals than gay people."

This statement is plainly STUPID. The word lesbian was derived from the Greek Isle of Lesbos, from the poet Sappho. It was not traced to exist in language until the 1800s and did not become common until the mid 1900’s…therefore it was NOT A WORD when the Bible was written. Gay is not in the Bible either. HOMOSEXUAL is in the Bible… (which means lesbians too, DUH!) All references to homosexuality in scripture ARE admonitions. Why do you hold such high regard for lesbianism anyhow? I bet you wear the pants, and your girlfriend does the skirt thing in your “relationship” eh? Don’t try to play semantics here, you are out of your league.
The Bible does go on to admonish all heterosexual relations that are held outside of the original design of marriage between one man and one woman. Being a slut is as morally corrupt as being homosexual- let alone homosexual sluts, but that is another topic altogether.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Your comment above reminds me of the comment made by rabbitpolice: you are like a leaf in the wind, blowing wherever it will. The argument was weak. Religion is so complex and complicated that no human can understand it all, some of us just study harder than others, and whereby are less confused. Yes there is truth scattered amongst all varieties of religion, some just contain far more complete and objective versions of it. I guess the comment about Jesus being the Inspirer of ALL the scripture went by you as well, another one of those complicated God made flesh concepts that you are ignoring- so He did, through the writings of the prophets, speak against homosexuality.
Paul did indeed meet Jesus, on the road to Damascus, after the ascension, but I am sure you refute that, because you are busy trying to figure out which "truth" you want to fabricate for yourself.
Acts 9:1-6
1Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples. He went to the high priest 2and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.
3As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"
5"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.
"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6"Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."
I would say it was a meeting that left quite an impression on Paul, wouldn’t you?

As for what the scripture contains, if you have faith that GOD inspired the Biblical scriptures and has preserved it accurately over the millennia, as was proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls, then you would have confidence that the items that belong in it are included.

The 10 Commandments are a summary of two categories of Law, respect and love for GOD, and respect and love for man... the details of which are included throughout the rest of the Book... but you have to read it and have a sound understanding of it (as best a human can) to reconcile all of the passages that refer back to the Big 10. Keeping the Law is indeed complicated, and understanding historical, cultural, and the pre and post Messianic evolution of faith in God the Creator helps sort out the particulars. Once again, it is a matter of dedicated study.
And yeah, there have been many a great and accomplished homosexuals. They can be great people in many a regard, and their sin is indeed no greater a sin in the eyes of God's law than gluttony, profanity, or even forgetfulness. The issue is the destructive nature of their behavior, on both a personal, and societal level. Living in a constant state of sin, or separation from God, is a statement of rejection of God. This goes the same for live-in couples who do not marry- but that is not the primary salient point here. If homosexuality is kept to themselves it is a personal issue, if it is drug out into the public square as it has globally in recent years, it becomes a personal issue to everyone. Once again, keep it in the closet, and I will keep my beliefs in the closet, ere I say the battle is in full swing, and I, and the multitudes like me, did not fire the first shot.
I only arbitrate what I have come to understand from the teachings of Christ, nothing of myself. If I have piqued your conscience, it was from no personal motivation. I would rather we all lived in harmony, but because of the fallen state of this earth, that will only be for those who accept the grace of Christ and see the Kingdom.

And as for the age calculations, you miss-credited me with that statement, it was someone else. I will just comment that for a woman of 50, you really show a lack of maturity.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

So true John A., the catfish do not care regarding the genderpreferences of those who hold the Rod. (singing...)
So Hold to the Rod, the fiberglass Rod, it is strong and flexible too, The Fishing Rod will catch fish from trout to Cod if you have a lure that will do...

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All of this over a lousy buck? How bout this; post their address here and I will personally mail them a check to shut them up.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from weve_25 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

rabbitpolice88
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Leviticus 19: 17-18
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke [reason with] thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord.""

"Um, that is not from the Bible"

Really?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

"Again look up what the Bible says about homosexuals! Just do that and all this arguing will cease."

umm.... how?

It seems to me that the constitution is pretty specific about the whole "separation of church and state" deal?

The bible can dictate how you lead your life, it CANNOT dictate how the government deals with its citizens.

and by the way, the bible also says that you should sacrifice a lamb when you sin, stone your kids when they talk back, and that the earth is 6000 years old.

Should the government enforce these too?

what criteria are you using to select the ones you want enforced?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from peter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

the lesbos overeacted and the guy did nothin wrong

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

so first off,

The 2008 Republican ticket consisted of John Mccain and Sarah Palin. I'm not sure who these macCane and and palan people are? (by the way, I love how the C in the middle of the word is capitalized, but the m at the beginning is not)

All you have to do now is misspell "Biden" and you'll win a prize!!

As for who I voted for-
I'm surprised someone who declares themselves as such a strong conservative has never heard of the Libertarian Party?

I voted for Bob Barr, I'm not a big fan of the man himself, but I agree with his party's platform more than the other two. Plus, I don't live in a battle ground state, so the electoral college system means that my vote doesn't matter, so I might as well use it to support a third party that holds my beliefs.

but what does any of this have to do with the topic at hand?

Warning: its pretty clear that you don't have enough knowledge on the topic to keep the argument exciting, if someone else doesn't pipe up on the anti-gay side, I'm afraid this thread will loose its appeal.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

So you voted for a man who called our troops " occupying forces" and didn't think it was good to be in Iraq. If you can support a man who doesn't support our troops than you have some serious issues.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from logan.vandermay wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ranger2
well written.
I am also tired of having this shoved in my face. I could care less if someone is gay. I just get tired of the racism card being pulled out all the time.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ahh rabbitpolice, the things I miss because the laptop goes down...
For your information the word "lesbian" isn't mentioned even once in the Bible, so as far as that goes, Lesbians must be nearly perfected beings requiring no admonitions from YhWh at all. The Bible spends much more space admonishing heterosexuals than gay people.

Again I see this assumption that the Old Testament applies to persons who are not Semitic. The Old Testament is quite clear that Hebrews and Jews are the chosen of YHWH and not others. The only homophobic statements in the New Testament are not the words of Yeshua (Jesus) but of Paul, who never met Yeshua and often made stuff up as he went along. THERE IS NO CONDEMNATION OF HOMOSEXUALITY OF ANY KIND ATTRIBUTED TO THE ACTUAL RECORDED WORDS OF JESUS. I wonder often why supposed "christians" persist in claiming that the Bible excuses their personal hatreds.
I also wish to inform you rabbitpolice, that ones sexual preference is not and cannot be a choice, except for bisexuals. If you are a gay man, pictures of naked women will not excite you, however much one might desire such stimulation. Conversely can you, rabbitpolice convince yourself to get excited over pictures of studly men? If such behaviors were a choice, then it would follow that such choice would be possible, but "Richard" usually has a mind of his own, doesn't he?
Remember in the book of Acts, we find out that the first nonJew to accept christianity was an Ethiopian Eunich. Do you think for a moment he had a choice in the matter? Phillip certainly wasn't put off and appreciated the lift on the eunichs chariot!
Puzzeled about what Jesus had to say about eunichs?
Read Mathew 19,verses 11 and 12 (caution it isn't particularly homophobic).
As far as the cat fishin derby goes, if they want a couples discount it should apply to everyone or no-one. Be fishers of men!
Finally rabbitpolice, if you were homeschooled you are no advertisement for private schooling. Plainly, your education included no rhetoric and damn little spelling.
Perhaps whoever educated you, used the opportunity to inoculate your innocent mind with their own personal prejudices, as plainly you have been taught much that is egregiously inaccurate. Go back to school rabbitpolice, higher education broadens the mind, especially after a sufficient number of remedial courses. Do this and when you troll in the future you wouln't appear quite so much a fool.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ranger2, your arguments don't hold water either. A gay porson, male female or inbetween does not discriminate against you for being heterosexual, just for demanding to be treated equally under the law. Also, you have no right to impose your prejudices on anyone else. If you were actually a christian you would apply the Golden Rule, that you "love one another as I have loved you" instead of imposing your own moral perversion (homophobia) on others who would normally have nothing to do with you.
Homosexual relationships are NOT the the "threat to the American family". Divorce and the fact that people get married for specious reasons or do not honor their commitments to one another are the threat to families. The assumption that "gay marriage" is a threat is purest scapegoating by persoins who can't handle their own relationships.
As a trained Sociologist, I would suggest that a primary aspect of familial impairment is that the so called "nuclear family" never was a stable institution. It is certainly not "natural" to define a "traditional" family as Mom, Dad and some kids. The natural family unit for human beings is the extended family, where Mom and Dad live with Grandma and Grandad along with uncles and aunts (and their kids). The nuclear family was an institution that evolved in the industrial age, where extended families were excluded from company housing and extended families broke up as individuals had to move to follow employment. Now that the age of the industrial revolution is being superceeded by the age of information (and the industry goes away for good) the weaknesses of the nuclear family are being laid bare. The problem is that nuclear families lack the support system that extended families afford individuals. If mom needs to leave the kids to work, gramma and auntie can watch kids. If Dad has to go a hundred and fifty miles to fetch something needful, the family isn't undefended if uncle and grandpa are about.
Nuclear families are vulnerable by nature and tend to isolate people, it takes a village to raise a child.
Some will suggest that extended families are a relic of the agricultural age (now also gone Here, but not in most of the world) but by this token, one must expect new family structures to arise. Unsuprisingly, new familial structures are arising, families by choice for one; where persons choose their "families" and treat them like kin. Polyamorous familial situations are also not uncommon today, as people learn that loving another doesn't mean the lover is enslaved or owned by their partner and discover in themselves the capacity to love more than one or two other individuals at a time.
So there are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dealt with in your philosophies, Ranger2. I would also suggest you reread the words of Your Savior, and see where he actually sanctions your personal prejudices.
In other words, if you don't like homosexuality, don't have sex with men! Otherwise it ain't none of your business dude.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ranger2-

first off, thank you for an infinitely better thought out post than anything rabbitpolice had to say.

second off,
I firmly disagree that homosexuality is a choice, I'm unsure whether the cause is nature, nurture, or both but I've met a too many gays who were otherwise "normal" to conclude that they chose the make themselves societal outcasts.

as for the assertion that our species wouldn't exist if a small portion of the population was homosexual; its absurd! That small portion just doesn't reproduce, the rest of the species does, and life goes on. We have diseases that cause infertility, yet we're still around, think about it.

We have accounts of homosexuals going back to the beginning of recorded history (Ancient Egypt) and we have no reason to believe they didn't exist even before then. The species has been doing just fine.

as for laws "favoring" gay people-
You use that terminology quite often in your post, please name one? seriously, a single law. I can think of a couple that give gay people equality with strait people, but not a single one that favors gay people OVER strait people. Please enlighten me.

as for having it "thrown in your face"
I think you and I have some common ground here. Believe it or not (IRONY) a lot of people I know consider me a homophobe. This seeming contradiction comes from the fact that while I do think they should have equal protection under the law, the stereotypical hyper-feminine gay men get under my skin and bug me. A lot like hyper feminine, prissy, stuck up women do.

I can understand why the law requires organizations that take government money to treat everyone equally. The tax money came from everyone, straits and gays, so everyone should have an equal opportunity to benefit from it.

However, in cases like this one, I disagree with the discrimination law as it stands. I assume the Lion's club was not government funded in any way, it was just a private organization offering a public competition. In my humble (limited government) opinion, the pro-gay people don't have any more right to use the government's power to force their opinion on everyone than the anti-gay people do.

I know this will never happen, but I believe that if you are a private organization you should be able to spew as much hatred, bigotry, or ignorance as you want. As long as you're not forcing it on anyone. The job of stopping that kind of behavior should fall on peoples conscience / religion / moral compass, not on the government.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from steve182 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I wonder if the broads caught any catfish?!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from cverstrate wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

At the risk of sounding as stupid as the rabbit guy, I would also say that the lesbians are in the blatant wrong on this one. They only make their case worse in the eyes of common sense people everywhere by suing over a lousy buck.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I think that Raney made a mistake in not identifying the girl-girl couple and giving the buck discount. I applaud the couple for not making too big of an issue of it in only seeking a written apology. If this same thing had happened to myself and my wife, I would probably expect some sort of apology. I do get irked at the quirkey social status and demands to be recognized as a different demographic than the normal "couple". What would be the point of having a straight pride day and then feeling it necessary to get the towns mayor to sign off in approval of the event. Isn't it about being free to choose, and not being treated differently?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I'm just throwing this out there, but I think Jesus would agree buckhunter.

Loving your fellow man makes the world a better place, regardless of whether or not they hold your religious beliefs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Ken, I'm afraid that Raney wouldn't have given you the $1 couples discount for loving your fellow man. :)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Oh and where do you get the inane notion that I think the neocons caused 1911, don't you actually read anything? I am by no means a left wing radical, I have some attitudes that are "left" some a little righty and a bunch of notions that are downright perpendicular to either. You have some peculiar notions or you are trying to be insulting and failing badly. Don't charicterize me, I am far too old to be a leaf in the wind, my roots run too deep. You say you are still in college? you a young sprout and likely ain't seen too much of the world yet. It ain't quite the way you think.
I'll say one thing, minds are like parachutes, they only work when open.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

You should be ashamed for even saying such things. What if a lady comes on the website and reads that crap? Everything I have said could have been said in front of a lady without her blushing from embarrassment.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

One to the debate of choice and behaviors… ken.mcloud, this is for you too…
“…ones sexual preference is not and cannot be a choice, except for bisexuals.” Once again, an INSANE statement. The choice of performing sexual acts is no less a choice than choosing bologna over pastrami. I agree that homosexual tendencies can be the natural bent for people, but we never have fully understood many mental illnesses. What a person chooses to do about those tendencies is where the choice comes about. As previously stated, homosexuality is not in harmony with nature and choosing to engage in homosexual acts is WRONG. One’s organs do not call the shots, Bella. I am positive that you do not know the first thing about “Richard” anyhow. The mind is “Richard’s” keeper, not vice-versa. Any notion to the contrary is an excuse to be a relativist, vacillating, spineless coward that wants to blame their actions on anything but their conscious ability to make choices.
ken.mcloud- my reference to the natural selection process and homosexuality- I was referring to the hypothetical consideration that if all humans at a given point of time, were solely homosexual, the race would cease to exist. Yes, homos have been around a long time, but they do not reproduce and pass on their genetics or values to natural offspring, therefore under the context of homos propagating, it does not occur without heterosexual activity.
Using the Ethiopian Eunuch to support your argument for homosexuality is moot as well. Matthew 19 is how Jesus responds to the Pharisees questions about marital laws, and specifically divorce- you have taken it out of context entirely. Eunuchs were not intended to marry because they could not fulfill the consummation of the marriage relationship- they were not by default gay, but celibate. Men who are effeminate for what ever reason do not equate to being homosexual. I have no reason to be wary of effeminate men. Should they choose to not be homosexual.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

How do you ask, Bella, and ken.mcloud, do these anti-discrimination laws do that very thing? When California faced a bill in 2006 forcing schools to celebrate gay historical figures- (AB 606 and AB 1056), or the introduction of the pro gay curriculum centered around the book targeted to children about the gay penguins- “And Tango Makes Three” which was intended to be taught to children as young as 5. Or the antidiscrimination cases brought against people who refused services to homosexuals based on moral principles- like the photographer from Oregon (I believe) that refused work at a gay ceremony, because he did not support homosexuality. Gay “rights” laws are designed to effectively prevent people from exercising their conscience, because, “it might hurt Adam and Thteveth’s feelingth”. Once again, being homosexual is a choice, not a natural existence, and if I have to desist from speaking out against the practice, and refusing to be involved with homosexuals on any level, it violates my conscience, my freedom of speech, my freedom to choose an appropriate education for my children, and it threatens my non-gay lifestyle. Did you not hear any of the backlash from the homosexual community regarding the results of prop. 8? The homos had riots, attacked people, terrorized people and churches. They were the intolerants, they were aggressive, they were the ones who could not handle the fair arm of democracy.
If a person wants to be gay, go for it. But don’t expect me to throw out the welcome mat, and pat them on the back while telling them that it is their own reality, and that gay is okay, if it is okay for them. Forget it, being gay is not okay. I am willing to tell any homo that homosexuality is wrong, without bashing their face, or otherwise causing bodily harm. And I will not give them special status as a minority group, if they choose to be gay, they choose to be isolated.
I have done what I can to present the evidence- I am sure I missed plenty. I will not be surprised, Bella, if I did not change your mind, though. But that is okay, changing a mind like that is like changing diapers… it is putrid to start with, and no matter how much effort you put into changing it, it will be filled with the same old poop again before too long.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

And to the rest of you guys, have some backbone. We do not have to go out and beat the hell out of people for choosing to be gay, but calmly, firmly, stick to your guns; wrong is wrong.

And to clear up this buzz word: homophobic~
It is not really all that accurate. I am not "afraid" of homosexuals. They do not frighten me in the slightest. I have a conscious disrespect for their choice in lifestyle and have the courage to openly disagree with it, like I disrespect terrorists, and sleazy, slimy, liberal excuse making bottom feeders.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Wow, Ranger2 you sir are incredible! I know I am not the poster boy for the perfect argument in any way, or for anything else for that matter. I do however know what I believe, why I believe it and what is right and wrong. Thank you for the wonderful read, it is written clear as a bell.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella,
This is a serious question, I have an application on my computer that allows me to zoom in on anything I want, are you gay? I am asking because your profile pic doesn't look like a woman. Some Americans did fight back maybe you recall United flight 93 that crashed in PA? Those men and women died defending their country, they were the very first casualties in the war on terror. The Bush administration was not asleep at the wheel, they were only in office a few months before 9/11, they had a bunch of crap to deal with from the Clinton administration. Again, if you want to blame someone for 9/11 why don't you blame Clinton for not taking him from the Saudis. Especially after the first trade center bombings. As to everything regarding the law in the old testiment from the Bible, we as Christians are no longer under the law. That happened when Jesus died for our sins and the vale was torn in two at the temple. All this to say that we live in a time of grace and are no longer under the law. That means we don't get struck dead because we take the Lords name in vain. What it comes down to Bella is either you believe the word of God or you do not. Either you believe That Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived sinless in this world and died on the cross for our sins. For those that would repent of theirs sins, knowing that they are at emnity with the Father and must repent of their sins and ask Jesus to forgive them and come into their heart or you do not. When you stand before Jesus when you die what are you going to say? I lived the best life I could, I tried to live with my fellow man in peace and harmony. That will not cut it, you must be born again. I (Jesus) am the way the truth and the life, no man comes unto the Father accept through me. John 14:6, For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God Romans 3: 23 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8 For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord Romans 6:23 Either you believe these words of the Bible or you do not Bella. It is a choice, a decision you must make, you accept Jesus, that he died for your sins or you do not.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella dear, its okay, I am not a hate monger, I don't even hate you. I feel sorry for you, but do not hate you. I don't hate homosexuals. I vehemently disagree with them, and if you cannot accept faith or science as evidence, that is okay too. As I mentioned hate the sin, love the sinner... part of loving the sinner is, at times, pointing out the sin~ which people do to me on a regular basis~ which I appreciate. It is no reason to spit venom.
You should really look into the cotton poly shirt thing- there is a specific connotation that was relevant at the time, and understanding that would help you figure out why it was written, but I will leave that to you, as I have provided a plethora of scriptural evidence for my position, as you have attempted to do, and now you are saying that it is invalid. Which leads me to believe that you don't believe the Bible anyways. I am learning the Greek New Testamant, I do not KNOW it, but English works pretty well most of the time. You appear to me to be a Humanist by faith. Good luck with that, I hope it works out for you in the long run. I am pretty confident with my belief system.

I hope that you at least will reconcile that good and evil are polarized- one cannot abide with the other... the result of that understanding shoud at least direct people to strive to accept the gift of grace, the Love of Christ, and the will power to do what He commands.

I also sincerely hope this little converation does not leave you bitter. At least I know that I won't loose any sleep over it :)

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I will admit I have encountered too many of the Westboro Baptist types and they always disgust me...
This is the internet and you are whatever you say you are. Whether I am gay or straight is nobodies business (other than my husband), Do I need to have a reason to defend the rights of my friends from what I see as bigotry and discrimination? I also don't think the be all and end all of human relationships should not be based on who penetrates who. I also disagree with the whole "father knows best" patriarchal chauvanism. My Feminism alone leads me to defend my queer friends and their rights and I get so tired of the hubris I see expressed by fundamentalists who insist that their illogical constructs be considered the only valid answer to complex situations.
Besides neither of you antigay type people still have any explanation as to why if being gay is soo bad why it isn't in the 10 commandments...God didn't care about sodomites in that chapter? Otherwise you are still picking and choosing the ones you like from Leviticus and not going with the whole program. I still think you are using scripture to justify your personal prejudices.
My biggest problem with the Old Testiment is that it suggests that God condones genocide. The wholesale slaughters committed by Joshua, the incidences where the Israelites take cities and kill every man,woman, child, sheep and dog. All at the command of YHWH.
How can such slaughter be considered the will of a loving creator. Any book that condones homophobia and genocide cannot be considered a useful guide to morality. My morality excludes both genocide and homophobia. Maybe you think the extermination of peoples is Godly, but I certainly don't.
I am glad to hear that the ranger and the rabbitguy aren't hate mongers, but how about the judging the fellow men business...Let he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

THANKS BELLA,I ENJOY YOUR POSTS.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Working definition of an evangelical christian: Knows all 10 Commandments and keeps none of them. Knows all 10 Amendments and wants none of them.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Nope, I'm not. I've yet to meet an evangelical that didn't have themselves confused with god, and that's C1. As for posting the 10c in courthouses; as noted, most evangelicals talk alot about the 10c even though they don't keep 'em. But turning the 10c into a monument in a courthouse where one supposes the First Amendment matters shows considerable disregard for the US constitution.

Myself, I don't understand all the bullshit directed against homosexuals. My two sons would be safer in a room full of new orleans drag queens than in a room full of evangelical ministers. IMO, there's something about that sort of biblical-literalist authoritarianism that attracts pervs to the pulpit.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

I FOR THE MOST PART AM AN IGNORANT MAN.UNEDUCATED AND CRUDE.AND FOR WHAT ITS WORTH I BELIVE THAT HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY.THUMBS UP MR,DIEHL.X2

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"you haven't known very many christians have you?"

Actually I have. The obvious hypocrasy of most evangelicals claiming to speak on behalf of god as though they have a priviliged voice pipe to the divine, the idol worship in which hordes of people fawn over TVangelists, and the stunningly gaudy icons that they create for themselves really strikes me as wholly at odds with both the letter and spirit of C1. I was raise congregationalists but it's the undeniable baloney of the organized churches that really put me off my feed, faith wise.

"I believe you are mixing the catholic churches priests with baptist preachers."

You haven't been keeping up with the news for the last, oh, four decades have you? I find it interesting that the authoritarian faiths ALL seem to have this problem. And it's really not limited to christianity. Where you have hierarchies of privilege and power, it attracts the worst moral elements of human society, in my opinion. I'm not saying that all the laity in the faiths are that way; I'm saying there's something inherently wrong and suspect about people who are that attracted to authority, IMO of course.

"Oh, and I love the way you give yourself the plus one, it's like blowing your own horn."

I had a +2 going for a while, but some chickenturd knocked me back.

"not to mean that government and religion can't have anything to do with each other."

You are not correct.

"That is why the constitution and the bill if rights and all the founding documents have God in them ( imagine that) and you say that America was not founded as a christian nation?"

America was not in fact founded as a christian nation. It was founded by people who included deists, christians of various faiths and some bona fide agnostics. Haven't researched EVERY conferee, but I would not be surprised if there were some people of Jewish faith too. The vast majority of them shared a suspicion of people who wanted to formally marry faith with politics. That is why, for example, the 10 Commandments aren't actually written into the Constitution. There's nothing in there about a national day off on Sundays (or whichever sabbath you want), there's nothing in there about roasting a lamb every time Congress meets because meat smoke is pleasing to the lord, etc.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

You have no ability to present anything with class or maturity. You did not have a good answer for anything I wrote, not one. You just hummed and hawed around everything, If you can't come up with something better I will find someone else to debate with.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

"You have no ability to present anything with class or maturity."

That'd be a pot-kettle thing if in fact I had done anything w/o class or maturity, thereby sinking to your level. Look, dood, you haven't offered anything other than your opinion. I don't agree with your opinion about the philosophical origins of the constitution, having myself read the fed papers, many of jefferson's letters, as well as those of Adams, Franklin, Madison and others. The fact that you're attacking me rather than offering evidence illustrates your lack of knowledge in the matter, your lack of evidence to support your argument, and frankly, your lack of character.

"I will find someone else to debate with."

That works for me. We're trading opinions here. I'm not demanding that you buy mine but where you assert a privileged point of view you're just up an irrational creek, IMO. If you can't argue to the argument, rather than directing childish jibes at me, then really neither I nor anyone else need to hear from you.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

@Rabbitpolice -

Please bear in mind I have no desire to convert you to some other faith. I merely rebut your claims about christianity being the underpinning of the US constitution, and the derived modern political activism of evangelicals that seeks to make their faith (which I find very peculiar) into the law of the land.

One can research any number of founding fathers. Probably the most oft mentioned fellow is Jefferson. Here are some excerpts from his writings. Please note his extremely skeptical outlook on members of the clergy and peddlers of organized religion to intervene in political matters. Elsewhere you will see that Jefferson does on dozens of occasions assert that all faith is a private matter between a person and their notion of god. That makes Jefferson a deist, at least insofar as his public philosophy, and openly expresses a demand for tolerance of all faiths.

With that in mind, here are some key quotes, with references to which you may refer for extended reading. These came from a University of Virginia website.

I have ever thought religion a concern purely between our God and our consciences, for which we were accountable to Him, and not to the priests." --Thomas Jefferson to Mrs. M. Harrison Smith, 1816. ME 15:60
"From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:545
"Religion is a subject on which I have ever been most scrupulously reserved. I have considered it as a matter between every man and his Maker in which no other, and far less the public, had a right to intermeddle." --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1813.
"Whenever... preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put [their congregation] off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art of science." --Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:281
"Ministers of the Gospel are excluded [from serving as Visitors of the county Elementary Schools] to avoid jealousy from the other sects, were the public education committed to the ministers of a particular one; and with more reason than in the case of their exclusion from the legislative and executive functions." --Thomas Jefferson: Note to Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:419
"No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools] inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Elementary School Act, 1817. ME 17:425
"I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith." --Thomas Jefferson to Michael Megear, 1823. ME 15:434
"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moor, 1800.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

BTW, the statement to PH Wendover is an explicit rejection of the efforts of religious activists to meddle in the affairs of teachers in such matters as, for example, biological science and the origins of species through natural selection.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kkeltic wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Just get rid of the couples discount.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Hoo boy!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

shane-

That's word for word out of the King James Bible. with the exception of the comment in the square brackets (of course)

Maybe our friend is using a different translation?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I guess this is the time when right becomes wrong and wrong becomes right. People start to loose all moral bearings and think the Bible is a joke. When you die and stand before your creator you will see who was right.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

To Bella,
I am in college have a job farming, people make choices in life and there are consequences for those choices. Don't even try and pass the bunch of bs off the gays can't help themselves or they were born that way. They made a choice, that is what life is, decisions you have to make.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Rabbit, having quoted the bible a bit here, am I to assume you're a christian? ANd if you are, how do you handle "treat others are you yourself would like to be treated"? Just curious.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

koldcut,
I tell it how I see it and I don't hold back. I expect nothing else in return. I do not mince my words and I don't mind when people talk to me the same way.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ken.mcloud wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Koldkut-

LMAO!

Thanks

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Don Mitchell wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

boy oh boy,has this been fun or what,? lol,

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I find it interesting that this story is front page news on Lambda Legals website, Lambdalegal.org which is evidently a very large gay rights law firm.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FloridaHunter1226 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All over 1 dollar? Are you kidding me! I am not afraid that I believe that marriage is a bond between a man and a women... not a man and a man or vice versa. These are just people looking for money. I can not believe they would file such charges just for a dollar... they must have been really offended.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Oh bunnyman, I didn't start with the crass behavior, unless you think everything you write is picture perfect and everything I write isn't. I am pointing out the double standards that you plainly hold dear.
Since when do Christians only get to discuss religion? Somebody calls you out on your beliefs and you can dish it out but you can't take it! As far as Ego-dystonic homosexuality goes it is in the Diagnostic Standards Manual (every version since DSM#3) if you don't like it go yell at the American Psychiatric Association, I didn't invent it. And I do think though doest protest too much, really.
Using your twisted hateful version of Christianity to justify your hatred isn't what your Jesus had in mind, if you think you are actually practicing christianity by preaching any sort of hate you should go hang out with the Westboro Baptist heretics who even protest at the burials of our war dead! If you think yourself qualified to make pronouncements about dogma, did you go to seminary? (I had 5 years of seminary) If God talks to you personally and tells you such hateful things then I might suggest you see a shrink and get some antipsychotics, then the voices will stop for a while...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

crm3006
Glad to hear from somebody from the South! I live in GA. I didn't realize until just now that bella is a woman, that is a little interesting.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Why do you think that the Old Testament is not for Contemporary Christians- Christ said Himself in Matthew 5:17, 18:

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
The early church only had the Old Testament, and the teaching of Christ to learn by. The New Testament Letters were not compiled as we know them for centuries.
If you want to really get down to the root of the Bible, Jesus Christ is a member of the Trinity, one with God, so he is as much the Creator as Yahweh. The Bible was an inspired writing, so Christ night as well have spoken the words recorded from His ministry on earth… which means Jesus detested homosexuality to the utmost.
Why must you persist to bad mouth Paul? The single most significant conversion experience known to man, and a man who did more to spread the Gospel than any other early Christian- you think he “often made stuff up as he went along”? Just because your feeble mind cannot grasp the inspired teachings of Paul does not mean you should bash his writings.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ranger2 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

More on “gay” rights and its role in moral decay, especially regarding familial structure.
Bella, it is valid for you to bring up all the factors that you have regarding the decay of the extended family structure, that divorce, marrying for poor reasons, etc. are all problems. Gay marriage is simply one more mutation of the family structure that promotes immorality in society. No scapegoating involved, just calling a spade a spade. And by the way, your mistaken assumption that I cannot handle my own relationships could not be farther from the truth~ I am over a decade partnered with a wonderful Godly woman raising four children in a home of love, emotional security, moral integrity, and enlightenment. My wife holds it all together, really, and I do the best I can to support her. So don’t go popping of with the inadequacy of my ability to function in healthy, meaningful relationships, as designed be the Creator.
As for my own “moral perversion and personal prejudices” as you have pointed out, these are in harmony with Christ’s teachings. You are the one who is confused. Specifically, I never promoted the aggressive persecution of homosexuals. The government of God was established as a free will society- I live by that. But it is also not free from consequences. I have the capacity to “love the sinner…” but I do however “Hate the sin”. Good and evil cannot co-exist, so you have to choose one or the other, you can’t have both. Christ could not abide evil - After His temptation in Mathew 4:10 He said with a voice of pure, raw, authority, “AWAY FROM ME, SATAN.” He drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip. Twice. To the woman at the well in John 4:1-38, He read her guilt like an open book, laid plain her transgression, and bade her change her ways. To the adulteress in John 8: 1-11, He not only saved the woman’s life by keeping her from being stoned by the mob, He made her realize the depth of her iniquity, and His parting words were: “…Go now, and leave your life of sin.”
This is what has stirred my disgust. Our society has begun to take this attitude that there is not hard line in the sand when it comes to right and wrong. It is a relative morality, that encourages “your own truth”. “Do what works for you”. I certainly do not have all the answers, and I make my share of mistakes, but I have the courage to stand up and call wrong by its true name.
When people think that it is wrong to call homosexuality an abomination, wrong to chide its perversity for the sake of “tolerance”, and that I have to stand by idly and subject my children to this debauchery, then they have another thing coming.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

By "him" I meant Osama Bin Laden

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Hoo Boy or should I say Oy Vey!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

Tell me mike diehl, if that is the case why has there been such a big battle in several states between the gov. and christians to get the ten commandments in the courthouses? You sir are full of it.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

oh good lord, now you are just blowing hot air. None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles. You just believe that because that is what the government taught you in school. I am talking about actual ordinary every day christians the ones that are in church on Sunday instead of sleeping in. Not the tv preachers, I have no respect for them whatsoever. You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

That is the kind of people they are the ones that voted for oboma and a socialist AMerica if you want to defend them go ahead, they are the reason why this nation is in the strait it is in. I have a backbone and stand up for what I believe in I don't bow to the political whims of the time or the politically correct.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I wasn't educated in government schools so therefore I was taught to think for myself and not be good little government subjects. I wasn't brainwashed into believing that there is no right in wrong in this world. THere is right and wrong and homosexuality is wrong.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, I am one of those Christian conservatives from the south that carries a Bible and a gun in my pickup. Why don't yall go and see what the Bible has to say about homosexuals. I would say that Bob81 doesn't even believe in the Bible.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, ken.mcloud you are a liberal, a bush hater. Tell me do you even know what right and wrong is? Do you have any moral bearing whatsoever? Why don't you move to France where you would fit in with all the gays. You could even start wearing super tight jeans and let your hair grow long and wear makeup.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Again look up what the Bible says about homosexuals! Just do that and all this arguing will cease.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

oh and by the way the founding fathers meant separation of church and state to mean that there would be no state funded or run church. Like the church of England, Yet another falsehood you learned in government schools.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

ken.mcloud you voted for obama, because if you hate bush then you hate macCane and palan and all the liberal agenda stuff you have been gleaning from the liberal media in this country goes to show you are a liberal and I would wager you voted for obama, or did you vote at all?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

There is that word "tolerant" again, another word for being soft and having no back bone.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ggmack wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

I agree this is bull hockey. Seems to me that they were looking for an issue to exploit.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Yes, you did start the crude and crass talk. I never talked about such disgusting low down homosexual innuendo. You are the one with the filthy mouth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from crm3006 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

rabbitpolice88-
Hey guy, I hate to tell you, but I have calculated Bella's stated history and accomplishments, and if you ain't figured it out yet, she has got to be about 323 or 324 years old! Now, I'm not sure where you are from, but where I'm at, that adds up to TROLL! Nothing else can live that long, be that crass and annoying, or know so much. Just be glad that she is in one of those damnyankee New England states that keep electing Kennedy the murderer and not down here where the good folks live. Love to hear the whine when you score points, though!

BTW, Bella, Neocons didn't cause 1911. John Moses Browning invented the worlds greatest handgun.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Gee ranger2 your math must work like Bishop Usher's, but FYI I am 50, and a girl can get a lot done in half century.
The assertion is made that homosexuality is "unnatural" when in fact it is not uncommon in the wild , occurring in about the same incidence as in humanity, about 10%.
The assertion is also made that gay cultural heros are being pushed into school curriculums, How about Leonardo Da Vinci and Alexander the Great, shall we expunge them because of their sexual proclivity? How about J. Edgar Hoover (perhaps that one we might edit out). J. Edgar is your prime example of an Ego-Dystonic Homosexual and his particular pecularities ("Mary") were well documented.
I understand quite well that in your version of Christianity homosexuality is wrong but there are many many sects in Christianity see the homophobia as wrong, who is to say who the heretic is? Are any of you prophets, to grant new revelation? and if so, why should anybody listen to you? Again, if you read the words attributed to Jesus, not once does he condemn homosexuality. Only Paul does that, and he never met Jesus, not once so why should anything he wrote be considered gospel? The whole question as to which books should even be in the bible kinda hinges on the Byzantine Emperor Constantine, who ordered the counsel of Nicea (the convocation of Bishops that decided which books would be canon and which books excluded). As a result Books like the book of Jubilees and the book of Mary were considered apocryphal while Paul (who never met Jesus) was considered more politically acceptable and included. As a result of this the Koran contains more information about the young Jesus than the New Testiment does. But hey, Christianity has been tainted by politics since the day they nailed Jesus up.
As to what religion I believe in? I believe in them all, because Truth is everywhere and I have studied every religion from Buddhism to Zoroastrianism and I can say without qualm that every one of em is true to some extent. Every believer is just as fervent as you Ranger2, and just as convinced of the sanctity of their dogma. There are a few cults, created to mislead and exploit people ( the mormons, scientologists, the moonies) but even these had to have some particle of truth in them or they never would have attracted anybody. The be all and end all is that each of us interacts with Deity in our own way and therefore as we are not telepathic there is actually something over 6 billion different religions, as many as the minds of men. Organized religion is kinda like herding cats therefore because imposing some common dogma on society is always going to be effected by divergence of minds (but that is politics again). I understand that Ranger2 thinks his view of the infinite is the sole acceptable worldview but in the grand scheme of things my own position is just as valid and likely closer to the actual teachings of the great Rabbi Yeshua than the intolerance espoused by rabbitpolice. And no I do not like Paul, he was intolerant and misogynistic. Of course he was a Roman wannabe, which is why the "Roman" greek speaking Byzantines made sure he was included when the book of Mary was not. But who do you think could share more of the teachings of the Great Rabbi Yeshua than his Wife, Mary. Most Christians never look at the Bible as a history book and therefore never view it in the context of the times. We also are shortchanged because the bible has been retranslated by many different writers for many different ends. A common theme is to de-emphasise the Judaism. People seem to forget he read Hebrew in Temple and spoke Aramaic. When as a child he discourses with the learned men it is his Bar Mitzvah, the marriage at Caena was his own wedding and he had to be married in order to be a Rabbi (Jewish Law).
As far as the old Testiment goes (in particular your favorite bits of Leviticus) if you claim that some archaic Jewish laws are God's Commandments to be imposed on everyone then you have to impose them ALL. There are likely a few in there that are likely to crimp your style and some are just illegal these days. But You don't get to pick and choose, you are sinning if you wear a poly cotton shirt or if you eat Lobster or Pork Sausage (you do keep Kosher don't you?). Then If your Brother dies you have to marry his widow (even if she is a shrew and you don't like her). It's all in there, you can't deny it. If Old Testament Rules are to be obeyed then you gotta do em all. Besides if Homosexuality is soo bad why isn't it in the big 10 commandments, it just isn't there. Coveting your neighbors maidservant is Worse than being queer, because it made the Big Ten. You can't pick and choose from Old Testiment Rules merely to justify your own personal prejudices and I thought "Judge not, Lest Ye be Judged" was also words taught by Jesus himself. Seems like you do a lot of Judging for a supposed Christian, especially versus your fellow men, who is to say who is queer anyway today with all these Metrosexuals running about. I would wonder who made Ranger2 arbiter of right and wrong anyway.
I know what is right and what is wrong
What is Right is honest and true, right creates respect between people, as well asunderstanding and co-operation. it is right to help others and try to alleviate pain or suffering where you find it.
What is wrong is what hurts others and causes others pain. Telling lies hurts people and is wrong, as is manipulating others for selfish benefit. Pretty much every major religion has the same standards for what is right and what is wrong.Only Patriarchal Monotheistic religions have this thing about homosexuality. Buddhism doesn't have any problem with it and at last count there were still more Buddhists on the planet than fundamentalist christians. You cannot tell me that the New Testament is scripture but the Bardo Thodol and the Sutras are not. I understand that you are ethnocentric and self-rightious but in my book those are sins of the Ego that actually cripple efforts to understand and appreciate my fellow man and after all isn't that more along the lines of what Jesus and Buddha both taught?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Hey, what about that cotton polyester Shirt Ranger, when Leviticus plainly commands that thou shalt not wear mixed fibers! It seems to me you have to do a lot of illogical headstands in order to have your religious beliefs all "work", but then you saeem to resort to the usual circular reasoning all fundies fall back on. Item #a is true because somebody said it was in the bible and the bible is the WofG. therefore if #a = #B then #B =#a no further research needed. But you haven't answered my two points either, they are inconvenient to your argument, one being that historically the "bible" as we know it was compiled at the order of Emperor Constantine and subsequently retranslated, re edited and revised frequently usually for political ends.For instance, if you prefer the King James version, do you consider James Stewart to be Divinely inspired? How can you claim something so frequently revised is any sort of uncorrupted truth? What version do you like, King James? The Vulgate? The Blue Jeans Bible? Or are you learned enough to read the original Aramaic and Classical Greek? I know Culdee Christians who do just that, and I respect their scholarship as well as the loving and nonjudgemental way they revere Jesus. But somehow you guys think JC gave you dispensation to judge your fellow mortals and I am still wondering where you get the sand to call hate mongering Christianity. Jesus did not say "love thy neighbor but hate those faggots over there". If you think homosexuality is a sin that is your perogative, but your only course of action then is to control yourself and not have sex with men. America is not and never has been a Christian Nation. America is now and always has been a secular state prohibited from favoring or mandating any faith or creed but patriotism. Imposing fundamentalist Christian dogma on persons who have their own religious beliefs is contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. If you want to live in a Theocracy go try Iran, here we have religious freedom and that means you cannot impose your hateful twisted homophobic excuses on folks who disagree with you especially when the guy you claim to follow said "Love one Another" and not the opposite. You cannot contradict the core teachings of Christianity again and again and claim to be Christian. One of the most Christlike men I have ever had the pleasure of knowing was an elderly blind gay minister with the Metropolitan Community Church, Although disabled every day he strove to bring comfort to the distressed and counsel to the confused, the man was a saint. Probably even more of a saint than Ranger 2! But my old friend Reverend George practiced the loving nonjudgemental kind of Christianity rather than the self rightious version you seem to espouse. I say you hate mongers are the Heretics and dear old Rev.George is the Real thing, regardless as to who's a queer and who isn't. You don't channel hate from God, Hate comes from some where else (perhaps you might guess). So who do you serve, really?
Oh and excuse my typo earlier (9-11 vs 1911) comes with my unique keyboarding style, guess part of my mind was on my beloved .45, indeed the best automatic handgun created by the mind of a man, too bad Browning was a Mormon...)
And I do think somebody could have prevented September 11th, the information warning about the potential attack existed, but the Bush Administration was asleep at the wheel. Of course part of the fault may lie that aircraft passengers have been so cowed by the potential for hijackers that they allow themselves to be held hostage by dudes with tiny boxcutters. I remember a few years ago when some fool attempted to hijack a Chinese airliner and was beaten to death by the passengers with winebottles. So yeah, I think September 11th could have been prevented just like I tend to think the politicians use of September 11th for promoting their own agendas was disgusting and using September 11th to trump up a war with disingenuous lies was treasonable.
But you Bible thumpers seem to like sinners in office, seeing as to the troubles conservative politicians seem to have with adultery of late. Oh but Obama, according to you prophets crying out in the desert is some kind of Antichrist already and he hasn't even had anybody tortured yet! Talk about double standards!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from burnettjv wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

ken.mcloud,
Your argument also does not hold water. "anti-discrimination law requires them to treat strait people and gay people equally" They were treated equally because two heterosexual men would not have been able to get the couples discount either. Therefore, no discrimination against gays occurred. Also who is to say that those women weren't just saying they were a couple to get the discount?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

you haven't known very many christians have you? I believe you are mixing the catholic churches priests with baptist preachers. Oh, and I love the way you give yourself the plus one, it's like blowing your own horn. Separation of church and state was put into place by our founding fathers to prevent the government from establishing a state run church, not to mean that government and religion can't have anything to do with each other. They have everything to do with each other. That is why the constitution and the bill if rights and all the founding documents have God in them ( imagine that) and you say that America was not founded as a christian nation?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles."

If you'd actually read anything they wrote they'd tell you that for themselves. Where'd you go to school? A madras?

"You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs."

Huh? Which part was bs? The part about wankers being attracted to authoritarianism? I stand by it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 4 years 37 weeks ago

"None of what you just said was a valid argument, I would love for you to tell John Adams, Samuel Adams, and all the others that signed the declaration of indep. that this country was not founded on biblical principles."

If you'd actually read anything they wrote they'd tell you that for themselves. Where'd you go to school? A madras?

"You go to a good conservative baptist church some Sunday and then come back and tell me all that bs."

Huh? Which part was bs? The part about wankers being attracted to authoritarianism? I stand by it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from muddog wrote 4 years 36 weeks ago

Rabbitpolice88.

Maybe you should spend more time remodeling your mobile home and less time attempting serious thought, you seem to have a tough time of it.
If you are a so called Christian then I want nothing to do with Christianity, you give it bad name…If Jesus were here today, gays would be the LEAST of his concerns.

Bella you are an Angle! Love your posts……..

My neighbors are a gay couple, one ex marine the other is a Police Captain. Both have Kids, both Hunt and both fish. They are the picture perfect example of what an outstanding citizens should be.

As for the Derby, who F#@KING cares?. Let them get the discount, to any observant you can tell they were discriminated against, FULL STOP. It seems as though the suit is not for the $1.00, duh, but for the principal. I say go for it. Very Unconstitutional. This is American damit, people are supposed to be FREE.

As a straight male I have NO issues with Gay couples hunting and fishing. I am not “threatened” by those who are different than I. Back woods hicks who cling to some age old homophobic archaic notion that we are all “threatened” by those who are different need to crawl back in their hole.

Using the Bible as a basis for your hatred is a cop out. You have a brain ( err I mean the one GOD gave you ), use it.

I will also defend those who do not support gay married but DO NOT push your old, sterile ideology on the rest of us.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

All that I have said is true and you know it, you are just a liberal and want to just get along with everyone and let everyone do what they want and how they want. I wonder what would happen to Isreal if they thought that way?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Well, you just shot yourself in the foot. Actually obama has spend more money than bush ever did, you are just lapping up what ever the liberal media tells you. That's whey under obama we went over a trillion dollars in debt for the first time ever. I guess you like socialism and how he is controlling the banks and GM and trying to have socialist healthcare too. You know exactly what liberal means in this country don't try and make it into something else. Hmm, did I ever say I hate you? Um no I didn't, that is just like a liberal putting words into other people mouths, taking things out of context and the like.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

kaboom, a total obama butt kissing liberal.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bella wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

As I suggested previously, how could homosexuality be a choice and heterosexuality not be?
So Rabbitpolice you talk to God frequently and all He has to say to you is how wicked those gay people are? I begin to wonder about your vehemence, have you ever heard the term ego-dystonic homosexuality? It refers to gay men so filled with self hatred that they persecute their own kind. You are so insistant that homosexuality is a choice, did you make a choice to be heterosexual despite your natural proclivities and desires for hot manflesh? Do you still hate yourself for years of self repression and denial? You know rabbitpolice, that therapy is available (even though methinks thou dost protest too much) You can liberate yourself rabbitpolice, and finally hang those Tom o Finland posters in your den. You can drop the false front of a christianity you plainly have no clue about and go forth and gayly live your life to the fullest off hunting on Brokeback Mountain...with a close friend of course (bring lots of lube dude...)

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Bella,
you talk so crass and so crude as to be shockingly inappropriate in any company. You are a left wing radical who makes excuses for everyone's actions including your own. Instead of taking responsibility for your actions or making some one else do the same for theirs. I can assure you that I am in no way gay at all. You have no authority to talk about any religion because you don't believe in the one true God, Jesus Christ. You are either a pagan or you don't believe in any higher authority other than your own. tell me if I am not right. You also think that the Bush administration caused 9/11 which shows your inability to think rationally or have any common sense. You sir are like a piece of grass blown around in the wind witch ever way it blows strongest.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

By what you have written all over this website it is easy to tell you are a left wing radical. Good lord you think that Al Gore would make a good president, you believe in global warming you hate the "bushies" as you call them, you did not answer my question about your religion because maybe you don't want people to know. You think Bush could have prevented 9/11? well why didn't clinton get him when he had the chance. You have no sound reasoning for any of this.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

That's what oregon gets for allowing same sex freaks to " get married". When you allow morally corrupt people to start pushing society around and throwing hissy fit's this is what happens. You get the dregs of society that are non productive, want everything given to them and expect the government to protect them from people who don't see eye to eye with them.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from rabbitpolice88 wrote 4 years 38 weeks ago

Um, that is not from the Bible, you are didn't go see what the Bible has to say about homosexuals either why don't you go do that take all the Bible not just the part that sounds good to you. You probably googled that one.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment