Blog powered by Typepad

Newsvine Politics News

« On The Other Foot | Main | The Religion Of Peace? »

April 01, 2011

Comments

Dennis

Rey,

Perhaps the fact that you have no interest in my values rendered your questions mute, in my mind.

The answers to your questions:

QUESTION:
I have no interest in your values. I have an interest in public policy. And, if you support public policy that is consistent with your "high moral values," how would you propose that fat people, rich people, and divorced people be treated under the law?

ANSWER
Your democratic party is already addressing fat and rich people through taxation, but I do not find it a sin to be fat, nor is it a sin to be rich. I know plenty of people that are overweight that really struggle to lose weight. Do they lose weight? Mostly no, because they eat too much. You see it is more about attitude; they want to lose weight. No, I don't think we should put fat people in jail. I know rich people that are generous and not greedy. I'm sure there are plenty of rich people that are greedy, but you see our free market capitalizes on that motivation to provide jobs (perhaps that's why the democrats have not been able to materially bring down the unemployment rate), so no, I don't think that we should put all rich people in jail. Nor do I think we should put homosexuals in jail (are you starting to see why I didn't answer these questions (I thought they were rhetorical)?

QUESTION
Ever walk your kids by a strip club, a swinger's club, a sex shop, or young straight people groping anyone? Is that an indictment of heterosexuality?

ANSWER
I usually steer clear of these places, so no I have never walked my kids in front of them (it's a family thing). Actually I haven't seen that much heterosexual groping either (except on TV, but that's another matter).

QUESTION
Did any of your gay friends ever ruin a child's life?

ANSWER
Not to my knowledge, but statistics on long term effects are not available yet.

Rey

Dennis: I'll address your questions even though you don't answer mine. Deuteronomy and Leviticus contain dozens of rules you don't follow, nor do you advocate laws enforcing those rules. Leviticus makes one reference to something that might be related to homosexuality, but if we're going to follow that reference as a rule, take your clothes outside and burn them. Then, go to the statehouse and argue for a law banning how our farmers grow crops.

Dennis

It is not for me to condemn homosexuals. I do; however, have a vote. I will vote my conscience.

Dennis

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-f018.html

Dennis

Rey,

What do the rules of Leviticus and Deuteronomy have to say about gay marriage?

Rey

Dennis: You appear to be a good-hearted person, but you don't appear to be courageous enough to scrutinize your own positions or respond to questions that challenge your positions. Reverting to "the Bible is the truth" doesn't persuade me on matters of public policy. If you think it should, good enough. I don't buy that the Bible is historically accurate, inerrant, and the judge of all human activity. You do, so it's fair for me to ask how you would reconcile the rules of Leviticus and Deuteronomy with public policy. If you can't, maybe it's time to give your starting point a second look.

Dennis

Rey,

Thank you for your opinion. You can keep the personal insults about my level of intellect. You obviously do not know me. Typically I try to keep my commentary from drifting into personal attacks. You should do the same.

To the fact that you and I have very different moral bearings is painfully evident. That does not make you right. I find your attitude perverse, you think that I am backward. You want to twist God's word into something of your liking, perhaps to make it more "PC". I do not have to defend Truth. There is only one Truth. Your reflection of your "truth" requires much work on your part.

We are both fortunate that God sacrificed His only Son to cleanse us from our sins. I know there is merit in what you have to say, concerning matters of the human heart. Jesus loves all sinners. I do not claim to be a better person than homosexuals. I am merely stating my opinion (such is the format) on the subject. My opinion is based in what I have learned from various churches, reading the Bible, Bible study and discussions with persons of the cloth. That does not make me right either; however, I would ask you to show me any Biblical passage that condones homosexuality. Or perhaps, your truth is higher than that of our Lord.

Rey

Dennis: You're not making any progress toward intellectual integrity. Many argue that gay civil unions or marriage, however named, undermine the sanctity of traditional marriage. Your response to that was "Well, my kids saw some homos by the ballpark, and that was uncomfortable." That was completely unresponsive to the point. Second, your kids are far more likely to be subjected to sexually inappropriate behavior by heteros, i.e., strip clubs, beer ads, etc. You didn't respond to that. If you ever received any higher education, it's apparent you didn't take a class in logic.

I have no interest in your values. I have an interest in public policy. And, if you support public policy that is consistent with your "high moral values," how would you propose that fat people, rich people, and divorced people be treated under the law?

You can't escape the fact that you're for discriminating against only a small segment of the population, and that discrimination is based on a type of sinful/immoral behavior that you have no desire to participate in. That's pretty weak.

Dennis

I tire of the worthless drabble from the extreme left and their efforts to corrupt moral integrity, their complete lack of principle and their efforts to liquidate family values. Ah, but I will not give in.

Yours is the new pious.

Dennis

Rey,

My example of my young children witnessing gay men in lewd behavior did have an impact on my family; and who are you to make an assessment on that? Also; our laws do not discriminate. Every person in the USA has the right to marry somebody of the opposite sex. I find it odd that I should have to defend what I know as a high moral standard. It is indicative of the complete moral collapse of this country. Do not push your perverted opinions on the public. The 8% of America (exaggerated, I'm sure) that are homosexual will just have to abide by the majority. Isn't that what a representative government is about?

Dave Thomas,

You and I have not read the same Bible.

Dave Thomas

"intellectual integrity"?

I'd define that as "Not making shit up to support your argument". Our culture is so pervasively full of over-the-top heterosexual imagery it's easy to overlook it, but see a couple of men kissing and you go into freakout mode.

Anyway, I'd like someone here like greeleygirl who uses her libido-scope to judge the behavior of others, to explain how someone's genetic makeup is a "lifestyle".

Call it "marriage" call it "union" (oops, dirty word...), call it "life partner", whatever. I'm interested in what makes for stronger families and better lives for children. Stable domestic partnerships, no matter what their composition, achieve that goal.

As I drift away from the GOP, I realize it is because they are willing to sacrifice results in the name of so-called principles. I'm tired of hearing the 50% divorce rate crowd lecture on marital virtues. Outlaw adultery if you are so serious about this. That's one of the Commandments. Homosexuality isn't.

Rey

Sure: faithful and consistent application of logic and rational thought. Avoiding use of logical tricks, i.e. red herring, non sequitor, strawman. Responding to, rather than avoiding points.

Fair question. Your example of seeing gays near Coors Field was a failure according to this definition. Your refusal to indicate how our laws should discriminate against other sinful behavior was another.

Dennis

Rey,

Would you give me your definition of "intellectual integrity"?

Rey

Believing that homosexuality is a sin is a matter of faith. Comparing homosexuals to pedophiles and claiming that homosexuals affected your marriage are demonstrations of a lack of intellectual integrity. Dennis, I actually appreciate that you're in favor of civil unions. I am too. I wouldn't call it marriage.

Dennis

Rey,

To you, the reasons we site are absurd. To me, they are faith-based. They are also the law of nature. I'm sure that I do not need to go into the "Birds and the Bees" with you. Look, many people are living together out of wedlock for one reason or another. Nobody is making them get married. By the same token, nobody is preventing gays from living together. Why does this have to be such a big deal? Why does it have to involve government, when our government is so overloaded and expanded that we can't even afford to operate? You do know that our government is on the brink of shutdown, don't you? Have you heard of Cloward and Piven?

If a person, in our free country is -or wants to be- gay, then by all means, be gay. Marriage is God's sanctity that joins a man and a woman for life, under which this man and this woman have a family under God's blessing. I have to agree with Powerball - they can go get their own logo. If it will shut them up, then have the state recognize their civil union. That way we can all move on from this distraction and deal with real issues of gravity.

nuff-sed

Powerball

As usual with the left, one liberal step leads to another without any forethought to how it will eventually play out. And usually they wakeup after shooting themselves in the foot.
This name play on same-sex marriage is just that. Why do they need to use the "borrowed" term marriage? What is wrong with calling it civil union?

The answer is two fold. One is that they are not truly happy with their state of affairs and wish to blend-in with the rest of the herd; to feel secure in public acceptance of their lifestyle by linking themselves to that via a name, marriage. My second point, which is more insidious (the shooting oneself in the foot analogy) is that point-one undermines the entire being of those who view marriage only between a man and a woman. The left-liberals know these two can never live together under the same roof, that of the church. It is a direct attack on the church. If you can adulterate the church then you can remove the separation, check and balance, of the church and state; government will be free to tell you what your morals should be. The same attack is being made on the church via women's right to choose and pro-life. Its also in redistribution of wealth that leads to socialism.

But to put it into perspective, think of it in other terms, franchise or charters, say Mc Donalds. That franchise was established to market hamburgers and fries. When you go there, you know what you will get; what it looks like and tastes like. They rely on that consistency to bring you back. Their product is protected. You would be very confused and perhaps up-set if you left Mc Donalds feeling like you just had a taco or burrito. But Bill's Burgers isn't doing so well, so he changes his name to **Mc Donalds** and puts up some golden arches! The rest of the story you can figure-out for yourselves, but the analogy is the same. If Bill is allowed to infringe on the Mc Donalds franchise name and not follow the menu protocol Mc Donalds will be hurt.

For those of you who need to hear it -THAT'S THE BEEF!

I do not appreciate the gay and lesbian lifestyle. It is not the norm, but having said that, I do understand. Stranger things than that happen. So if you think it advances your cause to spectacle yourselves in public be committed enough about it to at least get your own Logo!

Otherwise it is no different than a wolf putting on sheep's clothing and you will always be viewed that way by those of us who see marriage only between a man and a woman. You simply cannot change a biological understanding by covert operations. But you can destroy society by taking yet another step to force it to accept something that in the core is counter to the laws of nature. You pull this farce off and the government will be telling you stones are bread in no time!

Rey

I'm married. I have very few gay aquaintences. I am grateful that I was born straight. I am offended by those who seek to limit the freedom and opportunities of my fellow citizens when the reasons cited are so absurd. I'm curious as to why evangelicals spend so much effort seeking to discriminate, through man's laws, against one behavior that is arguably sinful when they do nothing of the sort against other behaviors that are unquestionably sinful. I think I know the answer: 92% or so of us have no desire to be gay, yet we all can fall victim to greed, lust, etc. We can ignore our own shortcomings if we get all worked up in righteous outrage at efforts to allow gays to live with the same legal (not divine) rights we enjoy under man's laws. That's all.

Dennis

Rey,

You seem to have a lot at stake here. My intention was not to insult anyone, merely to express my viewpoint. I'm sorry if I have offended you.

Rey

Dennis: dumb example. Ever walk your kids by a strip club, a swinger's club, a sex shop, or young straight people groping anyone? Is that an indictment of heterosexuality? You're lack of intellectual integrity is remarkable. I thought you were at least reasonable.

Rey

Dennis,

Did any of your gay friends ever ruin a child's life? That's what peophiles do. To compare the two is as ignorant as anything I've ever read, but you're among many supposedly loving, non-judgmental Christians to trot that drivel out.

Dennis

Rey,

Do you have any children?

About ten years ago I took my family to Coors Field to watch an afternoon game. We parked right under that overpass that is directly West of the park. There was a club (bar)under that overpass. We parked relatively close to it, as directed by the parking attendant. We got out of our car, gathered our things and the kids and started off for the ballpark. I noticed a couple of men holding hands, recognized that they were gay and moved on. Soon we turned the corner around a parked van and we were confronted with two men locked in a french kiss and aggressively groping each other. To distract my kids I started acting like a clown, making all kind of weird noises and hopping up and down. My kids did not notice the men, but remind me to this day how I acted "funny" all of the sudden when we went to the Rockies that one day. So count me and my wife as one "straight" couple who have been adversely effected by homosexuality.

I raised my children in the Lutheran church. They went to Dayspring up until high school. My wife and I invested in our children's future in ways that I understand that we should, as I was taught by my Savior through the Word of God. I thank God every day that my children love Him and live their lives in a manner that makes me proud to be their father. I looked out for my kids, took care to see that they were spiritually fed, and tried to set a good example for them (that was the hardest part). My kids understand what homosexuality is and they do not condemn or judge them. Homosexuality is a sin, but can I judge them? No. Who am I to judge anybody? I have had homosexual friends. They were like most of my friends; I liked them. To my recollection, I have never had an unkind word to say to them; however, I cannot condone their behavior. I will vote against any bill that proposes gay marriage. That's my vote. You, obviously, are free to vote how you wish.

Pedophilia is a perversion too.

greeleygirl

Rey, sorry about the barfing. Have a very happy home life. no complaints so far. Could it be that you are not as straight as you would like to appear? Many are wondering.........

Rey

And, if you can find ONE straight, married couple whose relationship has been adversely affected by the relationship of homosexuals, I'd love to hear about it. My relationship with my wife is wholly unaffected by what the State of Colorado, the United States of American, or my neighbors do or say. This argument that gay relationships or unions somehow undermines straight relationships is about as absurd as anything I've ever heard.

Rey

Rey,

I disagree with but do not despise people who share my values and believe that the laws of man should subject others to those values. My ideal of America is a place where the laws of man are founded on freedom. You are free to do whatever you want, so long as what you do doesn't affect me. Gay sex, civil unions, use of marijuana, etc. have no affect on me. Therefore, they should be legal. So-called conservative Christians place the imposition of their values on others through man's laws above freedom. Count me out of that.

Dennis

Rey,

I find your response interesting, and telling. You attend church, yet you despise people that share your values? You must have a lot of pent up anger.

If we took sex out of the equation and just viewed people for the balance of who they are, then many other issues would be more clear. This is what our feral gubmint must do. I don't recall that the Constitution expressly addresses gay marriage; therefore, it falls to the states.

Personally, I am repulsed by the thought of Gay marriage. Out of love for my faith I do not want the sanctity of marriage sullied by people who do not respect my faith. Legally, I do not see how it can be prevented; however, I will fight the terminology. Don't call it marriage.

Rey, you are correct that if sin were outlawed, then we would all be criminals. Many in our faith cherish moral integrity; morals as defined by our Lord and Savior in the Holy Bible. This is a huge issue now, because these are the same morals on which our country was founded. The recognition of our Creator is the foundation of our Constitution. Jesus does not demand that we love Him. This is part of our faith.

The comments to this entry are closed.