New Hampshire governor signs civil unions law.
By on May 31st, 2007 at 5:41 pm
New Hampshire governor signs civil unions law.
“Gay couples in New Hampshire will able to join in civil unions starting next year under a bill Gov. John Lynch signed into law Thursday. … Couples entering civil unions will have the same rights, responsibilities and obligations as married couples. Same-sex unions from other states also would be recognized if they were legal in the state where they were performed.”
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
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
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
Quick! Someone call Daryll!
May 31st, 2007 at 5:44 pmFantastic! Yay, Gov Lynch!
May 31st, 2007 at 5:47 pmOne small step forward, state by state… Thank You New Hampshire!
May 31st, 2007 at 5:47 pmUh oh.
How come TP posted this and never mentioned Oregon’s new law? Hmmm? We signed ours first!!!
May 31st, 2007 at 5:49 pmNew Hampshire, have you no shame?
May 31st, 2007 at 5:49 pmAnd this benefits society how?
May 31st, 2007 at 5:49 pmOne small step forward, state by state… Thank You New Hampshire!
Comment by RickyScorpio — May 31, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
More like a step backwards. Leave it to a liberal to defy God’s law. And you call yourselves christians?
May 31st, 2007 at 5:51 pmAnd this benefits society how?
Comment by Patrick1 — May 31, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
Hey Pat! It doesn’t, liberals want to destroy are christian ideals.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:54 pmUh oh.
How come TP posted this and never mentioned Oregon’s new law? Hmmm? We signed ours first!!!
Comment by gummitch — May 31, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
Your state has issues as well.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:54 pmAnd giving persons the right to marry those they love destroys society how?
May 31st, 2007 at 5:58 pmFred Thompson beats Hillary by ten in New Hampshire in 08′
May 31st, 2007 at 5:59 pmMore like a step backwards. Leave it to a liberal to defy God’s law. And you call yourselves christians?
Comment by Daryll
You call yourself a Christian? Have you no shame?
May 31st, 2007 at 5:59 pmDaryll my Man:
May 31st, 2007 at 5:59 pmI live in NH and it is a fine day here today. The sun came up like every other day. People went to work, raised their children, payed their taxes, and all the rest. I would think if your God was so mighty and as pissed off as you would have us think, he/she/it would have smited us or some shit. I think you might be losing this battle. Why not stop a crusade against shellfish? I think that is a problem in your story book as well.
Why does John Lynch hate america?
Why does John Lynch want the terrorists to win?
Clinton did it too.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:00 pmYour state has issues as well.
Comment by Daryll
Yes we do, happily.
We’re more or less fixated on the notion of a real democracy, without an established church.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:00 pmstart!
May 31st, 2007 at 6:01 pmMaybe someone should consider focusing on their own relationship with God rather than criticizing others for not having a relationship with God or not having one that follows the same bigoted and ignorant beliefs as their own.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:06 pmOh good! Daryll’s here. Now the forces of homosexuality have met their match.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:06 pm“And this benefits society how?
Comment by Patrick1″
…and this *harms* society–how??
May 31st, 2007 at 6:07 pmMaybe someone should consider focusing on their own relationship with God rather than criticizing others for not having a relationship with God or not having one that follows the same bigoted and ignorant beliefs as their own.
Comment by Ashen Shard — May 31, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
Hey, biblical laws are meant for everyone on earth. Ashen, I’m praying for you. Jesus Loves you, and I do too! You should divert from your liberal views and come see the light.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:09 pmOh good! Daryll’s here. Now the forces of homosexuality have met their match.
Comment by KRank — May 31, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
KRank, hell is real. This is not a game. God is not a toy.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:11 pmGod is not a toy.
Comment by Daryll
Then stop playing with him, you’re gonna break him.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:14 pmHey, biblical laws are meant for everyone on earth. Ashen, I’m praying for you. Jesus Loves you, and I do too! You should divert from your liberal views and come see the light.
Comment by Daryll
You observe all Biblical laws?
May 31st, 2007 at 6:21 pmWorking on it in Oregon – just need to overcome the obstructionist rural Republicans and we’re there. I’m thrilled for my friend Thomas, he and his partner have been together longer than I was married.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:24 pmYou observe all Biblical laws?
Comment by gummitch
How about asking yourself gummitch?
May 31st, 2007 at 6:28 pmKRank, hell is real. This is not a game. God is not a toy.
Comment by Daryll — May 31, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Thanks for your input, Daryll, but I don’t believe God is a toy. Nor do I believe God is an invisible figure in the clouds that judges humans for their adherence to a set of ancient tribal laws.
I frankly don’t think you’d be able to understand my concept of God, nor do i think you’d be interested, so I’ll keep it to myself.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:28 pmHey, biblical laws are meant for everyone on earth. Ashen, I’m praying for you. Jesus Loves you, and I do too! You should divert from your liberal views and come see the light.
Comment by Daryll
You observe all Biblical laws?
Comment by gummitch — May 31, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
Uh-oh… this should be good…
May 31st, 2007 at 6:29 pmHow about asking yourself gummitch?
Comment by Flaco
Did you find me telling other people they had to?
You might want to try paying attention for a change.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:33 pmDaryll – You obey all biblical laws, so,thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
c) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
d) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
e) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
f) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
g) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:33 pmComment by powkat
Hey, that’s mean. I set him up first.
Still, neither one of us is going to see any response. He’ll just hide out until the next opportunity to judge everyone else.
I think I’ll go home and cook up some shrimp.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:38 pmHeh…I was about to post that list. It usually shuts Daryll up, although sometimes he tries to weasel out by stating that the Old Testament no longer applies. We’ll see if he tries that dodge again.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:39 pmDaryll went home? Darn.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:42 pmDid you find me telling other people they had to?
You might want to try paying attention for a change.
Comment by gummitch
Yea I do, his name starts with a D.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:47 pm#33 Flaco, can you point out where gummitch told anyone they had to pay attention to God’s laws? Or told them they had to do anything? I’m just not seeing it.
Thanks.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:58 pmAnd this benefits society how?
Comment by Patrick1 — May 31, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
More important, shallow thinker, how does it hurt society?
May 31st, 2007 at 7:05 pmDaryll, We can finally get hitched and have children!!!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:11 pmHeh…I was about to post that list. It usually shuts Daryll up, although sometimes he tries to weasel out by stating that the Old Testament no longer applies. We’ll see if he tries that dodge again.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — May 31, 2007 @ 6:39 pm
Hi TripM M,
The Christianistas like to use the phrase “The 10 commandments are nailed to the cross.” This let’s them break all the rules in defense of Xtianity in the name of their “lord” and their sins are pre-forgiven. This is the stupid, ignorant thinking that Christianistas practice everyday as they try to replace out democracy with a Xtian theocracy or theonomy!!! They must be stopped!!! They are the enemy within!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:14 pmDaryll said Hell is real. God is not a toy.
Daryll, you shouldn’t listen to the uneducated Gino Jennings. He’s basically tossing out 2000 years of tradition. He uses the Bible as if it were a single work of God by ignoring the Rabbis, Priests and scholars who have collected, selected, edited and translated. And in case you don’t get what this means, read the full title page to the King James Version and the translator’s dedication to the King.
Hell is NOT real. It is a non-Jewish idea and one that would have been alien to Jesus. As for God being a toy, that’s what you’ve been doing: toying with God. Daryll, when you speak of God, you seem to think you know how God thinks and what God would do. Such arrogance, such pride. Read Job. Read Jonah. Read Ecclesiates. No one knows what God thinks.
America is NOT a Christian nation. And not all Christians hate gays and lesbians. If a same-sex atheist couple want to marry, what’s it to you? You’ve already damned them to hellfire for being atheists. Pastor Jennings feels the same way about Jews, Catholics, Hindus, and Buddhists, so what do you care?
It rains on both Christian and Jew, on both atheist and true believer. This is where you must show mercy and compassion as did the Good Samaritan. Remember: the Samaritans were reviled by the Jews and so a story about a villain being better than the most holy and observant Jew was Jesus attacking your kind of religion, Daryll. Think about that.
I’ve left a couple of links the Rev Dr Cheri DiNovo’s ideas on homosexuality in the Bible, but I suspect you haven’t read them. DiNovo belongs to a mainstream church here. But she’s very keen on the idea of helping the stranger, of welcoming the outsider, of not judging the unknown.
Bravo for NH.
May 31st, 2007 at 7:17 pmc) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
e) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
Exactly the point. Lev11:10 is an abomination but not calling for death like Lev 19:27. So when do we start executing the barbers in the USA!!!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:23 pmWell, my barber should go. Definitely. I had to wear a hat for a week.
May 31st, 2007 at 7:27 pmAnd in case you don’t get what this means, read the full title page to the King James Version and the translator’s dedication to the King.
Comment by david — May 31, 2007 @ 7:17 pm
Don’t hold your breath david. The reich-wing christianistas have discovered, using history of all things (imagine that) King James as gay. And so they reject this text out of hand (pun!!)!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:28 pmWell, my barber should go. Definitely. I had to wear a hat for a week.
Comment by david — May 31, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
LMFAO!!
May 31st, 2007 at 7:30 pmOh, and before his imperial highness saywho gets here: HOMOSEXUAL, the prefix “homo” is Greek for “same” and not Latin for “man”. It means same-sex and not man-sex. It’s one of these awful neologism that combine two different lingistic roots, such as “tele-vision”.
May 31st, 2007 at 7:30 pmWell, that must explain why so many customers come in asking for the Saint James Bible.
But, no matter what Bible you look at, it will involve having compared numerous versions, made choices as to what to include and what to exclude –the Catholic and Protestant Bibles really are different.
19th Century Biblical criticism revealed that Genesis was a pastiche or anthology of several sacred texts. And that other books had been added to or edited over the centuries. It was only in the time of Alexander the Great that Rabbis began created a canon of holy works. And the collection of “official” gospels, letters and such to form the New Testament was spread out over four hundred years.
The point is that an obsolete prohibition has to met with the thought What was that all about?
May 31st, 2007 at 7:46 pm“Hey, biblical laws are meant for everyone on earth. Ashen, I’m praying for you. Jesus Loves you, and I do too! You should divert from your liberal views and come see the light.”
You really should read your bible. Dust off your sandals and move on. I am sure you don’t know what that means, hypocrite.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:36 pm“Then stop playing with him, you’re gonna break him.”
I think enlightened people call him “god botherer”.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:37 pmSTOP FEEDING THE TROLLS!!!!!!!!
May 31st, 2007 at 9:53 pmanother step closer for our gay brothers and sisters in christ to finally have their full civil rights afforded to all americans. god bless america!!! the hateful, anything but christians, are losing and they know it. these old, jealous farts who cant get it up even in 100mph wind will soon be dead and sharing a place in hell with falwell. a recent poll shows that people aged 35 and under are 75% in favor of full civil rights for gay folks. thank you jesus. you are a good and loving god.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:58 pm“Then stop playing with him, you’re gonna break him.â€
I think enlightened people call him “god bothererâ€.
Comment by JPark
Heh. I like that one, JPark.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:17 pmZoo, I learned that term when the racist, “Christian”, scumbag, Reggie White was on my beloved Packers.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:27 pmJesus is a liberal.
June 1st, 2007 at 8:04 amCongratulations to New Hampshire. They have finally come into the light of Equal Opportunity!
And for those trolls who are so vehemently opposed to this, let me ask you a question…
Are you so unsure of your own manhood that you think a homosexual in a committed relationship will approach you and make you believe you are a homosexual?
Honey, it don’t work that way, sorry.
June 1st, 2007 at 8:49 amMarriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.
Christ explicitly states this in the Bible in Matthew 19 where he quotes from the book of Genesis. In Genesis man and woman are declared as one flesh. The allusion to “one flesh†is repeated numerous times throughout the Bible and seems to have important spiritual import.
Two men can not be one flesh.
Further, the New Testament uses the metaphor or marriage to describe the relationship between Christ and the Church.
If you describe yourself as a Christian, this should be the end word in this discussion.
As to the retort to the question
Homosexual marriage harms society in this way: It makes society not worth preserving.
How many of you patriots will be willing to sacrifice yourself so that the America way of life – including so called homosexual marriage – can be preserved? Plainly, how many of you would fight so that two men in New Hampshire could marry each other? Yeah! It’s easy to be critical when your only interest is calling others names.
Kohler suggests that the only people who really believe in trying to save the nation are the Evangelicals.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-koehler/the-crusaders_b_47556.html
“The Crusadersâ€
In this article Kohler expresses his concern that the Evangelicals are taking over the U.S. Military. He’s not happy about it.
Neither am I.
But it seems to me that you have to believe in something strongly enough to believe that serving in the military to protect the country is worthwhile.
In contrast, how many of you will be willing to sacrifice yourself so that Christians can worship freely?
My impression is that most posters on this subject don’t really believe in anything. However quick they are to belittle someone’s belief, they really don’t believe in much of anything.
Calling someone names and belittling their faith is not the expression of people interested in the free exchange of idea.
Seems to me if you believe in homosexual marriage you don’t really believe in much of anything – including the preservation of your own nation.
The most positive influence in history is Christianity. Before you rush to point all the horrible acts that have been committed in the name of Christianity, consider the following questions. I think these questions are more important than the history of how people have manipulated other people. Manipulation using a belief continues and the manipulators are not limited to those professing belief in God.
Consider these questions in light of the First Amendment, which was written at a time when it was assumed that the predominant belief was, and would continue to be, Christianity – and Protestant Christianity at than. The author(s) of the First Amendment never intended for it to mean that God is removed from the public square.
Would there be a United States of America without the influence of Christianity and the Bible?
Will there continue to be a United States of America without the influence of Christianity and the Bible?
Would you really want a world without Christianity
June 1st, 2007 at 8:50 am#53 – “Would you really want a world without Christianity” Comment by bitblt — June 1, 2007 @ 8:50 am
Bitbit, you make a good point. Personally, as an openly gay Christian, I would really miss having my faith. Then again, I follow the teachings of Jesus, and I don’t use the Bible to justify my prejudices.
I just wish that the “c”hristians in the US would stop telling God how to act, and would start following what Jesus preached.
June 1st, 2007 at 8:54 am#53 – “In contrast, how many of you will be willing to sacrifice yourself so that Christians can worship freely?”
By the way, I spent four years in the US Army serving my country. (86-90)
When did you serve?
June 1st, 2007 at 8:56 am#53 – “Seems to me if you believe in homosexual marriage you don’t really believe in much of anything – including the preservation of your own nation.”
It seems to me that if you believe that Republican sex scandals are nothing but Democrat sex scandals require impeachment, then you don’t believe in much of anything, including the preservation of the “rule of law” nor marriage in general.
If you lived in Massachussets, would you rush out to get a divorce just because same-sex marriage was legal?
You don’t really put much faith in heterosexual marriage at all, do you?
Then again, with the divoirce rate so much higher in states that outlaw same-sex marriage than in states that allow same-sex marriage or civil unions, it’s obvious who doesn’t care about marriage: heterosexuals that hate homosexuals.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:01 amI don’t think so!
After Christ saved the woman who was caught in the act of adultery – a sexual behavior – from being executed by stoning, he told her to change her behavior.
Christ told her to stop sinning.
I don’t think I’d call Christ a “Compassionate Conservative,†but He certainly told the woman to be responsible.
Being told to “be responsible†seems to me to be more of a Republican thing.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:05 am#57 – “Being told to “be responsible†seems to me to be more of a Republican thing.” Comment by bitblt — June 1, 2007 @ 9:05 am
Only if you’re a Republican from before 1988.
Any Republican that’s been elected after 1988 takes no responsibility for any of their actions. Not one.
Pres. Reagan took responsibility for selling drugs for guns.
Pres. Bush (Sr.) never took responsibility for his “no new taxes” pledge.
Pres. Bush (Jr.) never took responsibility for any of his actions at all. They’re all someone elses fault.
The Republicans blamed losing the House & Senate on the voters, not on their failures.
Takijng responsibility for your actions is no longer something that any Republican ever does at all anymore. It’s “blame someone else” time.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:09 amBy the way, Jesus is very liberal.
His philosophy, based in compassion, equality, inclusion, forgiveness, tolerance, peace and – most importantly – love, is 100% Liberal.
A Liberal as one who is open minded, not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal who taught that one need not conform to strict and orthodox views of God, religion, and life. He rejected greed, violence, the glorification of power, the amassing of wealth without social balance, and the personal judging of others, their lifestyles and beliefs.
Jesus threw the money-changers out of the Temple because they were using faith for personal power. Jesus stood up to flagrant abuse of power. Jesus stood up for the rights of children and the poor. How many Republicans or conservatives have stood up for poor people? None. How many Republicans or conservatives have stood up against abuse of power? None.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:13 amBitbit:
So in everything, do to others as you would have them do to you. Matthew 7:12.
So, conservative Republicans think that liberal Democrats should spend 70 million dollars investigating if Pres. Bush did cocaine in college?
How about the next Democratic President calling conservative Republicans unpatriotic for questioning his/her decisions?
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matthew 6:15
I don’t even have to tell you that conservative Republicans ignore THIS particular Biblical verse that Jesus spoke.
Jesus is liberal. The proof is in the Bible.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:19 am#57 – “Being told to “be responsible†seems to me to be more of a Republican thing.” Comment by bitblt — June 1, 2007 @ 9:05 am
OK, I stand corrected. Conservative Republicans always “tell” people to “be responsible”. They just refuse to practice what they preach.
Maybe it’s because conservative Republicans are not the same type of people to whom they preach. . . . . ;-)
June 1st, 2007 at 9:22 amIn conversation or in printed, I’ve heard or seen the following:
“Christian Muslimâ€
“Christian Atheistâ€
“Liberal Christianâ€
“Conservative Christianâ€
“openly gay Christianâ€
This leads me to believe that the following will soon be added to the list:
“Christian Adultererâ€
“Christian Pedophileâ€
“Christian Murdererâ€
So I’m getting a little jaded about the use of the word “Christian.â€
Seems to me that the only two titles that could result from a belief in Christian are “Liberal†or “Conservative.†These days, many people calling themselves “Liberal Christians†don’t believe in the divinity of Christ. These folks think he was really a nice, very wise guys. They think Christ is their chum.
In all other cases I think it’s honest to question the belief of the person who can be described in the respective fashion.
That’s question their belief, not judge the person. Judging is not a responsibility that has been assigned to me, and it’s not one I desire. It is not condemning to point out that a behavior or a belief are contrary to the Bible – the source of the Christian religion.
For example, we expect to question the belief of Catholic priest who sexually abuses anyone. I believe we expect to question the belief of the Evangelical Rev Haggard because of his sexual behavior.
We know that belief in Christ did not cause these people to behave the way they did.
We expect that those who wear the name Christian to behave in such a way as to honor the faith.
So, Democrat Soldier, do you believe in the divinity of Christ?
June 1st, 2007 at 9:26 amWell, Bitbit, my personal belief is in the divinity of Jesus Christ.
I’m not sure where you’re going with your point.
My faith is personal to me. When I pray, I feel a response from my prayers. I don’t expect others to agree with the path I’ve chosen, nor do I expect them to believe what I believe in. Faith and Christianity are what speak to my spiritual side, and are unique to me. If others have a problem with my faith, it sounds like it’s their problem, not mine.
June 1st, 2007 at 9:32 amOh hell yeah, Dem Soldier! Well done!
June 1st, 2007 at 11:19 amI never refer to my Christian belief as “my personal belief.†It’s shared with many Christians.
The New Testament book of Corinthians says that not only are people reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, they’re reconciled to each other. This is part of the function of Church – to help people to be reconciled to each other.
Other that humanity’s invitation to participate in Creation – Genesis 1:28 (paraphrasing) …make babies – the most important “prime directive†seems to be the New Testament command to believers to proselytize.
Echoing this thought on making babies, the book of Malachi uses the phrase (working from memory here) “…raise up righteous offspring…†In the context this is the reason that God put men and woman together in marriage.
Seems to me that very little of Christ’s ministry was devoted to teaching people what was good and appropriate behavior. The record of his interactions with people has Him interacting mostly with Jewish people who had a well established history of law and traditions that told them what was good and appropriated behavior.
So Christ told the woman who was about to be executed for adultery to stop sinning?
What do you think, SD, Christ would say to homosexuals about their sexual behavior?
June 1st, 2007 at 11:46 amJesus pretty much boiled down the ten commandments to two:
1. Love god 2. Love each other.
(Both of these, of course are much harder than they seem.)
Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexualilty – and his injunction to the woman taken in adultry would seem to be #2 above. I hate it when Christians announce that they are saved and that’s that. I struggle every day to be the person I think God wants me to be – and I fall short every day. Fortunately forgiveness is what Jesus is all about and free will makes me human.
June 1st, 2007 at 2:42 pm#65 – “What do you think, SD, Christ would say to homosexuals about their sexual behavior?” Comment by bitblt — June 1, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Well, as I pray to Him, He’s been telling me to be honest with my partner, to avoid conflict drivien by emotions, and to treat others as I would have them treat me.
You know, just following the Gospels and the words that Jesus left for us Christians!
What do you think Jesus would tell the Republicans that impeached Pres. Clinton while they were cheating on their own wives? What about the ones that have had multiple divorces?
June 1st, 2007 at 3:22 pm