Oregon House approves two gay rights bills.
By on Apr 17th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Oregon House approves two gay rights bills.
The Oregon House voted today to approve a domestic partnership bill which offers same-sex couples a broad range of new rights, as well as legislation that bans discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people in employment, housing and access to public accommodations. Towleroad notes one ironic moment: “House pages tried to block Aimee Wilson, the partner of Rep. Tina Kotek (D-Portland), from being on the floor during the debate because she wasn’t a family member. Wilson eventually made it on the floor.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Congratulations, Oregon!
April 17th, 2007 at 10:43 pmWow. Amazing. When I lived in Oregon, there was a huge anti-”special rights” for gays kurfuffle going on. I call this progress.
:-)
April 17th, 2007 at 11:00 pmThank you for working toward equality, Oregon.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:00 pmIf Oregon allowed people to carry guns, they could have protected themselves against homosexual marriage.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:05 pmIf Oregon allowed people to carry guns, they could have protected themselves against homosexual marriage.
Comment by Jake-obin
They could also legally commit suicide. Hate is a terminal illness, isn’t it?
April 17th, 2007 at 11:08 pmThe majority of Americans are rejecting the republican hysteria of “special rights” and are realizing that “equal rights” are not “special rights.”
April 17th, 2007 at 11:11 pmThe Jake jokes are actually pretty funny.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:20 pmImagine less angry people, all around.
Give people Justice, and you have peace.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:22 pmThe Jake jokes are actually pretty funny.
Comment by ForTruth
Another one determined to summon that turkey. Oy.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:33 pmI can totally ignore Jake. If he shows up…
April 17th, 2007 at 11:43 pmI’m sorry, I see the humor in doing a good parody of someone. It takes extra talent to do that. I know people don’t appreciate the “name jacking” part. That’s why I actually do it rarely.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:44 pmZooey, you’re missing the point. If Oregon let people carry guns, Oregonians could defend themselves against assisted suicide.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:44 pmYOU KNOW APPROVING TWO GAY RIGHT BILLS IS GREAT, BUT IF THAT’S
THE WAY THEY SERVE THE PEOPLE, HOW MANY MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES
ARE BEING NEGLECTED
JUST LOOK AT THAT FIASCO WITH THE 109TH. ALL THEY TALKED AWAY
April 17th, 2007 at 11:45 pmWAS GAYS/LESBIANS AND THEY COMPLAINED CONSTANTLY ABOUT WORKING
2.5 OF THE 5 DAYS AND OTHER ISSUES FOR WHAT 8 FRIGGIN YEARS, THEY DID NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO SERVE YOU OR ME. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A WHILE, WHAT HAS OUR TRUSTED SERVANTS REALLY DONE THAT HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE IN YOUR LIFE, TALK ABOUT GAYS/LESBIANS? IN REALITY THAT IS SUCH A MINOR ISSUE COMPARED TO REALLY SERVING THE PEOPLE DUDE :)
Zooey, you’re missing the point. If Oregon let people carry guns, Oregonians could defend themselves against assisted suicide.
Comment by Jake-obin
Point taken….
Would that be like fighting for peace, or f*cking for virginity?
Heh.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:48 pmGuns don’t kill people, Dr Kevorkian kills people
April 17th, 2007 at 11:49 pmI can totally ignore Jake. If he shows up…
Comment by ForTruth
You think so? I know I can. :)
April 17th, 2007 at 11:50 pmChuck Heston,
You still alive, you stupid old prick?
April 17th, 2007 at 11:52 pmEating for Anorexia
Sleeping for the blind
Banning books for learning
April 17th, 2007 at 11:59 pmChuck Hestin is my preznit.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:59 pmLibruls kill babies.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:02 amSorry, no trolls here and thought I would just throw out some action.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:03 amLibruls kill babies.
Comment by ForTruth
I only take my limit — no more.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:03 amPut down that scythe and come out with your hands up! I may have Alzheimers, but I’m not….. er…
April 18th, 2007 at 12:03 amEasier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:03 amWow. This is pretty good troll bait, but we’re coming up dry….
April 18th, 2007 at 12:06 amEasier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
Comment by ForTruth
Damned right. Especially when one can work up that “cute” look.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:07 amI could parody Daryll.
Here goes:
Oregon is run by devils. I pray for the government to change the law back to the path of righteousness
April 18th, 2007 at 12:19 amTruth,
Don’t forget they have to give their lives to Jesus.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:26 amBelieve me, I’d like to give some of them back.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:29 amTis oddly quiet. I guess a Chinese terrorist at VA tech has thrown a curveball into their unreal reality.
I can see it now, the reactionists will soon be howling for war with yet another country.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:30 amHello, Zep.
I’m sure Daryll will be checking in first thing in the morning. :D
April 18th, 2007 at 12:35 amOf course the Oregon house approved these two gay rights bills. The neocons will be out in 08′ and they will need a place to retire.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:36 amHello, Zep.
I’m sure Daryll will be checking in first thing in the morning. :D
Comment by Zooey — April 18, 2007 @ 12:35 am
Why don’t you try asking him if this Oregon law thing isn’t a sign that the Rapture hasn’t already been and we are already well into the Tribulation?
Who says the Lord has no sense of humor?
April 18th, 2007 at 12:40 amI’m sure Daryll will be checking in first thing in the morning. :D
Comment by Zooey
Maybe, somehow I doubt it.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:42 amWho says the Lord has no sense of humor?
Comment by Jesus Christ
I’m not sure he’ll take me seriously since I pimp-slapped him this morning, but I’ll try. :}
April 18th, 2007 at 12:44 amMaybe, somehow I doubt it.
Comment by Zep Tepi
But it’s a “gay stuff” thread!
April 18th, 2007 at 12:45 amSorry, off topic, and I dont mean to be insulting but take a look at this video. I dont mean all Americans are like this, of course, but we have to think that these are the citizens of the country with the greatest nuclear active arsenal in the world.
April 18th, 2007 at 1:03 amOregon has come along way… back in the early 90’s, the Christian Coalition (?) with Len Maybon (?) actually got measure 9 on the ballot which stated in so many words, gays were perverted. It did not pass but stirred up much controversy.
April 18th, 2007 at 1:26 amDoes this mean Karl Rove will be moving to Oregon after he gets out of prison so he and Jeff Gannon can live happily ever after?
April 18th, 2007 at 6:14 ammaybe the rapture happened and the trolls are gone… somebody go over to jake’s house and see if there is an empty pair of shoes in his front yard.
April 18th, 2007 at 6:36 amOf course, we’re going to hear from some posters (not all of them trolls) that more states have voted to define marriage between one man and one woman.
I always think back to the law of the land from the 40’s and 50’s that stated mixed-race marriages were illegal. It took time for the US to grow out of that sophomoric attitude. It will take time, but I’m confident that the US will grow out of the anti-gay attitude and remove the “special rights marriage laws” only permitted between men & women.
“Special marriage rights” shouldn’t be tolerated! ;-)
April 18th, 2007 at 8:06 amHas anyone here seen or heard from Daryll?
If you do, tell him I’m doing great!
The monks here at the ashram are so very kind, and quiet.
They’re not always in my face asking me if I’m saved yet or not.
‘Bye everyone!
April 18th, 2007 at 8:32 amComment by ForTruth — April 17, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
you forgot
Porn stars for abstinence
April 18th, 2007 at 8:58 amRock stars against drugs and
Christians against Christ.
Comment by Juan C — April 18, 2007 @ 1:03 am
Makes me proud to be an American. I’ll bet they know who is on American Idol though.
April 18th, 2007 at 9:04 amThis agitates me. How can Oregon legislators defy Jesus’ laws? Why go to church every Sunday knowing that you support sin? I can’t wait until October (Gay Pride month), I plan to protest against Gay marches in Washington D.C. These individuals have no rights. They’re equivalent to muderers and rapist.
April 18th, 2007 at 9:40 amDaryll
Your position agitates me. How can you continually seek spiritual answers through secular politics? Why pray every day to God when you are so caught up in the material world? Why call God supreme when you put all your calls for power into the hands of man, through his laws? In the secular world, homosexuals are NOT equivalent to murderers and rapists because they do NOT hurt another individual. Thus, they DO have secular rights and God ORDERS us to fight for the oppressed. IF homosexuality is a sin, it is a sin against only God and, therefore, judgment and punishment should be left entirely up to him – NOT to secular law and certainly not to YOU.
April 18th, 2007 at 9:50 amComment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 9:40 am
Daryll, fair warning. Don’t make me post the questions again.
April 18th, 2007 at 9:55 am#45 – “These individuals have no rights.” Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 9:40 am
See! Consesrvatives HATE the US Constitution!
How’s that “pick & choose” religion working for you, Daryll?
Have you chosen the right verses of the Bible to follow, or have you missed out on any of the good ones?
April 18th, 2007 at 9:58 amWay to go, Oregon!
April 18th, 2007 at 9:59 amDaryll
Your position agitates me. How can you continually seek spiritual answers through secular politics? Why pray every day to God when you are so caught up in the material world? Why call God supreme when you put all your calls for power into the hands of man, through his laws? In the secular world, homosexuals are NOT equivalent to murderers and rapists because they do NOT hurt another individual. Thus, they DO have secular rights and God ORDERS us to fight for the oppressed. IF homosexuality is a sin, it is a sin against only God and, therefore, judgment and punishment should be left entirely up to him – NOT to secular law and certainly not to YOU.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 9:50 am
It hurts the procreation method. Oh, I follow man’s law to an extent, I ultimately follow Jesus laws. Are laws should be identical to biblical standards. Homosexuals can continue to practice their deplorable sexual behavior. In the end, they will have to answer to Jesus. Did you go to church on Easter?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:01 amTMM
Oh, go on, post a few of those questions. Maybe two or three at a time would be more impactful than all of them together – harder to ignore.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:03 amDaryll, fair warning. Don’t make me post the questions again.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — April 18, 2007 @ 9:55 am
The Old Testament should be used to assist us in our daily lives (parables). We should follow biblical standards within the New Testament. Notice that Jesus was against slavery in the New Testament. Homosexuality was also forbidden in the New Testament. Please keep the Old Testament within context.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:03 amSee! Consesrvatives HATE the US Constitution!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 18, 2007 @ 9:58 am
Wrong. Daryll hates the Constitution.
I am a Conservative and I don’t hate the Constitution. I disagree with what Daryll says about 98% of the time. We have had this conversation. If Oregon want to pass the Gay Rights bills, then so be it. I personally feel it should be a Federal issue, not a State issue as it has Federal implications. It is all well and good that Oregon may recognize same sex unions, but those rights do not extend to North Dakota, for instance.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:08 amWay to go, Oregon!
Comment by Karim — April 18, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Karim, you support homosexuality? Was Jesus for or against homosexuality? Are you following holiness standards? What is a christian? Do you consider yourself a christian? Can an individual that supports homosexuality be a christian? How can homosexuals biblically procreate? Please answer.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:08 amI warned you, Daryll…
(Again, mad props go out to Your Conscience for originally posting this list.)
April 18th, 2007 at 10:10 am
Daryll
The “procreation method” justification is extremely lame. If it was currently primary, then we should continue to demand the polygamy of the Moses time. I have no objection to YOU following whatever interpretation you have of Jesus’ law (which has nothing to say about homosexuality as a sin). Jesus himself, however, said to give unto God what is God’s (sacred) and unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (secular). Jesus himself broke MANY of the pious misinterpretations of Torah law, particularly regarding the Sabbath. And for what purpose? To minister and help the outcasts, the oppressed.
And yes, I went to church on Easter and for most Sundays before that over the past year. Are you questioning my faith and committment? I’ll stack my committment to the church against yours any day – my giving of time, money, and talent. It might interest you to know that, in fact, I have a church ministry cabinet meeting tonight – yes, I am a permanent member of that committee.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:14 amDaryll
The “procreation method†justification is extremely lame. If it was currently primary, then we should continue to demand the polygamy of the Moses time. I have no objection to YOU following whatever interpretation you have of Jesus’ law (which has nothing to say about homosexuality as a sin). Jesus himself, however, said to give unto God what is God’s (sacred) and unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (secular). Jesus himself broke MANY of the pious misinterpretations of Torah law, particularly regarding the Sabbath. And for what purpose? To minister and help the outcasts, the oppressed.
And yes, I went to church on Easter and for most Sundays before that over the past year. Are you questioning my faith and committment? I’ll stack my committment to the church against yours any day – my giving of time, money, and talent. It might interest you to know that, in fact, I have a church ministry cabinet meeting tonight – yes, I am a permanent member of that committee.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:14
If homosexuality, within our society, is considered legal then polygamy should be legalized.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:18 amIt’s not about whether or not you support homosexuality, homosexuality exists, the same as heterosexuality. The issue is equality under the LAW. Not the biblical kind, because thankfully this is not a theocracy. I am a christian, but i also have a god-given ability to THINK. Try it some time.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:18 amOh, I follow man’s law to an extent, I ultimately follow Jesus laws.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
So, you stone adulterers?
Are laws should be identical to biblical standards.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
Who’s Bible?
Homosexuals can continue to practice their deplorable sexual behavior. In the end, they will have to answer to Jesus.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
Then let Jesus do his job.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:20 amWell said, up till that last paragraph. Let’s not go comparing who is more holy than whom.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:20 amDaryll
The “procreation method†justification is extremely lame. If it was currently primary, then we should continue to demand the polygamy of the Moses time. I have no objection to YOU following whatever interpretation you have of Jesus’ law (which has nothing to say about homosexuality as a sin). Jesus himself, however, said to give unto God what is God’s (sacred) and unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (secular). Jesus himself broke MANY of the pious misinterpretations of Torah law, particularly regarding the Sabbath. And for what purpose? To minister and help the outcasts, the oppressed.
And yes, I went to church on Easter and for most Sundays before that over the past year. Are you questioning my faith and committment? I’ll stack my committment to the church against yours any day – my giving of time, money, and talent. It might interest you to know that, in fact, I have a church ministry cabinet meeting tonight – yes, I am a permanent member of that committee.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:14
Why go to church when you support defying Jesus’ laws. Would a homosexual be able to hold a position within your church?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:20 am#52 – “Please keep the Old Testament within context.” Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:03 am
In other words, PICK & CHOOSE the verses of the Bible to which you adhere. All other verses of the Bible that you, personally, don’t like ignore to your hearts content.
Way to go, Daryll! Continue to legacy of hypocrisy that is rampant among “conservtive christians” and “fundamentalist christians”.
You never addressed my hypothetical: if you put all the heterosexual men on one island, and all the heterosexual women on another island, they woud die out with no way to replace their numbers.
How is that different from sexually segregating gays on separate islands?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:23 amyou forgot
Porn stars for abstinence
Rock stars against drugs and
Christians against Christ.
Comment by hacker bob
And you forgot:
Conservatives for Peace
April 18th, 2007 at 10:26 amIf homosexuality, within our society, is considered legal then polygamy should be legalized.
Comment by Daryll
That was a nice try to catch me in a hypocritical inconsistency. However, I think polygamy SHOULD be legal. I don’t think it’s emotionally possible to have the same committment to more than one spouse, but if people want to try I won’t stand in their way. As long as there is no coercion, no direct harm, then there is no justification for government interference through prohibition of polygamy.
Now, you explain your and the Bible’s inconsistency.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:26 amDaryll
The “procreation method†justification is extremely lame. If it was currently primary, then we should continue to demand the polygamy of the Moses time. I have no objection to YOU following whatever interpretation you have of Jesus’ law (which has nothing to say about homosexuality as a sin). Jesus himself, however, said to give unto God what is God’s (sacred) and unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (secular). Jesus himself broke MANY of the pious misinterpretations of Torah law, particularly regarding the Sabbath. And for what purpose? To minister and help the outcasts, the oppressed.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:14 am
Patriot, the following scriptures indicate that homosexuality is a sin. I’m going challenge your holiness, today. So what is your explanation for the following scriptures:
Genesis 19
Leviticus 18.22
Leviticus 20.13
Judges 19.22-26
Romans 1.26-27, 32
Corinthians 6.9-10 &
St. Jude 1.7?
St. Jude 1.7
April 18th, 2007 at 10:27 amDaryll sez:
So….the Old Testament is no longer strictly applicable? Several passages in the NEW Testament would seem to contradict you on that score, Daryll:
Well, Daryll??? Are these passages of the NEW Testament to be ignored as well? Are you a real Christian, or merely a “cafeteria Christian”?
I look forward to your response.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:29 amWell said, up till that last paragraph. Let’s not go comparing who is more holy than whom.
Comment by wags
I am sorry if it came across that way. Notice my screen name. I am tired of others highjacking my faith and accusing me of not being a “true Christian”. Daryll has done so numerous times and alluded to it again in the post previous to my response which you referenced. Notice his response in #61 as well. I meant to defend my committment, not denigrate Daryll’s, which I have never questioned.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:30 amIf homosexuality, within our society, is considered legal then polygamy should be legalized.
Comment by Daryll
That was a nice try to catch me in a hypocritical inconsistency. However, I think polygamy SHOULD be legal. I don’t think it’s emotionally possible to have the same committment to more than one spouse, but if people want to try I won’t stand in their way. As long as there is no coercion, no direct harm, then there is no justification for government interference through prohibition of polygamy.
Now, you explain your and the Bible’s inconsistency.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:26 am
There is nothing inconsistent about the bible. If you would refrain from listening to your preacher (who’s probably a lost soul) and interpret Jesus’ word with his guidance, you shouldn’t have a problem. Also, please answer my previous post about the scriptures against homosexuality. I have backed you into a wall that you can’t get out of (CHECKMATE).
April 18th, 2007 at 10:31 amOh, I follow man’s law to an extent, I ultimately follow Jesus laws.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
So, you stone adulterers?
Are laws should be identical to biblical standards.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
Who’s Bible?
Homosexuals can continue to practice their deplorable sexual behavior. In the end, they will have to answer to Jesus.
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:01 am
Then let Jesus do his job.
Comment by hacker bob — April 18, 2007 @ 10:20 am
Adulterers are disgusting because they defy the sanctity of marriage. If I was God, I would instantly take them off this earth, but because of Jesus’ mercy, they are still in existence. They will pay during judgement day.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:34 amI’m going challenge your holiness, today. So what is your explanation for the following scriptures:
Comment by Daryll
I have already given you my theology about these passages. I would reiterate it but, to be honest, your “challenge” to my “holiness” has left a very foul taste in my mouth. wags has already offered the opinion that I have gone too far and challenged yours. I do not agree that I have. But, if I respond to you anymore to you at this moment, I might. So, I will hold my tongue.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:35 am#68 – “Also, please answer my previous post about the scriptures against homosexuality.” Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:31 am
Well, as I recently heard from a hypocritical christian, we have to keep the Old Testament “in perspective”. My “perspective” is that the contradictions and errors of the Bible render the document an advisory status, and my relationship with God is dependant upon my listening to him, not the hypocritical followers of today’s churches.
Checkmate. I accept your surrender.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:36 amComment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:30 am
I am a fellow liberal christian (longtime reader of TP, but only recently became an active poster, so I do agree with the bulk of what you post). In my experience, holier-than-thou pissing contests only serve to prove who can race to the bottom fastest. I was not questioning your commtment either, nor would I ever of persons of any religion.
I’d like to chat some more, but I’m at work, and can only check in now and again. Cheers.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:37 amCongratulations on being post #69, Daryll!
April 18th, 2007 at 10:38 am#69 – “They will pay during judgement day.” Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
As will you, for your double-standards concerning the Biblical passages you follow and the Biblical passages that you completely ignore.
When I hear about you burning everything that your wife touches during “that time of the month” as the Bible says you should, then we’ll talk about the Bible.
Until then, you’ve proven that you are a hypocrite. Jesus will judge you accordingly, and I hope you repent before you spend eternity in very warm place.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:40 amGeorge Bush : “If I was dictator…”
April 18th, 2007 at 10:40 amDaryll : “If I was God…..”
#69 – “Adulterers are disgusting because they defy the sanctity of marriage. If I was God, I would instantly take them off this earth…” Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Wow! I guess you really hate the Republican party! The majority of politicians that cheat are Republicans.
Way to go, Daryll! You’re obviously a supporter of Liberal Democrats!
April 18th, 2007 at 10:42 amI’m still waiting, Daryll…
April 18th, 2007 at 10:42 amHere is where you and I can agree. God wanted the tiny tribe of Israel to thrive and grow, so he needed the Hebrews to be sexually pure – which included marrying only other Hebrews. He also needed the Levites, the priests, to be pure – meaning to not copy the fertility rites of the Baal worshippers, which included both homosexual and heterosexual intercourse between the Baal priests and their followers. Most of the cleanliness laws (which include the sexual laws) were practical laws meant to protect the Hebrews. They did not understand the practical reasons, such as the danger of eating pork that might be undercooked, but, like the children that they basically were, followed the dicatates of their Father until the Hebrews matured and, under Jesus, were freed from the laws and given a new interpretation. The new interpretation of how to act is Jesus’ indication that loving God and loving your neighbor are the basis of all laws. Paul was able to see how circumcision, as a cleanliness law, was not a requirement to be a follower of God, but he could not extend the logic to homosexuality. As the faith of Christians matures, perhaps we will all be able to do so.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 13, 2007 @ 11:48 am
April 18th, 2007 at 10:43 amComment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Daryll, you say you follow Jesus’ laws, but you don’t.
You do not stone adulterers.
Have you ever looked at a woman (other than your “wife”) longingly? Have you ever had desire for a woman, even if you never acted on it?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:43 amDaryll sez:
The Old Testament should be used to assist us in our daily lives (parables). We should follow biblical standards within the New Testament. Notice that Jesus was against slavery in the New Testament. Homosexuality was also forbidden in the New Testament. Please keep the Old Testament within context.
So….the Old Testament is no longer strictly applicable? Several passages in the NEW Testament would seem to contradict you on that score, Daryll:
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.†(Matthew 5:18-19)
“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.†(Luke 16:17)
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.†(Matthew 5:17)
“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness…†(2 Timothy 3:16)
“Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.†(2 Peter 20-21)
“Whoever curses father or mother shall die†(Mark 7:10)
“He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.†(Matthew 15:4-7)
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.(Matthew 5:27-30)
“Slaves, place yourselves under the authority of your owners and show them complete respect. Obey not only those owners who are good and kind, but also those who are unfair.†(1 Peter 2:18)
“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law†(John 7:19)
“For the law was given by Moses…†(John 1:17)
“…the scripture cannot be broken.†–Jesus Christ (John 10:35)
Well, Daryll??? Are these passages of the NEW Testament to be ignored as well? Are you a real Christian, or merely a “cafeteria Christian�
I look forward to your response.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — April 18, 2007 @ 10:29 am
I completely agree with the passages listed above. The passages in the New Testament shouldn’t be ignored. You don’t realize it, but you stumped yourself, liberals, homosexuals and sinners. So why aren’t homosexuals following these laws. If he said the word is him, and if homosexuality has been considered an abomination in the bible, why do you continue to support it?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:44 amI’m going challenge your holiness, today. So what is your explanation for the following scriptures:
Comment by Daryll
I have already given you my theology about these passages. I would reiterate it but, to be honest, your “challenge†to my “holiness†has left a very foul taste in my mouth. wags has already offered the opinion that I have gone too far and challenged yours. I do not agree that I have. But, if I respond to you anymore to you at this moment, I might. So, I will hold my tongue.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Please reiterate your response to the scriptures against homosexuality. I’m not trying to denigrate you, I want to know your true beliefs and whether or not you’re a christian based on proof and substance.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:47 amDaryll…
April 18th, 2007 at 10:48 amIs it OK with you if I include your postings with the divorce papers?
Since when do christians need to prove their faith to anyone other than GOD?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:51 am#68 – “Also, please answer my previous post about the scriptures against homosexuality.†Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:31 am
Well, as I recently heard from a hypocritical christian, we have to keep the Old Testament “in perspectiveâ€. My “perspective†is that the contradictions and errors of the Bible render the document an advisory status, and my relationship with God is dependant upon my listening to him, not the hypocritical followers of today’s churches.
Checkmate. I accept your surrender.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 18, 2007 @ 10:36 am
Wrong again, my friend. Jesus said he is the word (bible). In order to see the Kingdom of God, you must follow the commandents and biblical standards. Does Jesus speak to you? Do you have the spirit of prophecy? How does Jesus speak to you? Are you a homosexual? You better study your bible.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:51 amCongratulations on being post #69, Daryll!
Comment by Raven — April 18, 2007 @ 10:38 am
Have you read your bible today?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:52 am#69 – “They will pay during judgement day.†Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
As will you, for your double-standards concerning the Biblical passages you follow and the Biblical passages that you completely ignore.
When I hear about you burning everything that your wife touches during “that time of the month†as the Bible says you should, then we’ll talk about the Bible.
Until then, you’ve proven that you are a hypocrite. Jesus will judge you accordingly, and I hope you repent before you spend eternity in very warm place.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 18, 2007 @ 10:40 am
As previously stated, the Old Testament should be used to guide those following holiness through life.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:54 amGeorge Bush : “If I was dictator…â€
Daryll : “If I was God…..â€
Comment by Raven — April 18, 2007 @ 10:40 am
Also, stop critcizing President Bush. He’s a true man of God.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:59 amMy theology, continued: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13
If I speak in the tongues of men and angels, but have not love,
I have become sounding brass or a tinkling symbol.
And if I have prophecy and know all mysteries and all knowledge,
and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
And if I dole out all my goods, and if I deliver my body that I may boast
but have not love, nothing I am profited.
Love is long suffering, love is kind, it is not jealous, love does not boast,
it is not inflated. It is not discourteous, it is not selfish, it is not irritable,
it does not enumerate the evil. It does not rejoice over the wrong, but rejoices in the truth
It covers all things, it has faith for all things, it hopes in all things,
it endures in all things.
Love never falls in ruins; but whether prophecies, they will be abolished; or
tongues, they will cease; or knowledge, it will be superseded.
For we know in part and we prophecy in part. But when the perfect comes, the imperfect will be superseded. When I was an infant, I spoke as an infant, I reckoned as an infant; when I became [an adult], I abolished the things of the infant. For now we see through a mirror in an enigma, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know as also I was fully known.
But now remains faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:59 am#69 – “Adulterers are disgusting because they defy the sanctity of marriage. If I was God, I would instantly take them off this earth…†Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Wow! I guess you really hate the Republican party! The majority of politicians that cheat are Republicans.
Way to go, Daryll! You’re obviously a supporter of Liberal Democrats!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 18, 2007 @ 10:42 am
No, I’m a supporter for Jesus and his laws, regardless of political party.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:00 amI’m still waiting, Daryll…
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — April 18, 2007 @ 10:42 am
I’ve previously answered your questions.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:01 amDaryll sez:
Wrong, Daryll. We didn’t stump ourselves…we stumped you.
We’re not the ones preaching fire and brimstone. We’re not the ones demanding that everyone follow the writings in your magic book.
It’s a fair bet that you don’t follow the teachings of the Old Testament as outlined in my earlier post, despite the fact that the New Testament specifically states that the Old Testament is still valid, as outlined in my other post.
This means you are in violation of God’s Law. Plain and simple.
In closing, I leave you with another Bible passage….one that is quite relevant to you:
April 18th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Comment by Daryll — April 18, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Daryll, you say you follow Jesus’ laws, but you don’t.
You do not stone adulterers.
Have you ever looked at a woman (other than your “wifeâ€) longingly? Have you ever had desire for a woman, even if you never acted on it?
Comment by hacker bob — April 18, 2007 @ 10:43 am
No, I don’t lust on other women. I have a beautiful wife that is incomparable to others.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:03 amMy theology, continued: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13
If I speak in the tongues of men and angels, but have not love,
I have become sounding brass or a tinkling symbol.
And if I have prophecy and know all mysteries and all knowledge,
and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
And if I dole out all my goods, and if I deliver my body that I may boast
but have not love, nothing I am profited.
Love is long suffering, love is kind, it is not jealous, love does not boast,
it is not inflated. It is not discourteous, it is not selfish, it is not irritable,
it does not enumerate the evil. It does not rejoice over the wrong, but rejoices in the truth
It covers all things, it has faith for all things, it hopes in all things,
it endures in all things.
Love never falls in ruins; but whether prophecies, they will be abolished; or
tongues, they will cease; or knowledge, it will be superseded.
For we know in part and we prophecy in part. But when the perfect comes, the imperfect will be superseded. When I was an infant, I spoke as an infant, I reckoned as an infant; when I became [an adult], I abolished the things of the infant. For now we see through a mirror in an enigma, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know as also I was fully known.
But now remains faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — April 18, 2007 @ 10:59
Patriot, you sound like a democrat, you’re going around my question instead of answering it. This has nothing to do with love. What did Jesus say about homosexuality (scriptures posted)?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:06 amHave you ever looked at a woman (other than your “wifeâ€) longingly? Have you ever had desire for a woman, even if you never acted on it?
Comment by hacker bob — April 18, 2007 @ 10:43 am
No, I don’t lust on other women. I have a beautiful wife that is incomparable to others.
That wasn’t the question, Daryll. Have you EVER looked at a woman longingly, other than your wife (after marriage, of course)?
If so (and if you’re actually a fully functional male human, it’s pretty certain you have), how did the ‘plucking out of the eyes’ go for you?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:07 amDaryll Unhinged.
I’m getting popcorn….
April 18th, 2007 at 11:11 amNo, Daryll, I haven’t read a bible since I was in my early twenties.
It isn’t something that can be read over and over again, once the essence of old testament history and the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene were taken to heart.
From there, I went on to read the writings of the worlds other great religions.
In my learnings, I distilled the common threads from all of them, and through these efforts I have a happy and peaceful relationship with the still small voice of god which speaks truth.
(Oh, I was really, really cold one morning long ago, and I had to use the last bible I had kicking around to get the stove going. So, it had a truly practical purpose in the end. Hope you can understand.)
April 18th, 2007 at 11:20 amComment by TripMaster Monkey — April 18, 2007 @ 11:07 am
Thqanks for picking up my slack.
Daryll, again the questions are:
Have you ever looked at a woman (other than your “wifeâ€) longingly? Have you ever had desire for a woman, even if you never acted on it?
I am waiting for your answer.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:37 amDaryll’s run off. It usually happens whenever someone holds a mirror up to his incredible hypocrisy.
Today he lasted longer than usual, but the outcome was never really in doubt.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:54 am#98 – True. Daryll cannot support his positions clearly, so he runs away when the light shines too brightly upon his hypocrisy.
I still love his (non)explanation on how the verses from Old Testament only count if they agree with his prejudices! The verses that he doesn’t agree with are “just allegory†or not to be listened to. How convenient for him.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:10 pm(Oh, I was really, really cold one morning long ago, and I had to use the last bible I had kicking around to get the stove going. So, it had a truly practical purpose in the end. Hope you can understand.)
Comment by Raven
THUD
Daryll just passed out….
April 18th, 2007 at 12:22 pmWhoah – what did I miss? Anyone take my name in vain? Bastard.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:25 pmDarryl – you do know that this Oregon law is another sign that the Tribulation is well underway, don’t you? Sorry that you, Tim LaHaye and the Rapture Index guy didn’t make the cut… there’s always next season as they say at the Cubs.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:31 pmPatriot, you sound like a democrat, you’re going around my question instead of answering it. This has nothing to do with love. What did Jesus say about homosexuality (scriptures posted)?
Comment by Daryll
This has EVERYTHING to do with love. If two homosexuals love each other and wish to commit themselves to a marital relationship as part of that love, the government has no business saying “no”. Religiously, I believe that Jesus said that love is the basis for what is moral or not in our relationships with each other and with God. I also believe, therefore, that God does not condemn true homosexual relationships which are based on love, though other forms of homosexual behavior would be sinful. However, I acknowledge that to be my personal belief and I don’t care if anyone else agrees or not, providing that we all have the SECULAR right to the same SECULAR institutions, one of which is marriage. I also believe that denying homosexuals secular marriage that is NOT an act of love and, therefore, sinful.
April 18th, 2007 at 3:30 pmDaryll
Jesus said nothing about homosexuality or homosexual behavior. In fact, the only writings in Scripture are about homosexual behavior, not homosexuality as a loving attraction between two people of the same gender. The term “homosexual” did not exist until the late 1890’s, coined by a psychologist. Even then, the understanding that there is a homosexual identity and emotional attraction did not exist, being only a very recent knowledge.
Jesus said a lot about love, tolerance, leaving judgment to God, and not confusing the material world with the spiritual one.
April 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pmNicely put.
April 18th, 2007 at 4:18 pmJesus said not a single word about homosexuality Daryl. If you claim otherwise, you are lying.
April 18th, 2007 at 6:48 pmYay, PLC!
April 18th, 2007 at 7:30 pmWhat’s a ‘homosexual’?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 pmYou all are arguing about the dumbest things. I am reading over-zealous Christian comments, antaganizing comments, and such.
Just a couple things:
Under the belief that the Word is from God (Or the Word is the Word of God) You can truthfully say that Jesus did have something to say about homosexuality. Being that Homosexual behavior is mentioned in both the Old and New Testament.
Another point: a distinction between the Old and New Testaments… any layman, or anybody that has spent a little time reading the Holy Bible would understand that there was many paradime shifts between the old and new testaments. When Christ rose from the dead new standards and practices were set. For instance the punishment for others. The O.T. teaches a strict punishment, Christ and the N.T. teaches a graceful but stern punishment. A lot of you are arguing from ignorance, and that is why i call you antagonizers.
Any Christian has the right to judge another within the body of Christ (read 1 Corinthians chapters 4-7).
Where does it teach that Christ taught tolerance, and what form of tolerance to you suppose Christ teaches?
April 19th, 2007 at 6:03 pmso you get your special rights….okay…now what if a Father wants to marry his daughter? What if a Mother wants to marry her son? What if a Sister wants to marry her brother? What if 2 brothers wish to marry? What if 2 sisters wish to marry? What about Pologamy? What if I want 2 husbands and my husband wants 5 wives? If you say yes to one group you MUST say yes to all groups.
The flood gates are open!
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmThat is logical, but i do not think anybody is looking at this stuff anymore.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:16 pmGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 8:05 amGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 8:54 pmYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 6:24 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pmGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 3:52 pmLesbian Sex Free Lesbian Sex Videos Lesbian Sex Videos
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pmGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:24 amYoung Girls Young Teens Angus Young
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 6:53 pmLesbians Lesbian 69 Indian Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 12:23 amLesbian Sex Lesbian Anime Teenage Lesbian
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 2:52 am