A radical gay group disrupts Christian church service

November 12th, 2008 Urban Conservative

So much for tolerance. And these folks don’t understand why they aren’t taken seriously. If you act like children you are treated like children. A demonstration like this will do nothing for their cause. It will only make them look like the spoiled little brats they are!

A radical gay rights organization – Bash Back — is claiming the responsibility for a protest last Sunday at Mount Hope Church in Lansing, Michigan.  Protesters infiltrated the church and surprised the congregation when they stood up during the service, threw fliers at churchgoers and shouted slogans such as “It’s OK to be gay,” and “Jesus was a homo,” among other things.

It frustrates me that Christians are always labeled as “intolerant” on these issues. Gay couples have not been denied ANY civil rights whatsoever; they simply cannot call legal unions “marriage.” Marriage is a sacred institution to not only Christians but by many other religions in the world.  Labeling different types of relationships with different terms is not intolerant.

This meltdown by Bash Back was unconstitutional – a violation of the 1st amendment to use an act of aggression to disrupt the free assembly of others. What these protestors did was similar to how the Klu Klux Klan terrorized the black churches decades ago.

Of course, this outrage stems from the recent propositions in California (Proposition 8, 52% voted for Yes); Florida (Proposition 2, The Marriage Protection Amendment, 62% voted Yes); and Arizona (Proposition 2 - Marriage Protection Amendment, 56% voted Yes). I understand their disappointment but they really should grow up!

The insanity doesn’t stop there.  The Mormon Church is now being targeted for their support of Prop 8, including arson.  And, a California Art Director from The California Music Theater in Sacramento, Scott Eckern, was pressured by gay groups to resign because of his personal beliefs about marriage. Seems to me that he is now a victim of intolerance and persecution. I am just waiting for the day when my employer asks me if I voted yes or no for Prop 8.  Where is the ACLU when you need them?

I wonder if Bash Back plans on protesting outside of a Mosque, since homosexuality is forbidden by Muslims. That would be interesting. Ahh, who knows … maybe they’re just mad at the Christians.

Tags: california, proposition 8, prop 8, Florida, Proposition 2, prop 2, The Marriage Protection Amendment, Arizona, proposition 2, gay marriage, christians, Bash Back, church

Rating: 2.7/5 (63 votes cast)

Did you enjoy this article? If so, please subscribe to my blog!
  • Joanne Meyers
    it is a christian thing. they are so hypocritical and hateful. all for a black book and a god they can't prove even exists.

    life in the US would be much better without ANY religion, especially christians
  • David Jeroslow
    Having once been quite liberal in my younger years, I was weaned away from it all due to my disappointment and disillusionment.  "How I left the Left."  That will be my book one day.

    Thing is, if they actually believed in tolerance, they might actually have kept me.  I came to realize that we are all intolerant... and actually is that such a bad thing?  Should we tolerate fascism?  Bigotry?  Slavery?  Terrorism?

    The question becomes not should we be intolerant, but what should we exclude as acceptable, and, whether  you agree with Christians or not, at least they're above-board about what they find unacceptable.  Meanwhile, the Left hides behind words like "progressive" and "open minded" and "tolerant."

    As an advocate of freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and freedom of affiliation, I have always found myself butting heads with the liberals, not conservatives.

    And this incident above is just par for the course from the "tolerant" crowd.
  • Jason
    The left is becoming increasingly bold and is more and more inclined to disregard basic rights.  
    ...by any means necessary.
  • Larry
    It seems to me that the Christians are always told to sit down and shut up, while other groups, such as homosexuals, are allowed to do and say what they want because it is freedom of speech. These Christians were in their own church and were not bothering anyone. Why do the homosexuals think it is their right to disrupt a church service that has nothing to do with them?
  • Dora
  • WadeHM
    I live a half hour drive from this church. I am quite familiar with it and they have a tremendous outreach program. I first found this story at Right Michigan. The MSM has yet to pick up on and report on this intolerant act. Even the local newspapers here in Michigan have failed to report on this.

    Attacks on Gays: World News
    Attacks on Christians: not new worthy

    I feel sorry for Joanne Meyers, "life in the US would be much better without ANY religion, especially christians." She has no clue, and just prove the point that the liberals are the intolerant ones, not Christians. May God change your heart Joanne.
  • Rich
    In your words: Gay couples have not been denied ANY civil rights whatsoever; they simply cannot call legal unions “marriage.”

    If this were a more liberal-leaning blog I would aruge the importance of the word "marriage" and the inherent discrimination in using a different word for "the same" institution, but it would clearly fall on deaf ears.

    However, your statement that gay couples have not been denied any civil rights is simply false.  Clearly you are unaware of (or simply glossing over) the 1,000 federal rights (including a number of potential tax benefits) that are not available to ANY same-sex couples ANYWHERE in this country - even those who were legally married in California, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.  And maybe it will surprise you to know that civil unions (and gay marriages, for that matter) are not portable, because they are not federally recognized, and some states even have laws on the books that specifically invalidate out-of-state, same-sex marriages.

    I don't excuse what these people in Michigan did.  Nor do I condone the destruction of property in this case.  I find it misguided and tasteless.  But frankly, after years of having their fates toyed with by legislatures, courts, and popular votes, it doesn't surprise me one bit that gays, lesbians, and their supporters would lash out at those who oppose them.  

    On the other hand, disrupting a church service doesn't seem that "extreme" to me.   Churches that participate in political activism should be prepared to have a little political activism thrown back at them.  Maybe the reason this part of our society has been kicked around for so long is that they haven't been "extreme" enough.
  • DS
    It is understandable that god-less people would act like this.  They have no other way of releasing their frustration since they don't believe in God and prayer.  But it does seem hypocritical that the ACLU hasn't made a statement.  I haven't read about this yet, so I also wonder if law enforcement got involved.  These protestors should have been locked up for a few days. 

    I also get the feeling that even if same sex couples were given EVERY right that is afforded to the opposite sex other than changing the definition of marriage, it wouldn't be enough.  Why is changing that definition so sacred to them?
  • Dora

    Try again, DS.  Your ignorance is showing.
  • Dora
    I have been with my partner for longer than most of you here have been alive.
    You take for granted those rights that I cannot have- rights denied to me according to your personal religious beliefs.
    How do you justify your attitude on this? 

    Civil rights should never, NEVER be put to a popular vote.
  • newrepublican
    Is Proposition 8 going to be challenged?

  • WadeHM
    Churches that participate in political activism should be prepared to have a little political activism thrown back at them.

    Mount Hope was not participating in political activism, these people were practicing their faith, in their church. They were worshiping God as is their constitutionally protected right. Even if this was a "political" scene, which it was not, they still have the right to voice their opinions, just as homosexuals have the right to voice their opinions.

    What happened here was total lawlessness that is being supported by liberals because according to the liberals, those who disagree with them have no right to free speech.

    There is this "Baptist" church, and I use the term Baptist loosely because they are not Baptist as far as I am concerned, that we all know about; they go to the funerals of our service men and protest saying that God is killing these soldiers due to America's acceptance of homosexuals. I have seen them in action at a city near me here in Michigan (Swartz Creek) where they protested at a soldier's funeral. These are the extremely intolerant ones on the far, far right who make the rest of us look bad. I resent them just as much as I resent those who attack churches as happened last Sunday.

    Whether we all agree with each other is not the point. The point is, we all have the right to express our opinions and beliefs without fear of physical retribution no matter what side you have taken.
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Joanne Meyers #1

    Prove He Does Not Exist!

    People who think like you and act like you, is the reason why we need to get our country back!

    I agree with UC.  Why aren't ya'll going to the Muslim Mosques and Black churches?


    Why don't you stay at your liberal sites and let go of your rage there.

    We don't go to your sites and try to convince you of anything.

    Your perfect world would be to have us all thrown in the lions den.

    You are a brood of angry, heartless, cruel, blodd thirsty, vindictive people!  
  • 2BlueStarMom
    DS. You are right on!
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Evidently the left must really value our opinion more than they know to be coming over here whining about their issues.

    And they are issues.

    You are like children, who can't get your way, throwing temper tantrums with your parents if the don't relent.

    You know what kind of responses you are going to get over here, for the most part.

    We can't do anything about your problems.  Obama will.

    We can't.  Soon enough, your "one" will make everything better.

    He's the teenage babysitter.  He's cool.  Awesome guy.

    Time will tell.  Until then, why bother us about this?
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Like I've said before, go read about what happened in "history" with two towns that had total civil freedom, no laws, no remorse, no conscience and you will see the mirror of what has happened in our country to date.

    Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed. It was not due to any one sin, it was due to a host of sin including homo sexuality.

    These cities were not destroyed because of sin alone, but because they were not ashamed of their sin, and they were even at the point where they were calling evil good and good evil.

    Sound familiar?  Welcome to the 21st century!
  • WadeHM

    What really cracks me up is that Obama got elected on promises, promises, promises, yet we all know that electing a president based on promises alone has never worked. Yet Obama was devious enough and slick enough to get elected based on promises, most of which he has to go through Congress to get done.

    Yet the liberals think he will be able to do whatever he wants and they believe that now they will be able to do whatever they want. I'm prepared for a long four year battle against our beliefs and believe that the liberals will increase their attacks on religion, because the Obamessiah will allow them to, or so they think.

    All in the name of Obama.
  • 2BlueStarMom
    In my spirit, I felt that Obama's words/promises and the deceptive spirit he has,  is an illusion.  

    Matter of fact, I believe our friend David accused me of having what Obama has, just leave out the politician part:

    "the "common-sense" values you desire in a politician are actually idealistic and not at all common sense or based on realism "

    Thank goodness I have a strong immune system.  I don't want to catch the virus.

    Some women have these senses and it's usually right on.

    I can't say I really feel good about to many politicians however.

    There are some who have some very good qualities, but I think once they get seduced by Washington, their spirits get polluted.

    I guess I am kind of child like with my thinking and seem to look deeper than on the surface with folks. 

    That is probably a good thing.  I perceive things that some don't see.
  • davidwwalters
    WadeHM says:
    <<Mount Hope was not participating in political activism,........>>
    Maybe not.....
    -But the Mormon church is practicing activism.....and  gays should target ANY church that promotes discrimination.  Targeting Mount Hope Church maybe wrong.....i don't know, but oppressed minorities have a right to protest groups that actively attempt to suppress their freedom.
  • Dora
    2BlueStarMom,  I assume that you would have no problem with taxing the churches now- since they are acting in politics, they should no longer be tax free.
    And, what do you mean by "get your country back"?  from whom?  You had it just last week.  You lost.  By large numbers.  Do you know why?  Because of your party's backwards thinking and their inability to move into the 21st century.  The social issues, demographics, religious (and non-religious) views have all evolved. You have not.
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Dora.....are you sure you are not "toe?"   "emily?"

    Perhaps it's just that all democrats look, I mean, sound alike?

    Ya'll seem to just creep out of the woodwork.

    Your rhetoric is always the same.
  • Dora
    And, your comments regarding President-Elect Obama are pretty childish.  He's not in office yet.  Your negativity is based upon what?  I have read your posts in here- and from this reading I have gathered that you have not taken very much time to read anything other than right wing web sites. That's not going to be very helpful just listening to a bunch of grumpy old white men whine and wring their hands.  You have the same problem they do, 2BlueStarMom, you don't get it.  Until you do, you will continue to be a bitter sour woman.  The rest of the world is rejoicing that we are finally rid of this current President.  The United States is overwhelmingly proud of our next President to be- and then there's you.
    Listening to you is like dragging a broken leg.   Your negative expectations and perceptions reminds me of the fat lazy kid that always sat around and said "It's not gonna work so why even try".
    Why don't you use that religion that you seem to cling to for all of your answers and excuses and really live it . That's what Jesus did.  Perhaps you know of him.
  • Dora
    Who are emily and toe? 

    And answer the questions.  What makes you think I should have no opinion other than yours? And if I do not agree with you, you would have them re-write the constitution with your rules. 
    Thanks but no thanks.
  • Dora
    What is the problem you have with gays?
  • Dora
    Why do you think we who do not believe in god, are  automatically are wrong?
    What makes you right?
  • davidwwalters
    Dora, some here of the conservative persuasion believe that christianity and god are somewhere in our constitution.
    The only reference to god i found was in Article VI where it stated that there shall be NO religious tests for public office.
    Yet this notion of a christian nation pervades in these conservative circles.
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Go back Dora and re read all the post for the last few weeks, months, whatever floats your boat.

    You will see, that you and your friends, all say the same thing and ask the same questions over and over and over.  Why is that? 

    Why should I re type the same thing over and over that some of your counter parts have already asked and have received answers.

    I don't have to answer you.   Look it up.  Do this yourself.

    Due diligence.  Key words:


    It's what your party is going to pass so you might better get used to it.
  • 2BlueStarMom
    Dora, you can believe whatever you want to believe.  That's not the issue with agnostics or atheist.  What you want is for us to give up our beliefs, our morals, our God and act like Stepford Wives (yep, that's an old one I wrote on here before too if you bothered to read the past posts)

    Read my typing  IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
    No one is trying to change you. You are trying to change us and our thinking because you think you're right!  

    Let's call a spade a spade here!

    And by the way, that last phrase, was not racial.  I can just see one of you coming back at me about that one.

    You guys just keep saying the same thing over and over.  Personally, you are all predictable. 

    So, from now on, I am going to use The Word of God when I answer because, His Word, applies to everything.    

    His Word, is the same yesterday, today, and forever.  Amen!

    I am quite sure then you can run to your fellow liberals and tell them that you are justified and we are all crazy. 

    Who cares?!   I don't!
  • 2BlueStarMom
    David.   Good grief!  This has nothing to do with the constitution!


    You guys come up with the weirdest propaganda and the sad thing is that you believe it and think you are enlightened!

    Let me ask you something.............IF WE ARE SO WRONG, WHY DO YOU KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE?!
  • 2BlueStarMom
    This reminds me of a bad marriage. 

    A double standard relationship and a abusive husband or wife, whatever.

    Head games.  

    Something had to happened to ya'll.  

    Either someone put something in your Kool Aid, or you are delusional.
  • davidwwalters
    This is simply NOT true:
    << What you want is for us to give up our beliefs, our morals, our God>>
    When you keep repeating this, it makes you appear to be untruthful
    Go to church!!  Pray to Jesus all you want!!
    I don't care how you pray....just keep your faith separate from our nation's public policy.  That's all anyone wants.  If our constitution mandates christian beliefs to guide our public policy, it would have stated that in the various articles of the constitution!  But it does NOT.
  • b
    The real story here is the over-the-top, in-your-face tactics of the homosexual rights crowd.  Whether it is gay parades or church demonstrations, the goal of homosexual activism is to offend as many conservative Christians as possible.   I don't think many people, Christians or not, want to keep civil rights from homosexuals.  Our desire is to keep the term 'marriage' sacred.  So why not compromise...homosexual couples should get all of the civil rights of married couples, but traditionalists get to keep the word marriage.  Afterall, in a good compromise both sides leave a little unhappy. 

     There problem solved, now on to more pressing matters...
  • Kevin S. Willis
    BTW, I'm a rock-ribbed conservative with very little objection to gay marriage, or legalized polygamy, for that matter (in fact, I consider both circumstances to be identical--either adults can consent to enter into various relationships with other adults in various configurations, or they can't). I have yet to have a liberal present me with a rational argument that supports gay marriage but denies polygamous marriage (to consenting adults) in a remotely consistent logical framework.

    On the other hand, the idea that rights are being denied in any real sense seems to me to be a complete lack of perspective. Single people also don't get to enjoy the tax advantages of legally married couples--even if they live with someone of the opposite sex, or are at least dating. Or have been married in the past. Etc.

    It's making a mountain out of a molehill. I understand why homosexuals want to advance the issue, but still--I'm not sure the hyperbole serves their purpose. But I'd vote against anything that allowed gay marriage if it wasn't expanded to polygamy, because otherwise it's just more balkanization. More of the "I want my rights, but screw you, polygamists!"

    But, at the same time, I feel sorry for George Takei.
  • Dora
    Since 2BlueStarMom is unable  and unwilling to answer any of the questions I guess she has no answers.  This is not surprising.  She has no  answers, other than those  based upon  her personal religious beliefs.  She wants laws based upon these beliefs and refused for others based upon the same personal beliefs.  She knows this is unconstitutional. 

    No one is attempting to take away your religion, 2BlueStarMom.  But you certainly have a problem with others having theirs, don't you!  You said:
    "Why aren't ya'll going to the Muslim Mosques and Black churches?"

    Was that supposed to be some sort of put down?  Are these alternate
    places of worship where the "others" go?  You know,  those people other than "real Americans"  like you?
    I'm really glad I don't know you.  You and your rabid church-lady noise is suffocating.  Really. 

    Thanks but no thanks.
  • davidwwalters
    b.....what is over-the-top, in-your-face?   -Certain preachers who explain natural disasters such as Katrina as god's punishment......
    If a christian person would like to live a "moral" life, let them not engage in homosexual behavior if that suits them. 
    When their moralizing is aimed at restricting other people's freedom's, well then that is just un-American!
  • Titus Hunt
    well, hell................let everyone do everything out in the streets for all to see and get it over with!  that is where it is going!  it is becoming a nation of "do whatever feels right at the time and wherever you please."  it is ridiculous!  this nation used to be based on family values and Christian beliefs.  Children were more respectful and parents understood their responsibilities in taking care of their families.  thanks to liberals that life has gone.
  • davidwwalters
    <<Children were more respectful and parents understood their responsibilities in taking care of their families.  thanks to liberals that life has gone. >>
    ......Maybe the kids just realized how hypocritical our society appears to be sometimes.  Hell, that's why i freed myself from christian doctrine so long ago.
  • Titus Hunt
    David:  i don't care what kids realize.  i thought about that when i was a child.  however, i was raised by my great-grandmother and great aunt and they taught me to respect my elders regardless.  i was never punished but just had a geniune understanding that it was the right thing to do.  my son saw the liberal way of parenting and how the kids turned out and thought he could do the same thing.  my husband and i had to work so much harder to instill the respect and he has it today at 23 years old.  he also says his peers in college are very unrespectful and he thinks they are idiots!  by the way, i didn't use spanking as a way to discipline him either.
  • Bobby G

    The problem that I as a conservative christian have with (gays), is that God condemns homo-sexuality as abhorrant to Him.  He made the rules for sin, not the Christian.  Sins such as homo-sexuality, beastiality, incest, rape, adultry, orgies, and such like are condemned by God.  Christians don't hate the sinner, they hate sin.  All sins can be repented of, and turned away from, but to live in them, and to promote them, is what causes God to grieve, and subsequently Christians to grieve and to rise up and speak out against.

    As for not believing in God making a person automatically wrong, Christians didn't make that edict, God did.

    Many of us christians are trying to live our lives as Jesus would have us to live, but we are encountering some roadblocks along the way.  It seems that secular Americans don't want  christians to live according to the Bible, or according to their beliefs.  Jesus said to go to the world, teaching and making disciples of the nations, and we are trying to do that.  We also realize that some don't want to be told about Jesus, and if that's what they choose, then ok, we move on.  Please, don't condemn us for doing what Jesus would have us do.  I don't condemn you for your beliefs, that's not my right, it's God's right.  I just try to take the gospel to the world.

    David W

    You are right, no mention of God in the Constitution.  I believe that because of our founding fathers faith in God, they probably didn't deem it necessary to put it in there.  However, God , or Divine Providence is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, as well as many of their historical writings.  As to the religious test for public office I have no knowledge of what that would consist of, as I was not there in the writing of that Article.  I could make an assumption, but that is all it would be, so therefore, I won't.  I will say tho, that God though He is not mentioned in the Constitution, was very real to those who wrote the Constitution, and those who signed it.
  • Titus Hunt
    Our country was founded and built on Faith and that is why it is the greatest nation on earth.
  • Jason
    The left is becoming increasingly bold and is more and more inclined to disregard basic rights.  
    More along these lines: http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/evil_on_a_minneapolis_campus.html
    ...by any means necessary.
  • davidwwalters
    BobbyG(related to KennyG?)......said:
    <<You are right, no mention of God in the Constitution.  I believe that because of our founding fathers faith in God, they probably didn't deem it necessary to put it in
    there. >>

    The "founding fathers" were also Lawyers, and as we know lawyers don't leave anything to the imagination--they spell it out!.....and if they wanted this nation to be a "christian nation" they'd have made that an article of the constitution to that effect,no?  The Constitution is a LEGAL Document, and eschewed the notion of separation of church and state.  So much for the failed notion of a "christian nation.
  • Dora
    Whenever some religious zealot tries to link homosexuality in the same sentence with bestiality, orgies, adultery, incest, etc- is the red flag of ignorance.
    First of all- "Leave it to Beaver"  and "Ozzie and Harriet"  were television shows.  Any representation depicting real life was accidental and minimal.  If you think everything was hunky dory in the fifties and earlier- you are dead wrong.  Incest was never spoken of and kept in the closet.  Pompous church goers still went home and beat their children and wives, cheated on their marriage, and drank too much.  Gays and lesbians feared for their very lives from people like you, should their secret come out.  Blacks were being strung up in trees with barely  a notice.  Priests still fondled little boys and ministers still diddled with the church organist and half the choir.
    Wake up and smell the coffee, Bobby.  Just because you don't approve of something does not mean it does not exist.  "Liberals" have nothing to do with the morals or lack of them- just go and look up what Republicans have done - http://www.armchairsubversive.org/ 
    Hypocricy is there on both sides.  You and others want to blame all of your woes on liberals, gays, blacks, and illegal imigrants.  It just does not fly. It only shows how very uninformed you are.
  • Bobby G

    Who said it didn't exist?  I just said that God said that homo-sexuality was abhorrant to Him.   Did I say that liberals have nothing to do with morals?  NO!  What I said was that secular Americans don't want Christians to live according to their beliefs.  I don't blame my woes on anyone but myself.  Please don't blame yours on me.


    You need to read more real history about the founding fathers.   Again, I bring you to the Declaration of Independence.   God, or Divine Providence, is mentioned numerous times in it.  Also, every letter that I have read stemming from the founding fathers, is laden with praises for God, and many of them say that this country could and would not remain strong without God's intervention.  As for the separation of Chuch and State, if you studied your history, you would know that the separation was about a state run church, such as they had in England, and not the separation of Spiritual leaders in government offices.
  • Dora
    Some favored seperation of church and state because it would harm the church- others favored seperation of church and state because religion belongs in church.
    but both sides favored seperation of church and state.
  • Dora
    And, regarding your views on homosexuality- your views are based upon your religious beliefs.  Period.
    You have no right to legislate my life based upon your own personal religious beliefs.  Period.
  • Bobby G
    Sorry, Dora,

    The founding fathers believed that this nation would decrease in power if religion were taken out of government.  In fact, you should read some of the letters from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson.  They believed that this government must be founded upon Christian principles to continue to exist.
  • Dora
    You are just flat out wrong,  Bobby.

    Argument one: The phrase 'separation of Church and state' is of recent origin, and the concept was not known or promulgated by the founders.
    False. The Founders were well aware of the threats posed by religion/state entanglement; it's what gave the world Kings with "divine right."
    The exact phrase was first used in Thomas Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists, explaining the decision to seperate state and religion:
    "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for is faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."
    James Madison, principal author of the constitution:
    "The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State." (1819).
    Argument two: But the founders meant only that no sect of Christianity was to be elevated above another, but still meant our government to be Christian...
    "Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform" (Madison, Annals of Congress, 1789).
    "Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?" (Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance)
    "Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. " (ibid)
    "How a regulation so unjust in itself, so foreign to the authority of Congress, and so hurtful to the sale of public land, and smelling so strongly of an antiquated bigotry, could have received the countenance of a committee is truly a matter of astonishment ." (Madison, 1785, letter to James Monroe, on a failed attempt by congress to set aside public funds to support churches)
    Argument three: But one of the first acts of Congress was to appoint a Christian chaplain!
    This they did do, years before the ratification of the bill of rights. Madison's objection:
    "The establishment of the chaplainship to Congs is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority shut the door of worship agst the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain! To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a tight to govern the minor. " (Memorial and Remonstrance)
    "If Religion consist in voluntary acts of individuals, singly, or voluntarily associated, and it be proper that public functionaries, as well as their Constituents shd discharge their religious duties, let them like their Constituents, do so at their own expense." (Madison, detached memoranda, 1820)
    "That religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience." (Patrick Henry)
    "I am persuaded, you will permit me to observe that the path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction. To this consideration we ought to ascribe the absence of any regulation, respecting religion, from the Magna-Charta [Constitution] of our country" (George Washington, 1789).
    "In the course of the opposition to the bill in the House of Delegates, which was warm & strenuous from some of the minority, an experiment was made on the reverence entertained for the name & sanctity of the Saviour, by proposing to insert the words "Jesus Christ" after the words "our lord" in the preamble, the object of which would have been, to imply a restriction of the liberty defined in the Bill, to those professing his religion only. The amendment was discussed, and rejected by a vote of agst." (James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance)
    "Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If this freedom be abused, it is an offense against God, not against man: To God, therefore, not to man, must an account of it be rendered." (ibid)
    "The appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, [is] contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment'" (James Madison, Veto, 1811)
    "It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it was by the indulgence of one class of the people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that those who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it, on all occasions, their effectual support." (George Washington, letter to the Touro Synagogue 1790. )
    "We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions ... shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power ... we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society." (John Adams)
    "The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses...." (John Adams, 1787)
  • DS
    Wow, I forgot to check the "Notify me of followup comments" box after my first post.  I couldn't believe there hadn't been anymore posts after that.  LOL  It took me a while to read through all of this, but I don't feel like I missed anything really.....LOL

    I believe God, and because He created the world and everything in it (including every human being), I trust Him and what He tells me.  As BobbyG, Titus, and 2BlueStar have so eloquently spoken....I really can't add much more to the debate other than this fruit for thought......

    "IF" God is real, you atheists better be afraid of what is going to happen to you someday.  There are many examples in the bible of what happened to those who wagged their fingers and tongues at Him.  2BlueStar warned you already about Sodom and Gomorrah.  The Flood is another warning for you.  God is patient, but He will NOT be patient forever.  And nobody knows the hour or day of their death.  Today is the day of your salvation!  Do not delay.....trust Him today.  Don't take that chance Dora and David.  Eternity is a looooooong time.  This life is like a single breath compared to eternity.  Is it really that smart to keep denying God, and His power?  Do you really want to take that chance?  If we're wrong, it doesn't cost us anything.  Our lives have been very fulfilled already.  We are content, and have learned the lessons taught by Jesus.  It's a spiritual thing.  You can too!  Just give up and give in to Him.......do it tonight!  You won't be sorry!!
  • Rich Bordner
    LOL...dude, seriously.

    These imps need to be laughed at.

    I usually don't call names, but its real hard not to here on this one.  They are doing all they can to be branded idiots4life.
  • Bobby G

    You made my point exactly.  Religion was a part of every aspect of life including government.  In argument one, talking about the separation of Church and State, Thomas Jefferson was explaining that the State could not and would not be allowed to exercise jurisdiction over religion, or the exercise thereof.  It had nothing to do with not having christianity in the governmental offices. 

    James Madison said the same thing, that congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law. 

    You see, the people who had come to this land, had escaped from tyranny brought about by religion that was established by and authorized by the King of England.  A State run religion.  That's what the founders did not want for America.  They wanted the right to choose to serve God in the manner that they chose, not to be subjected to a State run religion.
    Everything that you posted talks about the freedom of religion apart from any regulation of the State.  It has nothing to do with implying that religion was to be kept out of the government.  In fact, of those who signed the declaration of Independence, at least thirty were ministers.  Also many of the signers of the Constitution were very devout believers in God, and Jesus Christ.
  • davidwwalters
    DS 48...
    <<Don't take that chance Dora and David.>>
    i always take chances!  I guess if there is a god, that is why he/she/it
    made me this way!  Gosh, i know you mean well, and i appreciate the thought. 
    Yet it was the actions of some christians that led me to to renounce my faith.  The exclusivity is what i dislike about christianity.  I just cannot imagine a god that would be so insecure as to want to punish a part of his/her/it's own creation simply because they think in a rational manner.
    (Not to infer that you are in any way irrational.....no, people of faith tend to rationalize things).
    Dora 47....
    Good job finishing what i started!  Thanx.  I was too busy moving  to reply. 
    I cannot strss enough, that the United States of America is not a christian nation.  That we were created by a collection of mostly christian men to be a secular nation is too their credit!  They provided for the liberty of all to worship, or not to worship as they please.  So i fail to see how some christians feel discriminated against.
  • Kevin S. Willis
    Yet it was the actions of some christians that led me to to renounce my faith.

    Funny, that's the same thing that turned me from liberal to conservative. ;)

    So i fail to see how some christians feel discriminated against.

    They pay too much attention to pop-culture. They are discriminated against in much of pop culture, the MSM, and other areas. Although they should check the Bible--Jesus said that's just the way it's going to be. And having pop-culture folks take potshots at us is a lot better than being decapitated or shot through the head because you won't renounce your faith. 

    BTW--God, and certainly Christ, say more about divorce than homosexuality. If we're going to base our take on homosexual marriage entirely on the Bible, then we should similarly ban divorce--as Christ never referenced homosexuality, but was quite condemnatory of divorce, and, in the Bible, God condemns homosexuality only a few times, and often in the context of Levitical law, which also prohibits sleeping in the same bed with a woman who is menstruating and eating shellfish and snake and pork and so on. 

    Frankly, anyone who condemns homosexuality who doesn't also fast regularly (while presenting to the world a pleasing countenance) is just picking and choosing what they want to take from the Bible, granting that the New Testament is the fundamental cornerstone of the Christian church.
  • DS
    Apparently, you like to answer everything flippantly, with little real thought of what you're saying.  If you ever seriously studied the bible you would know that God created all of us for the purpose of loving Him.  And love is an action word which requires the giver to make a thoughtful decision about it before giving it to another person.  That requires us to have free will.  God "could have" made us as robots who could only choose to love Him.  But He didn't.  He knew that if He forced us to love Him it wouldn't really be love.  Therefore, all of us are free to make decisions and take chances.  That is how we were created.  But there is one decision that we "have to" make if we want to spend eternity with our Creator.  He sent His Son to be a propitiation for our sins, because He realized that we weren't capable of living a sinless life.  If you accept this "free" gift, He will cleanse you from your sins. 

    So, God is not insecure David, and not wanting to punish us for thinking in a rational manner.  Quite the contrary, He has provided us a "way of escape" so that we can love Him and live with Him for eternity.  And I'm sorry if you think that is narrow minded of Him, but He is a jealous God.  And, by the way, have you found that book by Josh McDowell yet?   ;-}
  • davidwwalters

    <<Frankly, anyone who condemns homosexuality who doesn't also fast regularly (while presenting to the world a pleasing countenance) is just picking and choosing what they want to take from the Bible, granting that the New Testament is the fundamental cornerstone of the Christian church.>>
    My reference to renouncing my faith had a lot to do with what i perceived as a bit of hypocrisy...... there are tenets of Judeo-Christian i agree with.  I guess it is the jealous, narrow-minded god that i reject as a part of the faith.
    I enjoy studying Jesus and the context of 1st century Judea's  culture.  Do i believe a man named Jesus brought about a form of revolution to his culture?  -Yes.....
    Was he God?  This is where i have problems with the gospels and the letters of Paul.
    Anyway, nice point Kevin.

    If you ever seriously studied the bible you would know that God created all of us for the purpose of loving Him>>

    He did? (Oh, i have seriously studied the bible)   ......That(" for the purpose of loving Him") sounds kinda ego-centric, something unbecoming of a god....
    Is god so insecure that he must have creatures created who will, against all reason and rational thought believe in The Holy Trinity, or a Virgin Birth.....just so he has the love he so desperately needs?
    What you see as "flippant" is just the way the creation of my brain has evolved.  I cannot with good conscience believe in a guy so jealous, insecure, and irrational, no matter what condemnation awaits me.  If a god did create me this way, it sure seems like some kind of sick joke to me.  Perhaps if there is a god, he will reward me for using my head and in the face of all these threats of eternal punishment, and having the moral courage to reject the irrationality of christianity as a religion of faith.
  • DS
    I hope you're not serious about defending homosexuality.  It is a practice that is shunned by all religions, and the bible makes it clear that it is a sin.  And yes, God hates divorce.  He never intended for people to marry and divorce without good cause such as adultery.  he did permit it for that.  And even though He permits it, He still prefers that couples stay together.  God is a miracle working God, and He can patch up the worst situations if people allow Him to do it.  If He is the center of the relationship, there will be love and acceptance for each other.  I know this by experience.  Without Him in your marriage it is very difficult, as man's heart is selfish and is always looking out for what he can get rather than what he can give to his partner.  I agree with you that people sometimes pick and choose what they want to believe, and that is wrong.  But that doesn't nullify the message entirely.  People can't use that excuse for not believing.  There will always be hypocrites in the world, and we should all strive not to be.  So instead of refusing to believe because there are hypocites, people should believe and live in a way that will turn them back from their hypocritical ways.
  • davidwwalters
    Oh, BTW DS.....
    My 2nd wife was a Southern Baptist.....she got me to read Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Life", but i couldn't get into McDowell's book.
    I first read the entire bible during my 57 day lock up awaiting trial for assault on 2 Law Enforcement Officers.  I suffer from PTSD and i don't always react to things like normal folks do(i was released when the DA dropped the felony charges against me).....
    I doubt she dropped charges due to my bible reading either.  That was when i discovered Lot had sex with his daughters!  Wow!  No one ever brought that story up in sunday school....
  • davidwwalters
    ....and if you do have serious faith-driven attitudes AGAINST homosexuality, then by all means, don't do it!  But why do you want to force your notions on others who don't share your faith?
  • DS
    I understand that you have gone through a lot, and have experiences that are uniques to you.  I appreciate how those experiences impact our lives, and how they affect our decisions in life.  I have my own stories as does everyone.  I wish I lived closer to you David.  I would love to spend some quality time with you in person.  I know that you're a good guy, and we would be able to share a lot of common experiences.  You have obviously spent a lot of time searching for the truth, and you should be commended for that.  I know that God is still working in your life, and there will come a day when you see his love in it's fullness.  Then all (at least most) of your questions will be answered, and you will be at peace with Him and yourself.  I probably won't be around to hear it, but that's ok.  I will have played my small part in the process, and that is good enough for me.  God "just" did something in my heart which I can't explain David.  I am almost weeping as I finish this post.  I can't explain it, but I know it is from God.  I am finished.  God bless you David.
  • davidwwalters
    I know that God is still working in your life,....>>

    Maybe god is working on me.....but i hold to to the truth as i recognize it just as you do. 
    <<I will have played my small part in the process, and that is good enough for me.  God "just" did something in my heart which I can't explain David>>
    My favorite TV show is "My name is Earl".....my spirituality is that there is a real force within all things, at a subatomic level (quantum mechanics).....a kind of "karma"(for want of a better word i use this tired word).
    -I know you have done you part!
  • Tish
    Sheesh, it's amazing how they want tolerance of their beliefs yet, have no respect for the beliefs of others. It's as if religious organizations are afraid to preach the true Word of God for fear of persecution from those who say we are supposed to "love".

    When truly if they understood the Scriptures they would understand the antics of most religious groups. One's beliefs cannot triumph or impede on another person's rights.

    Marriage is a religious covenant between man and woman between God, so how they dare expect religious groups to grant them the acceptance they seek in that matter? Marriage is at the very core of religion. For Christians I know. Stemming from the Church being the bride of Christ.
  • SL
    Would anyone here be willing to subscribe and comment on my blog? We have had over 3,000 visits in the first week alone. Thanks so much.

  • davidwwalters
    In 60, Tish stated:
    <<it's amazing how they want tolerance of their beliefs yet, have no respect for the beliefs of others.>>
    -as if gay people just decided with no prompting or good reason, just to spontaneously disrupt a church service, or otherwise "disrespect" some christians.

    A young republican who writes about the Peace Corps in a not totally negative tone is fine with me!
  • BT
    "I would aruge the importance of the word "marriage" and the inherent discrimination in using a different word for "the same" institution, but it would clearly fall on deaf ears."

    There is simply too much on this topic to address fully, but I do want to address this fundamental premise.  "Gay Marriage" and "Marriage" are not the same institution, as suggest by the use of scare quotes.  I'm all about giving equal rights to gay couples (tax benefits, inclusion in intestate proceedings, etc.), and even believe that those rights are necessary so we treat all people as equal, but there is a very real difference between the relationship of a heterosexual couple and the relationship of a homosexual couple (regardless of whether one is more devoted then the other).

    That difference, plainly, is the combination of genders. Some may argue that there are no gender distinctions.  Even so, a majority of society (see: CA, FL, AZ) plainly believes that there is a distinction and that this distinction is epitomized by the title.

    A title is not a right.  I cannot be a mother in the eyes of the law.  I do not think there is any need, despite the drastic difference in the way the law typically treats mothers and fathers in custody battles, etc. for the law to change the definition of mother to reflect the fact that I cannot be one. Just the same, the law should not suggest that homosexual couples can be properly married.
  • DS
    Well said BT.
  • davidwwalters
    Did anyone see Barbara Walters interview Friday evening.....a woman who had undergone surgery to become a man is pregnant......a father carrying a baby!
  • Titus Hunt
    i didn't see that interview but saw articles about him/her being pregnant again.  that is why i think we need traditional values in this country.  look what happens when it is a "me" world and anything goes.  now how are they going to explain to their children what happened when the children are old enough to start being teased by their friends.  hell, i just think we all need to throw away any sense of decency in this country (we pretty much have already) and take away the laws that protect us.  that is what people seem to want.  it is horrific!
  • DS
    I agree Titus.  Seems people won't be satisfied until anything goes.  Sound like a familiar situation when God decided enough was enough?  It wouldn't be fair to Sodom and Gomorrah if God allowed our nation to do the same thing without punishment.  Again David, I hope I don't have to say I told you so.  But I'll be ready to go when He comes to get us.  I hope you will be too.
  • davidwwalters
    by all means, have traditional values for yourself......why demand everyone submit to your views?
  • Titus Hunt
    David:  a lot of children in america today are screwed up.  do ya think this stupidity that we are seeing now is helping?  how am i supposed to explain to my youngest child things like this?  children don't need to be subjected to this crap.  why don't we run around nude and have sex on the street?  is that what you are saying?  the "any goes" system has really caused this nation more serious problems than we had before.  why do you think people are having children out of wedlock?  statistics show single women w/children are more likely to be on the proverty level.  it used to be shameful as it should be.  it is the children that suffer, and it is not the government's fault.  but the taxpayers are expected to foot the bill because of stupidity.  it is the people's fault by the choices they make.  so traditional values are the only way to go!  i stand by my statement!
  • Titus Hunt
    DS-- i'll be ready.   it is really a shame that we are now living in a "me" world and people are so selfish.  that is why a lot of people condemn traditional values, and why we have the problems we have in this country.  it is so sad.  our futures are our children and if they are seeing crap like this, we are in trouble.
  • davidwwalters
    69(my favorite number!)
    i was born in Ft. Bragg, but i was raised in Germany......i rather appreciated the lack of modesty Europeans have concerning nudity.  No one is calling for public sex however.
    There has always been gay people Titus, If you leave 'em be and quit making such a fuss about it, i bet gay folks would be less inclined to be "in your face", and just keep their amorous activities a private matter.
    Explaining it to kids?  Not so hard to teach 'em that everyone is different!
    <<so traditional values are the only way to go!  i stand by my statement!>>
    -So go the traditional way!  If it works for you, by all means......but for those that are different from you, why insist on them being like you?
  • DS
    I actually disagree with your statement that they would be less in our face if we left them alone.  With political correctness the way it is, EVERY group will be looking to get EVERYTHING they can from the government.  And they also expect us to agree and accept everything they stand for.  Christians will NEVER be able to do that.  We love the person, but we will never accept the sin.  God feels the same way.
  • Titus Hunt
    David -- i agree w/DS.  discreet is not what they want.  that is evident by the parade in san francisco every year.  you call that discreet.  i don't think so.  as long as people are behind closed doors, i have nothing to say.  however, they shouldn't envade public space with such crap.  my rights as a parent are violated if i have to explain this garbage to my child.  children have a hard enough time growing up without this kind of behavior rubbed in their faces.
  • Bobby G
    Well said DS.   Christianity is not about forcing religion upon people, it's about teaching people about God, and planting seeds in the hearts of men.  When we as christians are trying to forced by others to submit to what we believe is wrong, we will stand up for what we believe, and  except for a few radicals, try to do that in a peaceable way.  Our only desire is to bring God back to a nation that once celebrated God as King, and Jesus as King, and to follow the morals that we once had as a nation.  But we will never force  non-christians against their will to believe as we do, that's not our right.  We will however, call sin, sin, and ask for repentence from our nation, and call upon the mercy of God for our nation.
  • Bobby G
    I guess no-one likes my comments on this site.  I've tried to post 3 times and have been kicked off.  I think because I quoted scripture to support my views.
    So I'll say DS, I am in perfect agreement with your Post#68
  • davidwwalters
    DS 63....
    (as i'm laughing a bit)<<It wouldn't be fair to Sodom and Gomorrah if God allowed our nation to do the same thing without punishment.  Again David, I hope I don't have to say I told you so.  But I'll be ready to go when He comes to get us.  I hope you will be too.>>
    -well, when i get (down there)......i'll bring that up with all the Sodmites&Gomorrahites, a kinda "fairness doctrine" for God to adhere to with respect to modern day Sodomites!  Maybe God will bring some kinda plague to punish 'em...
    << And they also expect us to agree and accept everything they stand for.>>
    -I think they'd be fine if you'd accept them......i don't imagine they'd ever think you'd agree with them!
    Titus There's that "69" again!
    <<that is evident by the parade in san francisco every year.  you call that discreet.>>
    The parade would loose it's luster if there weren't any bible thumpers to outrage......it's done, just to get y'all's goat!  Ignore 'em, their glitter will tarnish a bit with time!
  • Bobby G
    "So David, you are a live and let live person?  If people want to kill babies, let them, but forget about letting the babies live?  If homo-sexuals want to disrupt church services, let them, but forget about the rights of the church that was meeting quietly and peaceably.  Forget about the churches that don't believe that homo-sexuality should be allowed in an authorative position in the church.  That sounds one-sided to me.
  • Bobby G
    Thx U C for letting me back on.
  • Robert Jacobs
    Hey guys,
    Just a conservative willing to capitalize on some good ideas here... please visit: www.cafepress.com/rightunite

    I hope you enjoy the merchandise.
    Thanks for listenin',
  • davidwwalters
    BobbyG righteously observes:
    If people want to kill babies, let them, but forget about letting the babies live?>>
    Bobby, we should let ALL babies live.....as Susan, 2BlueStarMom,DS, and Titus Hunt can tell you, even those babies we drop bombs on in Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan should live, don't you think?

    If homo-sexuals want to disrupt church services, let them, but forget about the rights of the church that was meeting quietly and peaceably. >>
    -Well, i e-mailed Mount Hope Church and asked them if they actively oppose gay rights......but they never wrote back.  So i don't know if the
    "Bash Back" crowd had an ax to grind or what.  UC makes it sound so unfair...but something tells me there may be more to the story than meets the eye.
    So yeah, i am a "live and let live kind of guy".  I'm also a "Don't tread on me" kinda guy, so i could understand if Bash Back had an ax to grind.  But if the good pastor @ Mount Hope Church is blameless, well then shame on Bash Back!
  • davidwwalters
    <<.....as Susan, 2BlueStarMom,DS, and Titus Hunt can tell you, even those babies we drop bombs on in Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan should live, don't you think?>>
    -They don't agree with me either, it's just that they could have warned you not to get me started, lol!
  • DS
    Oh David,
    We agree that it is terrible for ANY innocent babies to die.  We just disagree that there is a direct parallel between abortion (murder) and those (killed) accidently during war.  And you have yet to acknowledge that fact.
  • Paula
    Seems to me that the liberal whiners are always the first to sling mud...including the accusation that conservatives and Christians are mean, nasty and intolerant.  I refuse to get in a political discussion with a liberal anymore because it will only end in hate and mud being slung back at me in the name of tolerance.
  • Anonymous
    I don't understand why there is such a fight over this issue but, there is, and evidently I've missed something. I'm all for legal unions for gays and lesbians because it makes sense to me that two legally joined adults should be able to participate in the same benefits that other legally joined adults participate in. Is it just a matter of having this union being recognized as a "marriage"? If this is the case, why not just legalize unions and call yourself married?
  • Anonymous
    In perusing the posts, I noticed the inevitable talk about religion, particularly the Bible. I'll be up-front, I've been to church services (not counting weddings) about 2 times in my life- both times were when I was a boy and had spent saturday night at a friend's house whose family was Catholic. Anyway, I know there is plenty in the bible about homosexuality and sin but is there anything in the bible that Jesus directly said about homosexuality? I don't think there is.
  • davidwwalters
    DS 82....
    <<We just disagree that there is a direct parallel between abortion (murder) and those (killed) accidentally during war. >>
    OK.....i'll break it down for you as best i can.  From my experience in the 82nd Abn Division, i had intimate knowledge of targeting air strikes.  I have called in air strikes for close air support, and later after i was injured and left my infantry unit, i worked alongside Air force "targeters".  A targeter would analyze aerial photos of potential targets and then answer the commander's(the General's) questions about the potential target.
    He'd often ask about the likelihood for collateral damage. It could only be an educated guess, since we couldn't actually see children in the photos for the most part.  Yet we knew it was likely.
    So, how accidental is that?  Not very much, if you ask me.  It's a good excuse, just as John McCain said "protecting a mother's life" is during the debates. 
    -BTW, i wonder why there were angry people about to kill young John McCain after he was fished out of that lake in Hanoi in 1967?  Could it have been due to the "accidental" deaths of young Vietnamese children from previous strikes on downtown Hanoi?  From what i understand, it was the fast talking of a young Vietnamese man that saved his life from some angry towns people who were ready to kill him then and there.
    We can CALL something an "accident" when in actuality it is no accident.  An accident is when we had NO knowledge of something.....and in many, many cases....we know the results of our actions prior to the 1st bomb being dropped.
  • davidwwalters
    Anonymous 84&85.....
    <<If this is the case, why not just legalize unions and call yourself married?>>
    Me?  I agree with you....yet something tells me some people of faith just don't want any compromise on this issue.  As if two people loving one another is gonna send some one else to hell!
  • davidwwalters
    Paula 83....
    Try me, i'm quite liberal, but i only sling back what's slung at me!
  • DS
    Actually, that IS the nature of the argument.  Christians just don't the term marriage changed form being a man and woman, that's all!  We would support equal rights for gay couples, just don't call it marriage, that's all.  So, I take it we're now finsihed with this particular thread since it appears we have solved the problem!   YEAHHHHHH!!
  • davidwwalters
    DS 89....
    I'm glad we can agree......all that is needed is for one of the gay couple to commit to being the man & the other to commit to being the woman!
    Isn't it every woman's dream to wear a wedding gown?
    My back was better after a long sit in a hot tub.
  • simonesdad2008
    I've said this before.  Marriage is a function of government.  The Pope himself can preside over your ceremony but if you don't have that piece of paper from your town or state, it is just an expensive party.  So called traditional marriage was an exchange of property (dowry in tow) or an expression of prosperity (by the number of wives you had).  That goes back to biblical times.  It has evolved over time and it is time for it to evolve again.  I would support language that says marriage should be for two people, any two people.  The government affords rights, your employer affords rights and legally you are entitled to rights when you are married.  Prisoners, who have no other rights essentially, have the right to get married.  Keep in mind, Barack Obama's parents marriage was illegal in at least 13 states at the time they were married.  Can anyone defend that now?
  • DS
    hahaha....not fair.  you can't change the rules in the middle of the game David!  A man is a man, and a woman is a woman.  Glad to hear your back feels better.  Jesus has been known to visit hot tubs as well.  ;-}
  • hey gays, what happen on lib's
    Join The Debate!
    Post Your Comment
    (30 comments so Far)
    View in ascending order     View in descending order

    Location: FL
    Reply # 1
    Date: Nov 18, 2008 - 1:38 PM EST

    Subject: Palin, Romney, live, true, deeplyconsist
    ((((((((LIB FAILED AGAIN)))))))))
    ((((((((GOD'S FAMILY MARRIAGE))))))))))
    ((((((((GOD EVEN OVER CALIFORNICANS?)))))))))
    But... there's not over yet on SoFlorida, California... there remain The People, not u$$r, cuba, iran, UN$adam, taliban, chavez, etc. kind of "liders", marx-no God empire denniers, hollocaust denniers, God's abortion survivor little defenseless babies "don't care about kind of vote"?
    And, my well beloved is not "over" yet on your state, or country...
    libland have the perfect opposition, their perfect storm, and the enemy legaly have to deal with an uncontroled remaining population,
    deeply consistant on conservative and homeland security(and allies, not enemy's) protective, along the vets, we won't go, "won't live the kids alone on the car outside a T-rex opencage, and hide where you are going to be found anyway", we don't run from history, we make history, we permit freedom, we seek God's creation, our genes are "older than just a coupple of million y/o bones",
    we even believe on eternal celestial ancient creatures along men, even before Earth...

  • davidwwalters
    DS 92.....
    -Just as creation isn't perfect,........ the physically&mentally challenged from birth defects, bombs dropping on children, natural disasters all tell us this is true.
    There are those who are not like you& me.....for what ever reason, since birth these people's sexuality are not the same as ours.  Let's not treat them unfairly......just as we wouldn't expect a challenged person to perform to  standards we reserve for the ones like ourselves.  Let us not hold those whose sexuality is different from ours to our morality.  As simonesdad2008 said in 91:
    <<it is time for it to evolve again. >>
  • DS
    I haven't been convinced that being gay or lesbian is a birth defect.  I don't see any scientific evidence for it.  It can just as easily be a behavioral condition brought about by choice.  But to be perfectly clear here, christians don't "hate" gays and lesbians, we just abhor the sin....just as God does.  We love the person, and want to see them made whole again.  IF they choose to NOT be made whole and to choose to be gay or lesbian, that is their choice.  If they want to be made whole, God will make them whole.
  • davidwwalters
    DS 95.....
    -Ricky was my neighbor as a child.....and before he was 5 yrs old, i knew he was a "sissy"...it was NO choice on his part.  No, he was always like that.
    By high school it was clear he was gay, and being the south in the early 70's, he did his best to fit in. 
    I know you don't hate gays.....but many Christian Leaders do their best to demonize gay people.  That has a bit to do with my thoughts on Christianity....
    -In addition to the hot tub last night, i got a visit from a friend, and he saw how i was aching so much........he decided to cut out some of his stash(herb)...
    -a miracle, huh?
  • DS
    hahaha, I guess it was some what of a miracle to you, at least last night.  I smoked it growing up, abut didn't really like it much.  It made me nauseas, and I didn't even get the munchies like most of my friends.  I think God was probably protecting me at that time, and letting me know it wasn't a good thing for me to do. 

    As far as Ricky goes, being a "sissy" is not an uncommon thing to happen for some boys.  But that doesn't automatically mean they are gay.  I suspect he heard it so often that he finally decided that he must be gay!  Gee, ever heard of the power of persuasion?  Tell a kid how bad he is long enouhg, and he'll probably decide to be bad.  Why not, everyone already thinks it!  So that isn't scientific proof for me David.  Nice try, but it doesn't prove anything.  Until scientists can find that "gay" gene, I don't buy it.  And how do you explain "gays" who have become straight?  If they were born that way, how would they be able to change?  Well, maybe it as a choice after all, or maybe it was a miracle?  ;-}  Either way, my theories hold up, and yours don't.
  • davidwwalters
    Ricky was always a female...he never played like a boy or with the boys.
    he'd hang out with the women and watch soaps and learned to knit&crochet.
    The only thing that made him a boy was his plumbing i guess.
    he was a unique individual though, and i remained his friend even after i chided him for "commin' on to me. 
    Ricky even went out to the Prom with a girl, because he knew it was expected.  Yet his sexuality was always female.....it wasn't a choice, it was the way he was.
    I rarely smoke weed any more.  I used to a lot, but as lucky as i have been in my life, i don't want any more to do with going to jail....
    -Oh, i saw your comment to 2BlueStarMom.....yes, i enjoy our chats.  It helps all of us to communicate with those outside our normal circles.  It certainly helps to dispel those preconceived notions we get sometimes, huh?
  • DS
    Guess we'll have to agree to disagree about Ricky.  Maybe we can ask God about it when we see Him.  ;-}   I enjoy our chats as well.  I'm not sure, but I think it's because of my maverick personality.  I'm a philosophy freak....I love talking about why things are the way they are, and what can we do to make them better.  You would probably fit right in when my son and I get together and wax philosophical.  Of course, Jesus usually ends up being the answer to all of life's problems.   ;-}
  • Bobby G
    I also agree that it is a matter of choice and not a "gay" gene.

    I've known many a young man who was deemed a sissy by the way he acted, and the things that he did, yet turned out to be very manly.  I truly believe that the constant bombardment of negative influence, and the push towards wanting to make men less manly, confuses young boys growing up, and society along with the media, make it seem that if you have any less than manly attributes, then you probably are "gay"
  • davidwwalters
    Booby G.....
    I truly believe that the constant bombardment of negative influence, and the push towards wanting to make men less manly, confuses young boys growing up, and society along with the media,.......>>
    This was
    way back (i'm old)
    ......there was no media bombardment that was pro-gay in the early 1960's!  So the negative influence idea doesn't hold any water, nor was there any push towards wanting to make men less manly .....and Ricky's dad was a big, bad paratrooper(every dad in my neighborhood was a paratrooper), so that shoots that theory down as well.
    -Back to square 1.......Ricky was born gay!  God musta made him that way!
  • Dora
    Those of us that ARE gay know that we were born this way.
    Those of you that are not gay don't know squat.
  • tracy
    Right on! If the civil code blocks them from any 'rights' then that is what needs reworking,, not marriage! Why not change that? The people voted democratically and that is a right too!

    I firmly believe homosexuality is a deviant behavior like pedophilia! I don't care if you were born that way or not! Those people I see LOOK and ACT deviant!
  • davidwwalters
    Tracy  104.....
    << The people voted democratically and that is a right too!
    -a couple of things...
    First, if the people were to vote to deny another minority their civil rights,
    it would be a right?
    Second, pedophilia involves minor children, so there is the issue of statutory rape.  Homosexuality is between adults.
  • Dora
    tracy- your ignorance is overwhelming.
    I swear, people should be jailed for just being stupid.
  • JarrodM
    OK help me out here I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

    So a company using technology, and this and that comes up with a great way for match making. This company has underlying chirstian ideals, and run their company this way, with out pushing a religious agenda. Things are great untill a gay person decides that this is descrimination that thist company is not providing this service to them. Where in american have we decided that a private company now must operate to include all lifestyles, to include alternative lifestyles?
  • WadeHM

    Eventually what it will come down to is that every entity, commercial, non-profit, churches, whatever they might be, will be forced to accept and cater to and treat as special any and all lifestyles no matter what the belief in them is. It is coming, and it is already rolling in place.
  • davidwwalters
    "Unlike in Europe, where secularism has a strong hold, many atheists in the U.S. have felt like a shunned minority. Politicians often reflexively end speeches with "God bless America." Schoolchildren pledge their allegiance every day to "one nation, under God." City parks display the Ten Commandments. When atheists talk openly in public, "we often see people shaking their heads and moving away, like there's a plague zone around us," said Iggy Dybal, a real-estate broker in Kansas City, Kan."
  • Bobby G

    Deviant behavior is deviant behavior, whether it is between adult to child, or adult to adult.  Incest is deviant behavior, and can be between adults.  Murder is deviant behavior, and can be adult to adult.  Your theory does not hold water. 

    On the gay issue, all that I am saying is, negative influence, such as calling someone a girly boy, or sissy, can, and could, influence a young boy, to become such a person, even in the early sixties.  It still does not change the belief that there is no (gay) gene.
  • davidwwalters
    Bobby G.
    -deviant behavior is also when an adult christian leader lashes out against gays as being deviant in god's eyes, so gays are subject to abuse and hatred.
  • Dora
    It would be far more productive to study why some humans hold such hate and foster ridicule of their fellow human beings who happen to be gay. 
    There is no "gay agenda" .  Anyone who fosters this notion operates with no knowledge of the "gay world".  All we want is to live our lives.   All you want is for us not to do this. 

    Why not work on YOUR issues.  I have no issues with who I am.
  • davidwwalters
    -Somehow, i don't understand though, how our sexuality.....deviant though it may seem, sends some christian moralists in a tizzy! 
    Jesus DID speak out against divorce, but i don't recall much on the homosexual issue. 
    Perhaps these christians could read there own bible and find out what Jesus really wants them to do......help the poor and promote peace....and stay out of my bedroom when it concerns consenting adults....
    << Murder is deviant behavior, and can be adult to adult.  Your theory does not hold water. >>
    -Uh, Bobby G.....murder is rarely between 2 consenting adults!  Your analogy sucks!
  • Dora
    I don't either, David.  I don't either.
  • sdan
    What are the laws governing protesting in Michigan?  If they were standing on the street yelling and handing out fliers that would be fine but to go in and disrupt the service is going over the line.  As to the comment that was made along the lines that the church must have done something to provoke this is silly.  It goes back to the old saying that two wrongs don't make a right.  Another question is if the gay-marriage laws were passed would a church that has beliefs that homosexuality is wrong would be required to perform marriages or face lawsuits?  Also what would have been your reaction if a group that feels homosexuality is wrong would have gone into a church that condones homosexuality and started yelling and throwing fliers.  Somehow I could see some of you yelling to prosecute them under the hate crime laws.