Gay Marriage Foe Bob Barr Calls For Repeal Of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Gay Marriage Foe Bob Barr Calls For Repeal Of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Former congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), a well-known and outspoken conservative, is, as he puts it, “hardly a card-carrying member of the gay-rights lobby.” He authored the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which declared that states did not need to recognize legal same-sex marriages from other states. In 1996, he argued that homosexual relations were “bizarre”:
“The homosexual agenda calls for taking these so-called marriage licenses to the mainland and the other 50 states, the other 49 states, and trying to force these other states, the citizens of these other states, to accept their bizarre view of marriage.” [CBS This Morning, 12/4/96]
Yet even Barr recognizes the damage the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy has had on our overstretched military. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed today, Barr declares his opposition to the policy and encourages other conservatives to call for its repeal:
As a conservative Republican member of Congress from 1995 to 2003, I was hardly a card-carrying member of the gay-rights lobby. I opposed then, and continue to oppose, same-sex marriage, or the designation of gays as a constitutionally protected minority class. Service in the armed forces is another matter. The bottom line here is that, with nearly a decade and a half of the hybrid “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy to guide us, I have become deeply impressed with the growing weight of credible military opinion which concludes that allowing gays to serve openly in the military does not pose insurmountable problems for the good order and discipline of the services. [...]
Because the military can’t fill its slots, it has lowered its standards, extended tours of duty and increased rotations, further hurting morale and readiness. Conservatives are supposed to favor meritocracy — rewarding ability — especially in the armed forces. Instead, the military is firing badly needed, capable troops simply because they’re gay, and replacing them with a hodge podge that includes ex-cons, drug abusers and high-school dropouts.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is weakening our national security. Since the policy was instituted, at least 11,000 servicemembers, hundreds of whom had key speciality skills such as training in Arabic, have left the military. Currently in the midst of a readiness crisis, the military could attract as many as 41,000 new recruits if gays could serve openly.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
all policies in this country that are based on race, religion, gender, sexual preference and the like – need to be ended now.
Don’t ask don’t tell gives a part of the federal government the power to fire people based on who they sleep with. That’s not equal protection under the law!
As far as gay marriage – if we are to truly “protect” marriage and ensure equal rights for everyone, we need to get the government OUT of the marriage business altogether.
Some follow up reading:
June 13th, 2007 at 12:21 pm“Here’s How to Defend Marriage”
http://www.populistamerica.com/here_s_how_to_defend_marriage
All the gays I know are built like athletes. Most straights I know couldn’t make it through basic. This is a no-brainer. If the Israeli army can win with gays, so can we.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:21 pm.
Equal opportunity cannon fodder.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:23 pmThis explains why most of the conservatives in the Bush Administration didn’t serve in the military.
They were Gay.
Those were the ‘other priorities’ that Cheney spoke about.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:24 pmWell there would appear to be a massive difference between US and Israeli attitudes towards homosexuals in the military.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:26 pmEspecially if Israel has allowed it since the 60’s. You did refer to them winning something right ?
What ? Mandatory stuttering lessons ?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:28 pmThe older Barr gets, the more he sounds like a Democrat. Give him another 20 years.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:28 pmLet me get this “straight”… gay people in Bob Barr’s home state of Georgia can be denied employment, housing and partner rights simply for being gay… but gay people are OK to fight for the RIGHTS held by others in this country? Screw Bob Barr… until we are considered equal under the law… go protect yourself!
June 13th, 2007 at 12:29 pmWhat ? Mandatory stuttering lessons ?
Comment by Kilo — June 13, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
No mandatory ass-kickings (no homo) by the straight soldiers who hate the gaze!
June 13th, 2007 at 12:30 pmSurely Cheney gets a pass for being able to have a kid 9 months to the day after he needed one. The second he wanted his wife pregnant she was.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:31 pmSo this bozo thinks it is OK for gays to get blown up in Iraq but it is not OK for them to get married? Next he’ll be advocating putting all the gays on the front lines.
What an ass.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:32 pmMr. Barr would you like some cheese to go with that whine? There are not enough gays to save bush’s ass. Time for a draft, to include bush’s whorish daughters. And lets not forget they are also drunks, just like bush is.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:32 pmSeriously, the place is getting cooler all the time. Just the other day I was hit by a snowball in the face. It nearly broke my horns.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:33 pm– Devil’s Complaints about Hell’s Cooling Problems
Is is just me, or is he saying that he changed his views in part because the military can’t meet recruiting targets?
I’m open to giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I want to be sure he has changed his view on principle, not due to expedience.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:34 pmhundreds of whom had with key speciality skills such as training in Arabic, have left the military.
Still persisting with this misleading statement I see.
Way to copy/paste there without checking your source or thinking for yourself there pal.
Amazing how you’ve got the same exact generosity the other TP authors do when it comes to claims on their blog which they don’t extend to anyone else when it comes to making claims of connections like this.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:35 pmGuess that they are running out of the poor, desperate, and down trodden.
Send in the fags!
(issued in FULL SARCASM, by the way)
June 13th, 2007 at 12:37 pmhundreds of whom had with key speciality skills such as training in Arabic, have left the military.
Still persisting with this misleading statement I see.
Way to copy/paste there without checking your source or thinking for yourself there pal.
Amazing how you’ve got the same exact generosity the other TP authors do when it comes to claims on their blog which they don’t extend to anyone else when it comes to making claims of connections like this.
Comment by Kilo — June 13, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
I know, what is it, you HAVE to be a gay if you want to learn Arabic?????
June 13th, 2007 at 12:38 pmScrew Bob Barr… until we are considered equal under the law… go protect yourself!
Comment by GAY! — June 13, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
Just make sure it’s a safe, heterosexual screwing.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:38 pm/sarcasm
So he is changing his views because recruiting numbers are down.
By this logic, since marriage numbers are way down
June 13th, 2007 at 12:39 pm(http://hismove.com/blog/married-couples-now-in-the-minority-of-us-homes/) he should be FOR gay marriage.
Bob Barr can rot. Sure gays, go fight and die for the rights of this country… the same rights Barr wants to deny you.
right…
what a jackass
June 13th, 2007 at 12:40 pmMr. President,
I think you’ll be shocked to find out that gay men, like heterosexual men, aren’t necessarily weaklings. It will certainly be embarassing, unfortuntely, when the first military ‘tough guy’ gets his ass kicked by a gay man.
You are an obvious bigot. You equate gay, with weak.
Funny, because I equate you, with DUMB!!!
June 13th, 2007 at 12:40 pmblah, blah, gayz…blah, blah, pussification…blah, blah, misleading…blah, blah, have to be gay…blah, blah, ad nauseum…
June 13th, 2007 at 12:42 pmI googled this guy, pretty much of a racist radical christian type…
June 13th, 2007 at 12:43 pmHis former district (7) in Georgia is a hoot, talk about gerrymandering!It forms nearly a circle around the outside of Atlanta….
Daryll? Where are you bud? This is one topic right up your, er, um…….alley.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:43 pmEspecially if Israel has allowed it since the 60’s. You did refer to them winning something right ?
Something like the Six-Day War? The Yom-Kippur War?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:44 pm.
I wonder why Representative Barr has decided to give up his beliefs on homosexuality? Was he lobbied by someone from the Democratic party? I will continue to write my Senator to ensure that the “Dont ask, Don’t tell” military clause is upheld. We do not want to cause a conflict of sexuality between our troops, especially the male soldiers. Homosexuals, read the word of God and divert from your wicked ways. Jesus is coming soon.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:45 pmConservatives are people too. They’re just 50-100 years behind the rest of us.
By the way, what is a “constitutionally protected minority class”? The constitution does not protect “classes”. It protects citizens. It guarantees equal treatment under the law for citizens. Yes, gays are citizens. Read the 14th Amendment PLEASE.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:45 pmEither that or we can look forward to the pussification of our armed forces.
Comment by Mr. President — June 13, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Why not, we have already seen the pussification of the Republican party. And you guys are well on your way to screwing up the military.
So, are all you closeted log cabin trolls gonna sign up to help pussify the military?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:47 pmBarr doesn’t appear to be relevant to that equation, so I think you’ve misidentified who are the idiots here.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:47 pmSo this bozo thinks it is OK for gays to get blown up in Iraq but it is not OK for them to get married? Next he’ll be advocating putting all the gays on the front lines.
What an ass.
Comment by Tex64 — June 13, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
NO, it is not okay for homosexuals to have marital relations (Read Leviticus and Romans). Tex64, are you a christian?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:48 pmComment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
Once again, Daryll shows up when he hears the word gay. Right on cue.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:48 pmYeah that was what I was talking about. Got the point yet ?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:50 pmWhat exactly is the “homosexual agenda”? Only a mixed up, wanna come outta the closest but living the hetero lifestyle male would think gays have some sort of agenda. (right, st. daryll?)
Just for the record, those of you not on my patented “Snore List”, during the heat of a battle, at that moment, I really don’t give a flyin’ f*ck what your sexual orientation is/was! Know how to aim and shoot? (no pun intended). Good! I’ll protect, you protect.
End of story.
hackerbob? Why is/has this ever been an issue? Most gays have no interest in heteros (and vice versa). In my opinion, only the insecure or confused would have such an unfounded fear.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:51 pmOf course, the testosterone filled atmosophere of the military (comparable to a fraternity party) could be hell for the non Rob Halford type gays.
Just ramblin’…
So, Daryll is going to quote Leviticus.
Tell us then oh blessed saint Daryll, how much should I sell my slaves for? Should I treat my slaves as my own sons and daughters. What is the problem with me beating my wife with a stick larger than my thumb? I mean some guys have bigger thumbs than and get to beat their wifes with them. What about selling my daughter? Should I check ou tthe family that is going to buy her or not. And is 5 cows enough to trade for her or should I get more?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:51 pmWay to copy/paste there without checking your source or thinking for yourself there pal.
A source like … the GAO?
The military services separated 9,488 members9 pursuant to the
June 13th, 2007 at 12:52 pmhomosexual conduct policy statute from fiscal year 1994 through fiscal
year 2003, some of whom were in critical occupations or had important
foreign language skills. Seven hundred fifty-seven (about 8 percent) of
these separated servicemembers held critical occupations10 (“voice
interceptor,†“data processing technician,†or “interpreter/translatorâ€), as
defined by the services. About 59 percent of the members with critical
occupations who were separated for homosexual conduct were separated
during their first 2.5 years of service, which is about 1.5 years before the
expiration of the initial service contract of most enlistees. Such contracts
are typically for 4 years. Also, 322 members (about 3 percent) had some
skills in an important foreign language such as Arabic, Farsi, and Korean.11 A total of 98 members separated under the homosexual conduct policy statute completed language training at the Defense Language Institute and received a proficiency rating; 62 members, or 63 percent, were at or below the midpoint on DOD’s listening, reading, or speaking proficiency scales.12
.
So Daryll is selectively using 2000 year old Biblical passages to justify his bigotry again… (yawn)
June 13th, 2007 at 12:52 pmYeah that was what I was talking about. Got the point yet ?
Yeah: gay Jews kick ass.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:52 pm.
Once again, Daryll shows up when he hears the word gay. Right on cue.
Comment by Spudge_Boy
It’s like letting out the sun every morning…. :D
June 13th, 2007 at 12:52 pmDaryll has very finely tuned gaydar.
And Mr. President sir, with all due respect, thou protesteth too much, methinks.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:54 pmTex64, are you a christian?
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
so sayeth the member of a cult who feel women are inferior.
and for the record,
true believers capitalize Christians, out of honor and respect.
then again, you’ve been provent to be a blind follower, and not a leader (true believer)
just still ramblin….
June 13th, 2007 at 12:54 pmThat would have been the infamous Paperback Offensive of 1985 in the Iraqi marshlands. Terrible, terrible losses.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:54 pmIf only Saddam didn’t have that shredder Glen Reynolds keeps reminding everyone about.
If we want a “feared and robust” military like the UK and Germany, we should encourage military people to allow openly gay people to serve!! [sarcasm off]
June 13th, 2007 at 12:55 pmNO, it is not okay for homosexuals to have marital relations (Read Leviticus and Romans). Tex64, are you a christian?
Do you eat shrimp? If so, I’ll send a priest right over to execute you.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:55 pm.
“If we want a “feared and robust†military like the UK and Germany, we should encourage military people to allow openly gay people to serve!! [intelligence off]”
Fixed.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:56 pmExcept for the past 20 years when they’ve spent sucking said arse.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:57 pma hodge podge that includes ex-cons, drug abusers and high-school dropouts.
He just couldn’t do it. That man can’t have a complete thought without offending one of my sensibilities.
So now high-school dropouts are the same as ex-cons and drug abusers?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the reason he wants to do this is so that there are fewer gays in his state. What could be better for him than for the people he hates to go enlist and get killed?
Seriously, is there anyone who thinks Bob Barrf has the rights of gays in mind when he spews? At best, he’s trying to curry favor with the “we can win” crowd and still politically join the winning side. I have no illusions about him turning over a new leaf. This guy is one of the few politicians who actually makes me ill, and he’s not even in office anymore. There are only two people I think deserve a bullet, and he’s one of them.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:57 pmAnd Mr. President sir, with all due respect, thou protesteth too much, methinks.
Comment by nanlichi — June 13, 2007 @ 12:54 pm
Thou don’t thinks too much, though, do ya!!!!!!!!
June 13th, 2007 at 12:58 pmMr. President – Ignore the perverse and deviant nanlicki. His/her Nativity scene beastiality comments were so pathetically sick……I try to ignore it.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pmI nominate DRxJ as the wrangler in charge of Daryll.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pmKilo, That is funny! Thanks for the laugh.
I ate a catfish once, but was able to pray for forgiveness before I was smote.
What is the past tense of smite anyway? Smote? Smitten? Smith and Wesson?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pmBob Barr…Cut from the same Mark Foley cloth no doubt.
June 13th, 2007 at 12:59 pmMr. President – Ignore the perverse and deviant nanlicki. His/her Nativity scene beastiality comments were so pathetically sick……I try to ignore it.
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
Speaking of “pathetically sick,” MA, tell us another funny story about your imaginary dead kid.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:01 pmMr. President – Ignore the perverse and deviant nanlicki. His/her Nativity scene beastiality comments were so pathetically sick……I try to ignore it.
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
I’ll keep that in mind VV, thanks.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:01 pm“I opposed then, and continue to oppose, same-sex marriage, or the designation of gays as a constitutionally protected minority class. Service in the armed forces is another matter.”
Oh, I see, it is not all right with him for gays to have rights and privileges, but it is all right with him for gays to be cannon fodder.
What a hypocrite.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:01 pmComment by Tex64 — June 13, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
NO, it is not okay for homosexuals to have marital relations (Read Leviticus and Romans). Tex64, are you a christian?
——————————
How dare you accuse me of being a christian?!?!? (love the small case c)
Call me a fag all you want but the “c” word is hitting below the belt.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:02 pmKilo- You mean that shredder Progressives don’t credit Saddam with owning? Oh….thaaaat shredder….
Tooodles…..
June 13th, 2007 at 1:02 pmThe GOA…. that was linked as the source in highlighted text ?
What…. are the odds pal ?
Nice work doing the same thing yourself. Copy/paste it without reading it.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:02 pmWhat is the past tense of smite anyway? Smote? Smitten? Smith and Wesson?
Comment by nanlichi — June 13, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
“Smitten” means to be infatuated
June 13th, 2007 at 1:03 pm“I opposed then, and continue to oppose, same-sex marriage, or the designation of gays as a constitutionally protected minority class. Service in the armed forces is another matter.â€
Oh, I see, it is not all right with him for gays to have rights and privileges, but it is all right with him for gays to be cannon fodder.
What a hypocrite.
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
The ultimate irony of that is that then homosexuals will be able to fight and die for freedoms they don’t enjoy. That should set Bobby giggling.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:03 pmWhat are you a parrot ? I just said that.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:04 pm“No mandatory ass-kickings (no homo) by the straight soldiers who hate the gaze! Comment by Mr. President ”
Sorry troll, all polls taken of the military say that they have no problems serving alongside a gay soldier.
The people who are the most homophobic are the ones who are truly insecure about their own sexual orientation.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:05 pmExcept for the past 20 years when they’ve spent sucking said arse.
Comment by Kilo
Ah, well as anyone can see, that is entirely the fault of the gays, even though they were there before, and has nothing to do with the change from fighting armies in the Sinai and Golan to fighting insurgencies.
As the military theorist Clausewitz observed, “if you don’t like pussy, you can’t kill very well.”
June 13th, 2007 at 1:05 pm.
Mr. Incoherent, sir?
Sorry to wake you, sir, but it’s time, sir.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:06 pmSorry, sir, I know that’s a touchy subject, sir.
Actually, that’s what this afternoons briefing is about, sir.
Yes sir, that’s correct, sir, they did find your watch.
No, sir, not in good repair, sir.
Worse than that, sir, it seems it was used as a timing device in an IED.
An IED?
An explosive device, sir. That’s correct, sir, a bomb.
And one other matter, sir, Harriet just called.
Harriet, sir, Harriet Miers… your former counselor?
No sir, not the substance abuse counselor, your former legal counsel, Supreme Court nominee?
Very well, sir, I’ll relay that message….
In your exact words, sir?
Sir?
This was a stupid policy from Day 1 and Clinton never should have signed it. It was little more than a PR stunt so they could pretend they were giving gays equal rights when in reality they were ensuring gays were shut up.
The whole idea that gays can serve in the military ONLY if they don’t let anyone know they are gay is ridiculous. It’s like saying you support light but can only do so as long as everyone promises to leave the lights OFF. That’s not a policy…it’s a waste of paper.
It should definitely be repealed. If gays want to serve thier country in the military they should be rewarded, not pushed out. Especially at this time when nobody wants to enlist because of Bush.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:06 pmYou’ve lost your smittens
June 13th, 2007 at 1:06 pmyou naughty little kittens
Meow, meow, meow
The people who are the most homophobic are the ones who are truly insecure about their own sexual orientation.
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Oh, that’s some good information you got there…
What’s all this I hear about women in the military likely to be raped or sexually assaulted/harrassed, I suppose those easy-going boys in the military are OK with the gaze, but not women???
Is that what you mean???
June 13th, 2007 at 1:07 pmNice work doing the same thing yourself. Copy/paste it without reading it.
Yeah, I read it, and you still don’t have a point, just like with the Israeli army.
There seems to be a pattern here ….
June 13th, 2007 at 1:08 pm.
Yet another RINO jumping on the homosexual agenda and ditching a fine bipartisan policy.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:08 pmThe people who are the most homophobic are the ones who are truly insecure about their own sexual orientation.
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
well said.
St.Daryll? What happened in your past that has you hating the mythical homosexual agenda?
Where you molested as a child or young adult?
Or did you experience a sexual encounter with another man….and enjoy it?
If the former, I am truly, deeply sorry, and beg you to seek professional help to purge your demons (obviously your cult can’t/won’t)
If the latter (which I believe it is), all I can say is stop being confused and stop living the lie (especially for Tiffany’s sake).
For the record, you can still be a Christian, and gay (no matter what your cult has preached to you)
..and I’m still a ramblin’
June 13th, 2007 at 1:10 pmBob Barr’s political views have changed significantly since he left Congress. He’s even campaigning for marijuana legalization now and working with the Marijuana Policy Project. Good for him. If only Democrats had the kind of courage that he has now.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:10 pmNo. The polls taken of the military say that none of them have a problem serving with straight soldier.
When asked whether they have a problem serving with gay soldiers a minority says they would have a problem with this.
That minority still represents hundreds of thousands of soldiers you risk losing to gain 11,000.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:11 pmDefensible or not, that is the math ignored here.
Test.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:11 pmThe people who are the most homophobic are the ones who are truly insecure about their own sexual orientation.
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
And they are the same ones who are too chicken sh!t to sign up for the military.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:12 pmNobody let Daryll know his test came through. Shhhhhhhh.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:12 pmThank you, Dr.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:13 pm(wink, flutter, toss………….)
Tex64, are you a christian?
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
so sayeth the member of a cult who feel women are inferior.
and for the record,
true believers capitalize Christians, out of honor and respect.
then again, you’ve been provent to be a blind follower, and not a leader (true believer)
just still ramblin….
Comment by DRxJ — June 13, 2007 @ 12:54 pm
Christianity doesn’t exist. I believe in holiness (Chronicles). DRxJ, I think it’s time for you to brush up on your bible.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:14 pmDefensible or not, that is the math ignored here.
“Math”? This from the guy who thinks 322 doesn’t equal hundreds?
Geeze, anything to prop up their sick little superstitions, eh?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:14 pm.
Yeah. That you either can’t read or distinguish between numbers of different values.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:14 pmSeriously, you’ve had 2 cracks at each of those and not a clue about either of them yet eh ?
LMAO.
Only in the interest of the health and well being of others, am I informing all that Daryll tested positive.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:14 pmChristianity doesn’t exist. I believe in holiness (Chronicles). DRxJ, I think it’s time for you to brush up on your bible.
Comment by Daryll
Ohhh, now it’s on!
I’m getting popcorn!
June 13th, 2007 at 1:15 pmI nominate DRxJ as the wrangler in charge of Daryll.
Comment by Zooey — June 13, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
Zooey, until DRxJ ensures that his life is in order with Christ (and he knows what I mean), the Doctor will be considered a sinner. I can’t have a sinner in charge of me (we already have too many false prophets).
June 13th, 2007 at 1:16 pmSeriously, you’ve had 2 cracks at each of those and not a clue about either of them yet eh ?
LMAO.
Yes, I’ve gathered that you don’t have a point, but think that calling it “misleading” will magically make it go away. This is consistent with your subscription to a pathetic superstition about gays.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:17 pm.
Daryll,
Are you ever going to brush the TP dust off your sandals and quit trying to convert us to your limited, fundamentalist Christianity? If it works for you, meaning it helps you be in spiritual union with your God, great. But, you have no right or commandment to demand that other people, let alone a whole nation of people submit to your dogma.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:18 pmZooey, until DRxJ ensures that his life is in order with Christ (and he knows what I mean), the Doctor will be considered a sinner. I can’t have a sinner in charge of me (we already have too many false prophets).
Comment by Daryll
Sorry Daryll, the sinner you need to worry about is the Pastor Gino Jennings.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:19 pmChristianity doesn’t exist.
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
and with that, my work here is done.
by definition, Christianity is The Christian religion, founded on the life and teachings of Jesus.
St.Daryll says “the life and teachings of Jesus” do not exist.
told ya he is in a cult
June 13th, 2007 at 1:19 pmHow dare you accuse me of being a christian?!?!? (love the small case c)
Call me a fag all you want but the “c†word is hitting below the belt.
Comment by TX64 — June 13, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
Then you are basically stating that you’re doomed for hell for not following biblical standards, supporting homosexuals, supporting illegal immigration, supporting over-taxing the rich, supporting embryonic stem cell research and supporting abortion activists.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:19 pm… until we are considered equal under the law… go protect yourself!
- Comment by Gay
I’m not gay, but I tend to agree with you. Why should gays fight for America if America is not willing to fight for the rights of gays and lesbians?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:21 pmBarr must’ve gotten a terminal diagnosis from a doctor or something… he’s been acting strangely for a while now – saying things that make sense and are a good idea…
June 13th, 2007 at 1:21 pmThen you are basically stating that you’re doomed for hell for not following biblical standards, supporting homosexuals, supporting illegal immigration, supporting over-taxing the rich, supporting embryonic stem cell research and supporting abortion activists.
Comment by Daryll
Heh.
TX64, we’ll save a seat for you in hell — you can sit by Daryll if you want…
June 13th, 2007 at 1:21 pm(we already have too many false prophets).
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
so sayeth the biggest false prophet of em all!
June 13th, 2007 at 1:22 pmI see that, in order to think we have to keep gays out of the military, you’d have to be too stupid to count or tell time, like Kilo.
No wonder homophobia only clings to life in undeveloped backwaters.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:24 pm.
36. I don’t think 36 equals hundreds.
Honesly, was encouraging the author once and you twice to read the source not a big enough hint ?
WTF did your tiny brain think the odds were that when someone told you to read a source you were getting wrong twice that you’d get it right if you ignored it a 3rd time ?
I have mechanic skills.
However if I were asked to apply these skills in a professional capacity on which dozens of other people depended on in a combat zone I would be kicked the fk out and in the field with a rifle with everyone else in a matter of minutes.
Pretty fkn simple stuff here. Just reading and using your head. Not asking much.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:24 pmThen you are basically stating that you’re doomed for hell for not following biblical standards, supporting homosexuals, supporting illegal immigration, supporting over-taxing the rich,
Seriously, you can’t make $hit like this up, even if you tried!
I can’t stop laughing!
I’m actually going to hell because I believe in a system that taxes the rich, well to do, to HELP the homeless, the hungry, and I’m going to hell???
Dammit, my sides hurt
June 13th, 2007 at 1:25 pmStop it St.Daryll! You’re killin’ me!!
What’s all this I hear about women in the military likely to be raped or sexually assaulted/harrassed, I suppose those easy-going boys in the military are OK with the gaze, but not women???
Is that what you mean???
Comment by Mr. President — June 13, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Women are still more likely to be sexually harrassed and even assaulted in the workplace than men are, but that’s no reason to say “No girl.. you can’t have that job.” Homosexuals probably are most likely to be harassed, assaulted and yes, even killed in the military, but that has nothing to do with their right to be there, and should have nothing to do with prosecuting anyone who does harrass/assault/kill them while they’re their.
It doesn’t change the fact that the majority of military personell accept women in the military and will accept gays openly serving. There is no excuse for our treatment of this issue given the fact that we supposedly founded on the idea of freedom for all.
Most likely, the people who are against gays in the military know that it is the gateway to all those other rights. After all, if you allow them to fight and die for rights, then you can’t justify not giving them those same rights.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:26 pmThen you are basically stating that you’re doomed for hell for not following biblical standards, supporting homosexuals, supporting illegal immigration, supporting over-taxing the rich, supporting embryonic stem cell research and supporting abortion activists.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
—————————–
That is satire, right? You can’t be for real.
Going to hell for supporting taxing the rich? That’s a good one! Excuse me, but I think there is a camel stuck in your needle. Haaaaaaaaa….
June 13th, 2007 at 1:26 pmI can’t have a sinner in charge of me (we already have too many false prophets).
Comment by Daryll
_________________________
We “sinners” are not trying to be in charge of you but you are certainly trying to be in charge of us. Classic projection.
Daryll, how would you cope if the majority in the U.S. voted in laws that demanded that you live your life in a way that is not compatible with your religious views? You would likely be justifiably angry, which is how we feel about you and the other fundamentalists trying to use laws to force your dogma on us.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:26 pm#29… read the word of God and divert from your wicked ways. Jesus is coming soon.
-Comment by Daryl
…You mean like, do unto other as you’d have them do unto you? That sort of thing? I can see how you use religion to justify your putrid immorality.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:26 pm36. I don’t think 36 equals hundreds.
But 36 wasn’t the number.
You lose again.
And I still want to hear how 1956 came after 1967 and 1973, but since you’re a drooling superstitious freak who can’t count or tell time, I doubt you’ll be able to tell me.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:27 pm.
The people who are the most homophobic are the ones who are truly insecure about their own sexual orientation.
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
well said.
St.Daryll? What happened in your past that has you hating the mythical homosexual agenda?
Where you molested as a child or young adult?
Or did you experience a sexual encounter with another man….and enjoy it?
If the former, I am truly, deeply sorry, and beg you to seek professional help to purge your demons (obviously your cult can’t/won’t)
If the latter (which I believe it is), all I can say is stop being confused and stop living the lie (especially for Tiffany’s sake).
For the record, you can still be a Christian, and gay (no matter what your cult has preached to you)
..and I’m still a ramblin’
Comment by DRxJ — June 13, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
DRxJ, none of the above. I was raised in a family that believes in evangelical higher learning institutions and holiness. I have never had homosexual tendencies (Thank God).
June 13th, 2007 at 1:28 pmI have never had homosexual tendencies (Thank God).
Comment by Daryll
________________________
So, God determined that you have heterosexual desires and not homosexual tendencies. Is it such a leap to believe, then, that God gave the homosexual desires to some people?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:30 pmDaryll,
Are you ever going to brush the TP dust off your sandals and quit trying to convert us to your limited, fundamentalist Christianity? If it works for you, meaning it helps you be in spiritual union with your God, great. But, you have no right or commandment to demand that other people, let alone a whole nation of people submit to your dogma.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — June 13, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Patriot, your review reminds me why our government officials should seek communism.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:30 pmOh, well. I guess Kilo has buggered off to learn to count and tell time again. And we were having so much fun!
June 13th, 2007 at 1:34 pm.
Patriot, your review reminds me why our government officials should seek communism.
Comment by Daryll
_________________
What?????
June 13th, 2007 at 1:34 pm#29… read the word of God and divert from your wicked ways. Jesus is coming soon.
-Comment by Daryl
That’s a rather personal thing to say about Jesus, isn’t it?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:34 pmSorry Daryll, the sinner you need to worry about is the Pastor Gino Jennings.
Comment by Zooey — June 13, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
He is a true man of God. He is one of the few preachers who will preach the truth about the word of God (not for monetary purposes).
June 13th, 2007 at 1:34 pmI have never had homosexual tendencies
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
dude, I excelled in college with classes such as pyschology, and pathophysiology (disease state) and pharmacology (drug therapy) dealing with the brain.
You are screaming to be let out of the closest, but your past, for what ever reason, keeps locking the door.
and by denying that you never had homosexual tendencies, is only harming yourself.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:35 pmYou continually post on homosexual threads (sometimes in very graphic detail). Your posts are very homophobic in nature, yet you “coddle” heir Bush, who has had many homosexual issues right in his own administration.
You’ve got issues. Major issues.
I implore you to seek help.
Yeah. It is retard.
And you’ll be in for a long wait for someone to pretend they can’t read and count just to agree with you. So best of luck with that.
Again, you’ll be in for a long wait.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:35 pmEveryone apart from you realises what has been discussed. “Has” as in the past tense.
I have never had homosexual tendencies (Thank God).
Comment by Daryll
_____________________________________
And you bought the crystal meth from your masseur but never used it. Yeah, we get it Daryll.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:37 pmOh and one more thing:
Daryll says “I’ve never had homosexual tendencies”, yet he believes homosexuality is a choice.
How can one pick a lifestyle if one has never been given the options?
If Daryll has been given the options, when did Daryll “choose” one over the other?
BOOM!
June 13th, 2007 at 1:39 pm(that’s the sound of Saint Daryll’s brain imploding)
He is a true man of God. He is one of the few preachers who will preach the truth about the word of God (not for monetary purposes).
Comment by Daryll
Looks like quite the empire to me, gauging by the list of churchs…………
June 13th, 2007 at 1:40 pmTypical conservative thinking. Gays should be denied the same rights the rest of Americans, but it’s okay to use them as cannon fodder.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:40 pmThen you are basically stating that you’re doomed for hell for not following biblical standards, supporting homosexuals, supporting illegal immigration, supporting over-taxing the rich,
Seriously, you can’t make $hit like this up, even if you tried!
I can’t stop laughing!
I’m actually going to hell because I believe in a system that taxes the rich, well to do, to HELP the homeless, the hungry, and I’m going to hell???
Dammit, my sides hurt
Stop it St.Daryll! You’re killin’ me!!
Comment by DRxJ — June 13, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
DRxJ, this is a serious matter. The rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears. Why should we be penalized. Isn’t there a scripture in the bible that says everyone should be treated equally?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:41 pmOh, and by the way.. It’s okay for Bob Barr to have a change of heart and start doing good things, but only if he acknowleges what he did before and explain why he’s changed his tune. Otherwise, I’m not going to trust him any further than I can throw his church.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:43 pm“The rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears.”
Comment by Daryll
The rich have earned their wealth off the blood, sweat and tears of those they have been able to exploit and subjugate.
(There, fixed it for ya….. praise the lord and pass the shackles!)
June 13th, 2007 at 1:46 pmYeah. It is retard.
Oh, that was convincing. I’ve got the quote. You’ve got shit. Thanks for showing us just how ignorant a homophobe has to be.
“Has†as in the past tense.
Yes, I explored the past tense. You can’t even get the Isreali policy correct, so once again you’re an idiot who ventures nothing because you have nothing. You keep referring to what’s not here because you don’t have anything. I keep using what’s here and you keep running away.
By the way: learn to use a comma.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:46 pm.
The rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears. Why should we be penalized
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Please, please, I beg of thee! Please provide chapter and verse where Jesus preaches about not penalizing the rich to help the poor!
and I was wrong about your church, it is not just a cult….
June 13th, 2007 at 1:47 pmIt’s a psychotic cult with false witnesses galore
(I have one word of advice: DO NOT DRINK THE GRAPE KOOL-AID!!!)
DRxJ, this is a serious matter. The rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears. Why should we be penalized. Isn’t there a scripture in the bible that says everyone should be treated equally?
Comment by Daryll
Daryll, sweetie, we have something called the Constitution, not The Bible. You should check it out some time.
And you need to let us know which Biblical laws you’re currently violating. Like eating pork or shellfish? Do you have a nice long beard and long hair? Otherwise, you’re in desperate violation of Biblical laws.
You don’t get to pick and choose, Daryll. God doesn’t like it.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:47 pmHe is a true man of God. He is one of the few preachers who will preach the truth about the word of God (not for monetary purposes).
Comment by Daryll
It doesn’t look as if the Pastor Jennings buys his suits at the JC Penney, Daryll.
If you ever manage to pry your eyes open, you’re going to be sooooo disappointed. But you’ll be alright.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:49 pmTest, again.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:49 pmThe rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears. Why should we be penalized. Isn’t there a scripture in the bible that says everyone should be treated equally?
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
_______________________________________
Mt 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mt 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
I’ll be waiting for you in Hell.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:51 pmEven if we limit it to Arabic translators alone, the number is still higher than 36.
Is it possible that Kilo’s extra chromosome gave him three dozen digits, so that’s just as high as he can count?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:51 pm.
He is a true man of God. He is one of the few preachers who will preach the truth about the word of God (not for monetary purposes).
Comment by Daryll
It doesn’t look as if the Pastor Jennings buys his suits at the JC Penney, Daryll.
If you ever manage to pry your eyes open, you’re going to be sooooo disappointed. But you’ll be alright.
Comment by Zooey — June 13, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Why can’t people who follow in the way of holiness wear nice suits, own nice homes, and drive Lotus automobiles?
June 13th, 2007 at 1:53 pmDRxJ, this is a serious matter. The rich have earned their wealth off blood, sweat and tears. Why should we be penalized. Isn’t there a scripture in the bible that says everyone should be treated equally?
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Because:
A) It’s not usually off YOUR blood sweat and tears
June 13th, 2007 at 1:53 pmand
B) Because people like me pay $3,000 dollars to a charity and it’s a months pay. Rich folk might be able to give $30,000 to charity and it’s only an hours pay, but for some reason they seem to think that makes them better than us.
and
C) Rich folk can pay to have their kids kept out of wars, and they feel that is their right.
Still testing positive, honey……..
June 13th, 2007 at 1:54 pmNo retard. You COPY/PASTED the quote. I on the other hand read it.
5 times now and you cannot bring yourself to read something you yourself quoted, even when prompted to the point of ridicule.
You do realise that I’m not calling you a retard to be rude. You have satisfied the dictionary definition here. Congrats.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:56 pmThey can fight Bob’s wars for him but have rights, out of the question.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:56 pm“and drive Lotus automobiles?”
Comment by Daryll
Please don’t dragging us into your unenlightened little corner of existence.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:57 pmWhy can’t people who follow in the way of holiness wear nice suits, own nice homes, and drive Lotus automobiles?
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
Because you can’t act humble if you’re not. The money you use to buy the nice suits, the nice home and the Lotus isn’t yours. It came from people who paid to to Gods work. You can do Gods work just as well in a t-shirt and jeans, and you’ll get something a good suit doesn’t come with: Respect.
June 13th, 2007 at 1:58 pmDaryll thinks that homosexuality is a choice,and that he has chosen to be heterosexual. That kinda implies that Daryll has taken a walk on the wild side and chose to be hetero.
Maybe he just had a bad experience on the wild side and should give it another shot. Those homosexual encounters seemed to have really made an impression with Brother Daryll, as much as he denies it.
“The rich have earned their wealth…..” That’s an incredibly stupid statement. A good friend has several tens of millions and has NEVER worked a day in his life. His father NEVER worked a day in his life, and his two kids will probably never work either. Ain’t inheritance grand??
Most fortunes are made exploiting the resources of our country, or exploiting the vulnerabilities of our country. Tell me Halliburton hasn’t made billions off of George’s Mistake.
I pay more than $100k/year in income tax and don’t resent it a bit. We are all in this together, and I have had opportunities that the less fortunate haven’t.
Now, back to the subject of Darryl and his fear of the closet……..
June 13th, 2007 at 1:59 pmEveryone apart from you realises what has been discussed. “Has†as in the past tense.
Comment by Kilo
Uh, unless you’ve been posting under different names, Google says otherwise. So, you won this debate on gay specialists … and then you woke up in a puddle?
Figures.
Googling news articles also shows other categories that would be subsets under TP’s language, and they aren’t ‘36.’
So, you pretend to have won an argument, based on data you pretend to have, on an issue you pretend to understand, all because you subscribe to the pathetic superstition of homophobia.
That’s the first thing about you that makes sense.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:01 pm.
Why can’t people who follow in the way of holiness wear nice suits, own nice homes, and drive Lotus automobiles?
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
Because it flies in the face of what Jesus Christ said d!ckwad. You know Jesus Christ as in Christianity is named after him? You are a fu*king idiot.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:02 pmMt 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mt 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
I’ll be waiting for you in Hell.
Comment by TX64 — June 13, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
That scriptural text does not indicate that it is considered a sin to be rich, but it does indicate that it is hard for a rich person to serve God with full loyalty. We are not those type of individuals, we love the Lord with all of our heart and would give up our finances, if ordered by God.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:03 pmWhy can’t people who follow in the way of holiness wear nice suits, own nice homes, and drive Lotus automobiles?
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
I thought old Gino didn’t do his thing for monetary gain? He’s just a humble hypocrite, right?
June 13th, 2007 at 2:05 pmLOL – 139 messages, this topic sure does yank the homophobes out of the closet.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:06 pmDRJ – A quick Question – what about the Brooks study demonstrating that Conservatives are MORE generous in their charitable contributions than progs?
“In 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more money to charity than households headed by a liberal ($1,600 to $1,227). This discrepancy is not simply an artifact of income differences; on the contrary, liberal families earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families, and conservative families gave more than liberal families within every income class, from poor to middle class to rich.”
Would it be too much to ask for libs to get out of our pockets and dig in their own?
Back on topic – Most people would never know who was who and what was what if people didn’t feel so Opraj-esque and have to SHARE all….Keep your bedroom antics to yourself….
Tooodles……
June 13th, 2007 at 2:06 pmDaryll,
I command you to give all your money to the poor!
June 13th, 2007 at 2:08 pmBecause you can’t act humble if you’re not. The money you use to buy the nice suits, the nice home and the Lotus isn’t yours. It came from people who paid to to Gods work. You can do Gods work just as well in a t-shirt and jeans, and you’ll get something a good suit doesn’t come with: Respect.
Comment by swordsbane — June 13, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
You can be financially stable and still be humble. There is proof in society.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:09 pm#126 – Get a clue (stop being such a fundamentalist! HA!) The Eye of the Needle is a gate in the old City of Jerusalem. A camel could pass thru this gate – although it was narrow….the rich have so many distractions and responsibilities that keeping one’s focus on the holy and not allowing for the distraction of the profane is challenging….
Tooodles……
June 13th, 2007 at 2:09 pmThat scriptural text does not indicate that it is considered a sin to be rich, but it does indicate that it is hard for a rich person to serve God with full loyalty. We are not those type of individuals, we love the Lord with all of our heart and would give up our finances, if ordered by God.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Got a camel through the eye of a needle, did you? Or is it that you don’t really want to enter the kingdom of God??
June 13th, 2007 at 2:09 pmWe are not those type of individuals, we love the Lord with all of our heart and would give up our finances, if ordered by God.
Comment by St. Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Why do you keep insisting to use “we” when you’re talking about beliefs?
Is it because you can’t think on your own?
Do you blindly follow whatever your cult leader says, without thinking or questioning?
You do know that true Christianity involves a humble, personal relationship with Jesus, not hiccupping talking points of what false prophets tell you to believe, don’t you!
Seriously, when offered the grape kool-aid, do a Nancy Reagan, and JUST SAY NO
June 13th, 2007 at 2:10 pm#126
If these verses, Mt 19:23&24 are important to you, perhaps these verses earlier in the chapter are also important to you.
This is from chapter 19:
http://bibleresources.bible.com/ passagesearchresults2.php?passage1=Matthew+19&book_id=47&version1=31&tp=28&c=19
“Haven’t you read,†he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.â€
Here Christ quotes from the book of Genesis. That’s the “Haven’t you read,…†part. By quoting Genesis Christ both endorses the creation story and the sexual union of a man and a woman.
If you want to reference scripture on sexual behavior, why not mention what Jesus said in the book in Matthew?
In short, Christ said the one man one woman – forever – is the best model for everyone. This arrangement was the intent of the Creator, and safeguards one’s emotional, physical, and spiritual wellbeing. It’s certainly a sure cure for AIDS.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:12 pmYou can be financially stable and still be humble. There is proof in society.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Then explain to someone who gave up their own cash to serve God why it buying part of a fender on a Lotus is Gods work when a Honda Civic can work just as well and is a LOT more comfortable (yes I’ve sat in a Lotus) economical and costs less to maintain and drive.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:12 pmDRJ – A quick Question – what about the Brooks study demonstrating that Conservatives are MORE generous in their charitable contributions than progs?
“In 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more money to charity than households headed by a liberal ($1,600 to $1,227). This discrepancy is not simply an artifact of income differences; on the contrary, liberal families earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families, and conservative families gave more than liberal families within every income class, from poor to middle class to rich.â€
Would it be too much to ask for libs to get out of our pockets and dig in their own?
Back on topic – Most people would never know who was who and what was what if people didn’t feel so Opraj-esque and have to SHARE all….Keep your bedroom antics to yourself….
Tooodles……
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Of course, isn’t the pot calling the kettle black? Wow, conservatives give more than liberals. Easy to believe.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:15 pmDaryll,
Give away all your money!!!!
June 13th, 2007 at 2:15 pm“If you want to reference scripture on sexual behavior,etc……….
Comment by bitblt
I’ve always rather enjoyed Song of Solomon………..
June 13th, 2007 at 2:16 pmOf course, isn’t the pot calling the kettle black? Wow, conservatives give more than liberals. Easy to believe.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
Only problem is… I’m not a liberal.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:17 pmwhat about the Brooks study demonstrating that Conservatives are MORE generous in their charitable contributions than progs?
Comment by valiantly mighty aphrodisiac venus — June 13, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
I dunno. but as a recent business owner, I can see where people that are well to do may be more conservative due to their insistence on a better tax break to increase their gross margins (thus put more money in their pocket). I can see it, but I don’t agree with it.
Now that I answered your question honestly, can you return the favor?
June 13th, 2007 at 2:18 pmCan you please tell us another of your dead child fantasy jokes?
I never tire of a good mythical jab at a liberal from a pretencious child whose sibling just passed away!
I don’t exist. Let it go.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:19 pmDaryll,
Jesus commanded the Apostles charged with spreading the Word to travel without food, clothes, or money as they were to receive these from those to whom they convert. If you keep trying to convert us at TP, you are going to be one of the “least of these my brethren” (hungry, naked, and poor). Time to dust off the sandals.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:19 pmGod,
You don’t exist. I wish they would let it go. We’d all be way better off.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:20 pmDoes anyone else find it disturbing that the only reason conservatives are willing to look at allowing gay and lesbian people to serve in the military is that the military is desperate for more bodies? What happens when the need is less – will discrimination again rear its ugly head.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:22 pmWow. Pastor Gino Jennings found the best sheep in the barnyard when he found Daryll.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:24 pmIt’s certainly a sure cure for AIDS.
Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
You actually presented a strong debate, until you came up with that ditty!
A sure cure for AIDS? Really? Wow, tell that Magic Johnson!
Oh wait, he’s heterosexual, isn’t he?
so the best way to cure AIDS is to have normal heterosexual “sex”???
and the best way to cure alcoholism is to…….only drink light beer?
You know, you may want to join St.Daryll’s cult. Their looking for a few good men…
June 13th, 2007 at 2:25 pmHeh
In short, Christ said the one man one woman – forever – is the best model for everyone. This arrangement was the intent of the Creator, and safeguards one’s emotional, physical, and spiritual wellbeing. It’s certainly a sure cure for AIDS.
Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
________________________________________
My committed and long term (same sex) marriage makes me very happy and it is just as good for preventing AIDS as a straight marriage.
And let me cut you off before you even try it:
The majority of AIDS cases in Africa are in heterosexual men and women.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:27 pm“This arrangement was the intent of the Creator, and safeguards one’s emotional, physical, and spiritual wellbeing. It’s certainly a sure cure for AIDS.”
Do you speak for the Creator? I don’t think so.
If the Creator didn’t want people to be homosexual, then why did he create people who were homosexual? Do you think he created this population in order for them to be miserable, to suffer, to be lonely, hated by many and outcast in society? I think not. God’s biggest message was to learn to love. Not intolerance and hate.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:27 pmI have several relatives in my extended family who are gay. It was clear to me even as a young child one relative in particular was gay even though I didn’t understand it until I was older. It was no surprise to anyone when he came out. They have ALL suffered in many ways for being ‘created the way they were’. And make no mistake about it, that is how they were created.
I have had long conversations with them and they have ALL struggled in many ways their entire lives, fighting against their nature trying to please others and fit into the mold of society, fighting against injustice and intolerance in society and the workplace. One relative even moved out of our country and now lives and works in Europe where he is much more accepted and happy.
DR – Thank you for the strawman argument re: stingy Progressives. Most people don’t line their pockets deeper – they invest, spend or expand their business – all of which is GREAT for the economy….. But I’m surprised – Progs don’t get the same tax breaks as conservatives? How shocking!!
Pssst…..My “pretentious” child did not say anything…..my PRECOCIOUS child made the comment….I’m certain it was just a slip of the tongue.
It’s been fun….and most enlightening.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:28 pmPssst…..My “pretentious†child did not say anything…..my PRECOCIOUS child made the comment….I’m certain it was just a slip of the tongue.
It’s been fun….and most enlightening.
Comment by valiant venus
Right. Your tongue slipped when you told the funny dead kid story.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:32 pmYou can be financially stable and still be humble. There is proof in society.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Then explain to someone who gave up their own cash to serve God why it buying part of a fender on a Lotus is Gods work when a Honda Civic can work just as well and is a LOT more comfortable (yes I’ve sat in a Lotus) economical and costs less to maintain and drive.
Comment by swordsbane — June 13, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
Well, the taxes on the purchase of this car helped boost our economy. Smoke that in your pipe.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:33 pmJG
“God’s biggest message was to learn to love. Not intolerance and hate.”
While I hear what your trying to say, the fact is, that the bible is so chocked full of hateful messages, directly from God, that it is intellectually dishonest to think that ‘God’ believe in anything but intolerance and hate.
The Jews are the chosen ones. Screw everyone else. Everyone can and should own slaves. Slavery is expected of God and ok by God so long as you don’t beat them hard enough to knock out their teeth or eyes.
The problem is faith in the first place. You can’t have a true conversation with a faith head. There is no room for movement with fundies. They’re too far gone.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:35 pmMost people don’t line their pockets deeper – they invest, spend or expand their business – all of which is GREAT for the economy…..
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
Like driving a beamer or a vette is an investment… what… do you sell it back and make a profit? Is it better for the environment? Is is cheaper to service?
Hey… I’m all for investing, but the fact is.. it takes a fixed amount of money to live well enough so you have no financial trouble and get the best medical care and it’s the same cost when you earn minimum wage as when you earn $6 million a year. Everything else is money in your pocket. If you use that pocket money to buy toys instead of helping people, don’t talk to me about being a better person.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:35 pmWell, the taxes on the purchase of this car helped boost our economy. Smoke that in your pipe.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
Bullsh*t! Those taxes went to the government. They only boost our economy if they are returned using something like a subsidy, and most of the money the governement doles out in subsidies goes to… say it with me now…. producing oil.
Way to go bone-head.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:37 pmSword – And those workers who make the “toys” appreciate having a JOB, right?….
June 13th, 2007 at 2:38 pmTesting.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:39 pmPart of this argument is just plain despicable. So, now being gay in the military might suddenly be acceptable to the military just because they need more bodies to fill their quotas? Despicable!
June 13th, 2007 at 2:40 pmGays are human beings just like the rest of us and can serve their country as honorably, as bravely, and as effectively as any other human being in this country.
I am so sick of the arrogance and self-righteousness of people making decisions in this country!
Sword – Of course…you completely ignored the new jobs available when people invest and/or spend. Figures.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:40 pmdefinition of pretentious a : making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) b : expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or statur:
sorry mightly valiant, but my adjective that describes your hypothetical child is correct
NEXT
June 13th, 2007 at 2:41 pmbob barr is a total dick. he was then and he is now still a total dick! is it a bizzare view of marriage to cheat on your wife, mr barr? as he did. those same ‘ex-cons, drug abusers and high-school dropouts’ are able to marry and procreate. so they’re legally able to take on the most important job any adult is charge with-raising children-but not fit to serve in the military? i find his so-called logic bizzare!
June 13th, 2007 at 2:42 pmTesting, again.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:46 pmSword – And those workers who make the “toys†appreciate having a JOB, right?….
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 2:38 pm
Nice try. Except in certain cases, unemployment stays pretty much the same no matter which way the industry is going. If people weren’t building those toys, they’d be building other stuff. If you bought a Honda Civic instead of a Lotus, then all those people building the Lotus can be put to work building Honda’s (or Fords if you insist on buying American)
Then people can afford more Honda’s so you need more workers and now your net gain/loss is more people at work. Everyone wins, and even the rich people can actually be respected for their money.
Besides, if you’re spending more money on helping people and raising the general standard of living, then you’ll be putting people to work in the right places instead of making expensive playthings.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:47 pm#160
I believe Christ was speaking for the Creator. The summary statement – one man one woman forever – was mine.
I believe the remains to be shown. People were not created to be homosexuals. Perhaps there’s a problem with the implementation.
Perhaps there’s a problem with the random mutation and natural selection. Perhaps it’s cosmic radiation.
I’m sorry your family has suffered because of homosexuality.
I’m not sure society could provide enough acceptance to remove all the suffering endure by homosexuals.
Many homosexuals display an “in your face†attitude that only seems to emphasize how separate they truly are.
I have difficulty imagining that this attitude is the result of genetic influences.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:48 pmSpineless warlords of the U.S. Government, please bring back the draft!
The Jihadists are increasing their troops, why shouldn’t we?
Isn’t this war worth anything to you greedy Americans?
Where’s your blind servitude to your ‘dictator’ when we need it most?
June 13th, 2007 at 2:48 pmSword – Of course…you completely ignored the new jobs available when people invest and/or spend. Figures.
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
As I said… there are new jobs and there are new jobs. Where the money goes isn’t going to determine the number of jobs available. IF the money goes is what deteremins that. $5 million can buy a really cool mansion and requires X number of workers. Five $1 million homes take more people to build, so you’re employing more people. In addition, rich mansions often have more unrecyclable materials in them, and take up larger lots than five other houses.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:52 pmI knew the moment I saw the word “homosexual” in the post that I’d find Daryll here, hehehehehehehehe.
“I have never had homosexual tendencies (Thank God).”
Comment by Daryll
I believe you here Daryll, it’s pretty clear that you’re gay and don’t just ‘tend’ to be.
DRxJ, looking at the postings I think that Daryll’s drinking what he believes is lemon-lime kool-aide, unfortunately it’s from a bottle with a Prestone label.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:53 pmI don’t suppose he apologized for his previous gay-bashing?
Well, I guess any improvement is to be welcomed.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:56 pm“Testing, again.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:46 pm”
Daryll, no need to keep testing. I think you’ve ingested enough to be good to -30 already.
June 13th, 2007 at 2:56 pm#158
You know. I believe you’re right.
A cure is when you go to the Dr. (MD) and you say I’ve got this disease.
Dr. says take this and the disease will be cured. All signs and symptoms will go away, and you’ll never be trouble with it again.
There not many cures around.
I’ll change by ditty.
The sure preventative for sexual transmitted AIDS is one man one woman forever – committed, faithful monogamous heterosexual relations – a marriage.
Thanks.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:00 pm“I’m sorry your family has suffered because of homosexuality.”
Thanks, but save it. I don’t need your sympathy. My family hasn’t suffered because of anyone. We love all our family members unconditionally – which is how it should be. We love them all just as God created them. The particular family members I spoke of struggled in their own personal lives growing up BECAUSE of the intolerance of others. That is the bigger problem in society. Intolerance.
Is that a code word “attitude”? Believe me, you couldn’t be more off base..
June 13th, 2007 at 3:00 pmFollow the Bible.
The money doesn’t have your name stamped on it, it has the name “United States Government” stamped upon it. It belongs to the United States.
If you fail to pay your taxes, then you’re obviously not a Bible following Christian. Sinner.
This is one gay man who had the courage to serve the US by my service in the Army. Why don’t all the self-professed Christians joining the Military? Not patriotic enough?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:06 pmI have been waiting for this. I knew that as soon as the military was having problems meeting their recruiting goals that some wingnut would fall off the wagon and say that it’s time the gays were allowed to join.
Note that Barr is explicit in his opposition to same-sex marriage. So the summary of his views is that it is OK for a gay American to fight and die in a war to “protect” his country, but his family doesn’t deserve the same protection his fellow soldiers’ families do.
Not one single solitary gay American should join the military until we are recognized as full citizens like everyone else. Respect our rights and our families, then we can talk about carrying a gun for ya.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:07 pmThe sure preventative for sexual transmitted AIDS is one man one woman forever – committed, faithful monogamous heterosexual relations – a marriage.
Thanks.
Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
You are aware that AIDS is not just a sexual transmitted disease, aren’t you?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:07 pmIn fact, the rapid spread of HIV in the mid to late eighties was in part due to the sharing of needles, and tainted blood (Ryan White;Arthur Ash)
so, even your utopic scenerio holds no ground.
and never forget that the government only became vocal about AIDS when the heterosexual population infected was skyrocketing
You are a child left behind daryll, no further testing neccesary.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:08 pm#182 – I’ll match your comment:
The sure preventative for sexual transmitted AIDS is one man and one man together forever – committed, faithful monogamous homosexual relations – a marriage.
If neither person in the marriage enters the relationship with a disease and remain monogamous, there’s no possibility for transmission.
Exactly the same as would happen with one man and one woman.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:10 pmExactly the same as would happen with one woman and one woman.
The sure preventative for sexual transmitted AIDS is one man one woman forever – committed, faithful monogamous heterosexual relations – a marriage. Or so says bitblt.
So bitethebullet, we should only have sex with one other person forever? Is that/was that your MO? Really?
If you answered yes, you are either lying, or truly f*cked up. I am guessing you are both.
Remember too that you go to hell for masturbating. But you probably have never spilled the seed on the ground either right?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:11 pm#182…. are you still living in the 1980’s? There is more HIV spread around by breeders (i.e., heterosexuals) than by the gay community. More and more women are becoming HIV+ because their husbands and boyfriends are busy screwing whores behind their backs.
AIDS in Africa is an almost 100% heterosexual disease. AIDS existed in Africa long before it appeared in the West. And you want to blame gays, who just happened to be the first victims of HIV in this country.
If you so strongly support monogamy (and on this I do agree), why don’t you support same-sex marriage? It is as important for gays as it is for straights. Monogamy would definitely cut down the number of new HIV infections. Are the lives of gay people not as valuable as your own?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:12 pmI’ll repeat what I said earlier:
I’d prefer Democrat Soldier to fight the enemy in battle with, rather than some selfish right wing pseudo(c)hristian chickenhawk like St.Daryll!
Geez, can you imagine St.Daryll in the heat of battle:
“oh no, what do I do…what do I do? Please, Father Jennings, please guide me in my time of need. I promise I’ll never let Tiffany wear the pants in my house again. (speaking of pants, I think I just soiled mine…oh dear!)”
By the way, Democrat Soldier. Thank you for your service! Our country greatly appreciates it!
June 13th, 2007 at 3:14 pmExactly the same as would happen with one woman and one woman.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — June 13, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
(doing my best Homer Simpson impersonation)
HMMMMMMMMM, woman on woman!
(sorry, couldn’t resist)
June 13th, 2007 at 3:17 pmGays should NOT serve in the U.S. military until GAY rights are fully recognized by the government that wants to recruit gay people into its imperialist armed forces…Die for straight gay-hating americans? I dont think so. Straights started the war…let them provide the blood.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:22 pm#186
You are aware I said…
I believe I’ll stand by the statement.
I’m aware that my dentist always wears a full face mask, if that’s what you mean?
If you have better advice for preventing the spread of AIDS, I’d like to hear it.
So, would you tell all the victims in Africa that it “…just had to happen..,” even among the heterosexuals?
Loosing generations seems to be a high price to pay because the men can’t keep their pants on.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:22 pmLoosing generations seems to be a high price to pay because the men can’t keep their pants on.
Comment by bitblt
Now there is an interesting assumption.
Men?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:24 pmThis post is to “address” the posting issues that TP has yet to correct.
Since the move to new servers once you post to a thread, no new posts show up until you post again. This will increase the number of posts like this one to every thread.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:24 pm“….then you’ll be putting people to work in the right places instead of making expensive playthings.” Comment by swordsbane
Who appointed you in charge of deciding what other people SHOULD do with their money? Have you always been such an envious “reverse” elitist….or just broke?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:25 pmI’d prefer Democrat Soldier to fight the enemy in battle with, rather than some selfish right wing pseudo(c)hristian chickenhawk like St.Daryll!
By the way, Democrat Soldier. Thank you for your service! Our country greatly appreciates it!
June 13th, 2007 at 3:27 pm____________________________
I second that.
#190 – Monogamy among gay men is even more rare than hetero men. The sad fact is: unless you innocently contracted HIV through a blood transfusion, or some other medical mix-up, AIDS is transmitted thru immoral behaviours. (NOTE to the Perpetually Offended: I did not say “rotten horrible people”.) Lets’ examine the behaviours to which I am referring:
Homosexual sex – check.
Hetero cheating husband (bi or straight) – check.
IV drug use – check.
Enough said.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:32 pm#192 – “HMMMMMMMMM, woman on woman! (sorry, couldn’t resist)” Comment by DRxJ — June 13, 2007 @ 3:17 pm
Hah! I showed your response to a co-worker, and he agrees with you! ;-)
#194 – “the sure preventative for sexual transmitted AIDS” Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
What’s more preventative than two people (same or opposite sex) who remain monogamous?
Monogamy: the ultimate preventative for STD’s. This just supports allowing same-sex marriage.
Currently, only opposite-sex marraiges are allowed. What’s the percentage of opposite-sex marriages that suffer from adultry? Or do assume that all opposite-sex marriages are completely monogamous?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:32 pm“….then you’ll be putting people to work in the right places instead of making expensive playthings.†Comment by swordsbane
Who appointed you in charge of deciding what other people SHOULD do with their money? Have you always been such an envious “reverse†elitist….or just broke?
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Ahh… the classic “I’ve got nothing so I’m going to be self-righteous” argument.
Hey, bone-head. I never said anyone should tell you what you SHOULD do with your money. It IS your money. But if you want to get into a moral argument, go stand on a corner next to a bum and see which people give them money and which people ignore them completely until they’re squatting on the ground that’s going to be turned into a mall.
I’ll put my $3000 dollars up against your millions any day of the week. Why? Because it cost me more to make that three grand than it cost you to make your millions. If I give that away to people who are more needy than I, it means more than you giving away your millions. Until you understand why that is, you’ll never understand why I’m so pissed off.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:32 pm#190 – Monogamy among gay men is even more rare than hetero men.
Comment by valiantly mighty venus aphroditus — June 13, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Link please. Seriously. I would like to read up on your strawman.
Homosexual sex – check.
Hetero cheating husband (bi or straight) – check.
IV drug use – check.
you forgot to add:
Hetero cheating wife (bi or staight) – check
you’re welcome
June 13th, 2007 at 3:36 pm#199 – “Monogamy among gay men is even more rare than hetero men.” Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Really? How many gay men do you personally know? Do you keep a running total of the number of sexual conquests that gay men have? Why the interest?
Don’t you think that encouraging same-sex partnerships would encourage monogamous relationships? Or do you ascribe to the belief that marriage encourages sex outside the marriage? Is THAT why Mr. Limbaugh cannot keep a wife for more than a few years at a time?
If you are going to support your arguments with facts you pull out of your a$$, then I’m going to make up my own facts to refute your facts.
(I could become exactly like the right-wing bloviating mouthpieces, making up my own facts as I go along!)
June 13th, 2007 at 3:38 pm#190 – Monogamy among gay men is even more rare than hetero men. The sad fact is: unless you innocently contracted HIV through a blood transfusion, or some other medical mix-up, AIDS is transmitted thru immoral behaviours. (NOTE to the Perpetually Offended: I did not say “rotten horrible peopleâ€.) Lets’ examine the behaviours to which I am referring:
Homosexual sex – check.
Hetero cheating husband (bi or straight) – check.
IV drug use – check.
Enough said.
Comment by varicose veinus
I’m pleased to hear that you are in favor of gay marriage. Anything to encourage monogamy, right?
And your list of “immoral” behavior? Why list homosexual sex? What makes it immoral? You’re worried about someone else being appointed to be in charge of how people spend their money and yet you get to being charge of what is moral or not?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:39 pmSwordbane – I think your’re pi$$ed off because Progressives are incapable of JOY – nothing more…nothing less. After all, “how can I smile if anyone in the world is starving?”
Conservatives are FAR more generous to charities and the poor than Liberals. Pssst….if you read the Brooks study, the PERCENTAGE of money contributed by Conservatives was higher than Progs making MORE MONEY….And MORE Conservatives d-o-n-a-t-e….
June 13th, 2007 at 3:41 pmGo play with your assumptions – you certainly don’t have the data to back up your assertion. Goood effort!!!!!
Conservatives are FAR more generous to charities
______________________
Were donations to churches counted. If so, the data might be correct. The reason for the donations and what those donations were used for, though ….
June 13th, 2007 at 3:46 pm#203
How many homosexuals want to be married?
June 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pmMonogamy among gay men is even more rare than hetero men.
Comment by valiant venus
___________________________
Since “marriage” is reserved only for heterosexual men in this country, they are the only ones capable of NOT being “monogamous.” And they seem to excel in that freedom.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:53 pmSwordbane – I think your’re pi$$ed off because Progressives are incapable of JOY – nothing more…nothing less. After all, “how can I smile if anyone in the world is starving?â€
Conservatives are FAR more generous to charities and the poor than Liberals. Pssst….if you read the Brooks study, the PERCENTAGE of money contributed by Conservatives was higher than Progs making MORE MONEY….And MORE Conservatives d-o-n-a-t-e….
Go play with your assumptions – you certainly don’t have the data to back up your assertion. Goood effort!!!!!
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
Unfortunately, nothing I said was false. Your (no doubt carefully collected) data doesn’t have anything to do with it because I’m not comparing conservatives to liberals (I am not a liberal in any case so it doesn’t matter). Even if I was, percentages aren’t the whole story. I have enough money to live pretty well and give to my favorite charities. If a CEO who earns $10 million a year would have to give the same percentage of his money to charity (before you take anything away for living expenses) that I do, but that’s not the end.
I can’t live on 10% of my income. On the other hand, the CEO can. If I give away 90% of my income, I starve and I’m evicted from my home and I can’t afford another. A CEO gives away 90% of his $10 million a year income and he still has $1 million a year. Plenty to live very comfortably. Is that figured into the Brooks study?
But even that’s not the end. Tell me in that little Brooks study. WHAT CHARITIES do conservatives and liberals give their money to? I bet that would change the moral scales a bit.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:54 pmIf you want to talk about “immoral behavior”, what could be more immoral than the leader of a country taking his country to war on lies and manufactured evidence in order to line the pockets of his corporate buddies? What about the immorality of decimating an entire country, killing hundreds of thousands of its people, and causing the deaths of over 3,500 soldiers by sticking them in the middle of a civil war (that we set the stage to happen).
What about the immorality of torturing prisoners in secret prisons and lying about it? What about the immorality of not taking care of our injured soldiers once they get home? What about the immorality of going into a war without a plan for what happens after you blow everything up? What about the immorality of sitting back and not doing anything to help the people of New Orleans (except showing up for photo ops) after Katrina struck?
I could list a very long list of immoralities that are far more pertinent and destructive.. Why aren’t you screaming about those immoralities?
Is sex the only issue conservatives can focus their ‘immorality radar’ on? Perhaps that is why our country is in the fix it is right now.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:55 pmUnfortunate..
NONE
June 13th, 2007 at 4:00 pmHow many heterosexuals want to stay married?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pm#203
How many homosexual men want to married to other homosexual men?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pmHOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS A COUNTERTFEIT!
Looks real but is fake.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:02 pmre # 13: Where in the world are Bush’s darling daughters?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:12 pmLast I heard, a few months ago, they were at a party somewhere in South America where one of them had her cell phone stolen. Haven’t seen hide nor hair of them since. They don’t seem to show up at important family events like Mother’s Day or Easter.
Maybe the press just doesn’t care.
Or maybe they’re told to not report anything. They’re such good followers, aren’t they?
Daryll, It’s a lovely day up here so me and a couple of the other gods got together to tip a few back and goof on all of the dopes we created and the silly shit we make happen to them. It might of been the quality dope Allah scored or that water/wine brew of mine but you’ve got us in stitches. We’ve being trying to get some of the Greeks off of the private clouds to check you out but you know how those “greeks” are. Anyway keep it up. We haven’t had this much fun since I told that dimwit from Texas that I wanted him to be preseident. By the way, I made up most of that shit in that book but I really ment the shellfish part so please drop the gay thing and started doing my work relative to ending their consumption. Those freakin’ Hindu gods are always making these weird animals which gross me out.
Best,
June 13th, 2007 at 4:13 pmChristian God
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS A COUNTERTFEIT!
Looks real but is fake.
Comment by Flaccid— June 13, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
kinda like your posts!
June 13th, 2007 at 4:14 pmSwordbane – How do you account for all those millionaire Libs who are so damn cheap? Al Gore and John Kerry come to mind – remember their tax return and the heading “Charitable donations?”
Frankly, I think people should give what they can and want with a happy, anonymous heart…..BTW way, the Brooks study notes his incredulity that Libs weren’t as generous – and the demographics……another urban myth up in flames!!
And for those who think gay activists in San Francisco were interested in stopping AID’s in it’s tracks….read gay author (who has since died of AIDS) Randy Shilts, “And the Band Played On“….They were not about to close the “bath houses”….tooo many of their liasions were conducted anonymously in those places.
Pssst – OK, So if I give to Catholic Charities or Jewish Family Services (which provide alot of social services to communities) and you give to the SAVE the Whale….you’re moral and conservatives are not – or I’m moral and you’re GREEN? I don’t think it matters which charities – I think we might even have a few that overlap….but you pro-choicers are confounded by CHOICES….
Funny thing- your “moral scales” are morally relative…..and quite flexible……
I must be running… I’ll enjoy your “maybe morally” response….til later
Tooodles…
June 13th, 2007 at 4:18 pmI have the utmost respect for Al Gore. There are lots of ways to give.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/nation/0509/09/nat4-309467.htm
Where was Bush and Cheney?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pmSwordbane – I think your’re pi$$ed off because Progressives are incapable of JOY – nothing more…nothing less. After all, “how can I smile if anyone in the world is starving?â€
Comment by valiant venus
This from a woman so totally incapable of JOY, she wouldn’t recognize it on her own imaginary child’s face. Joyful people don’t spew vicious bile the way you do, Hag — we don’t have to.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:24 pmRequired Refresh Post – Please ignore.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:27 pmI want to marry my camel.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:30 pm:}
June 13th, 2007 at 4:31 pmGod,
why did someone have to think you up. Now look at us. We’re still running around as though we are scared of our own shadow.
We fear that which we have no reason to fear. THere is no rational reason to believe you exist, but we, near ape like creatures, continue to do so in nearly infinite ways. None of these ways are truly compatible. We’ve manifested you in multpile terms and forms, only to come to same conclusion. WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF YOU WHATSOEVER!!! So we give into the fear and it manifests itself in blind unreasonable faith.
Thanks a lot as*hole!!
June 13th, 2007 at 4:33 pmMr. Roboto,
“I want to marry my camel.”
Please do.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:34 pm#201 – “How many homosexuals want to be married?” Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
More than you might think!
I know of about 30 couples that would like to have a marriage recognized by the state in which they live.
I would like to have one as well, but marriage exists in the heart, not on a piece of paper. I’ve been with my partner for over 7 years. We’re married.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:39 pm#216 – “I want to marry my camel.”
Sorry, Usama bin Laden. You’ve already screwed your camel. No marriage for you!
June 13th, 2007 at 4:40 pmSwordbane – How do you account for all those millionaire Libs who are so damn cheap? Al Gore and John Kerry come to mind – remember their tax return and the heading “Charitable donations?â€
Frankly, I think people should give what they can and want with a happy, anonymous heart…..BTW way, the Brooks study notes his incredulity that Libs weren’t as generous – and the demographics……another urban myth up in flames!!
And for those who think gay activists in San Francisco were interested in stopping AID’s in it’s tracks….read gay author (who has since died of AIDS) Randy Shilts, “And the Band Played On“….They were not about to close the “bath housesâ€â€¦.tooo many of their liasions were conducted anonymously in those places.
Pssst – OK, So if I give to Catholic Charities or Jewish Family Services (which provide alot of social services to communities) and you give to the SAVE the Whale….you’re moral and conservatives are not – or I’m moral and you’re GREEN? I don’t think it matters which charities – I think we might even have a few that overlap….but you pro-choicers are confounded by CHOICES….
Funny thing- your “moral scales†are morally relative…..and quite flexible……
I must be running… I’ll enjoy your “maybe morally†response….til later
Tooodles…
Comment by valiant venus — June 13, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
At least with “Save the Whales” I have a better idea where my money’s going than giving to the Catholic church. No disrespect intended, but nowhere on the collection plate does it say “And this will feed the hungry” as opposed to “This will build another gaudy church” or “This will be used as a defense fund for priest convicted of pedophilia”
Besides, rich people have a unique way of getting around that by making up their OWN charities and making sure the money goes to where it should. On the other hand, I hear a lot about Charities like that being investigated for fraud.. It’s funny that most of them seem to be affiliated with the conservatives… but oh well.. I’m not going to get into a pecker contest over which is the better charity, but I will give a hint… Halliburton isn’t a charity.
But again.. I’m not a liberal, so the Brooks study doesn’t apply anyway. I also wasn’t comparing liberals to conservatives. I was comparing rich people to everyone else. Rich people think it’s the size of the check that matters. I don’t. I think it’s the size of the account you have left over that matters. I hear too many rich people puffing themselves up and getting all this publicity for the money they give to charity, when someone who gives up a greated share of their income doesn’t even rate a human interest story… In the meantime we debate the idea that Paris Hilton should go to jail for comitting a crime when it’s a given for anyone who isn’t routinely on the cover of a magazine.
Having money doesn’t make you a good person, and not having money doesn’t make you a good person either. It’s what you do with the money you have. If you buy a mansion that is ten sizes too big for you and your family or drive a flashy car, or buy nothing but silk suits, I have no respect for you. It is simply a waste of money that could be put to better uses. Comfort is one thing, even a little excess is okay, but decadence is not, and if you’re living a decadent lifestyle and try to impress me with how much you’re doing for others, don’t expect it to work.
If you don’t want to call that a moral argument, I’ll be satisfied if you simply call it my opinion. Either way, you’re not likely to change my mind with nothing but conservative vs liberal statistics.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:43 pmHOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS A COUNTERTFEIT!
Looks real but is fake.
kinda like your posts!
Comment by DRxJ
Truth not your cup of tea is it?
June 13th, 2007 at 4:44 pmWe are not those type of individuals, we love the Lord with all of our heart and would give up our finances, if ordered by God.
Comment by Daryll — June 13, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Read Deuteronomy 15
You’ve been ordered. Start giving up.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:44 pmI knew the moment I saw the word “homosexual†in the post that I’d find Daryll here, hehehehehehehehe.
LOL – me too :D Thinking alike again…
DRxJ, looking at the postings I think that Daryll’s drinking what he believes is lemon-lime kool-aide, unfortunately it’s from a bottle with a Prestone label.
Comment by Quadrajet — June 13, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
I just wonder how much emotional pain you must feel to need to convince yourself of such outrageous things… It makes perfect sense that he clings to such a cultish faith to assuage his inner pain over his homosexuality realities…
June 13th, 2007 at 4:51 pmFunny thing during the 60s, 70s couples were ’shacking up”.
Who needs a marriage license, they would say. We love each other and do not need a worthless piece of paper to show our love.
Now you have homosexuals saying we need a marriage license to prove we are a normal loving couple. But they really don’t believe in marriage as has been for many years.
Lets pretend house and make it up as we go along.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:54 pmLets pretend house and make it up as we go along.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
You prefer the current situation of a 54% divorce rate?
Just because two people get married doesn’t mean they are doing everything else right as a result. You keep missing the forest for the trees. It’s not about marriage, it’s about mutual respect for men and women – something you neocons fail to recognize.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:58 pmHOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS A COUNTERTFEIT!
Looks real but is fake.
kinda like your posts!
Comment by DRxJ
Truth not your cup of tea is it?
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
If you’re talking legally, then it’s only counterfeit until changing the law makes it not. If you’re talking religiously, then it doesn’t matter, the law shouldn’t be making religious rules into state rules. No one is going to force churches to preside over homosexual marriages. I’m not a member of any church. The law doesn’t treat me with any less respect than anyone else, and if the only thing between me an a homosexual is their sexual preference, then what God wants doesn’t enter into it.
Two homosexuals getting married isn’t going to make my marriage any less sound. It’s not going to make me love my wife less, and it’s not going to destroy religion. What it’s going to do is allow two people who love each other enjoy the same legal benefits I do. If you think there’s something wrong with that, you’ve got a serious inferiority complex.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:59 pm209
June 13th, 2007 at 5:01 pmPlease explain. I don’t get what you mean. Marriage is a legal contract with the state. Love, companionship, etc is the human bond between people. Are you saying that the paperwork filled out in the states which have had the courage to move forward on the next great step advance in civil rights are forgeries? Thanks
You are told the maximum number. Why the confusion ? This is entry level math. First grade stuff. Damn.
No, that would be 36 split among those 3 or 4 languages specified. I was being generous.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:03 pmRead Deuteronomy 15
You’ve been ordered. Start giving up.
Comment by unbelievable
You’re no bible scholar unbelievable.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:04 pmYou prefer the current situation of a 54% divorce rate?
Just because two people get married doesn’t mean they are doing everything else right as a result. You keep missing the forest for the trees. It’s not about marriage, it’s about mutual respect for men and women – something you neocons fail to recognize.
Comment by unbelievable
Homosexual marriage is not going to fix the divorce rate. That comes from society/culture devaluing marriage by shacking up, sex outside marriage, mainstreaming porn etc. idiot.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:09 pmoops 209
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS A COUNTERTFEIT!
Looks real but is fake.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
My students were amazed when I pointed out that I was 2 when the Loving decision was rendered. Quite frankly they did not know there was a time when interracial marriage was not legal and were appalled. I am glad my own children and so many other young people will know their parents were on the correct side on the current issue.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:09 pmWell, I finally found a place where Kilo had “discussed” this issue before. Only he didn’t do the math there, either. All he did was attack a strawman of “hundreds of Arabic translators,” which was never at issue, but he never established his number. His number does not reflect the contents of the report, it cannot be derived from the report, and it cannot account for other subsets of gays reported elsewhere in the media.
The TP summary in both posts accurately reflects the information from both the GAO and the DOD.
The reason Kilo won’t show his math is because he knows he’d get his ass beat … again.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:09 pm.
Lesbian couple become first gays to divorce
Last Updated: 1:55am BST 19/05/2006
A couple are to become the first lesbians to divorce – just two months after they became one of the first gay couples in Britain to get married.
Liz King, 40, and Daphne Ligthart, 36, registered their partnership in Ashford, Kent, on Feb 11 under the Civil Partnership Act, which allows same-sex couples to gain legal backing for their relationships.
Homosexuals are already divorcing each other.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:12 pmunbelievable u married right?
June 13th, 2007 at 5:13 pmNo one is going to force churches to preside over homosexual marriages…
Comment by swordsbane —
Dude you are a wishful thinker. Give it time. Homosexual Agenda (HAg) is just getting started.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:18 pmDude you are a wishful thinker. Give it time. Homosexual Agenda (HAg) is just getting started.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 5:18 pm
Ah yes.. the famous “Homosexual Agenda”
Is your tinfoil hat on straight?
Hear that click? That was me switching off.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:23 pm:]
June 13th, 2007 at 5:23 pmBob Barr thinks it is okay? Great guns, we can go ahead with it, then. Anytime the spinmaster of Price Is Right says it is so, it is so! (How the wife, Bob–you know, the one you dumped?)
Ask if I give a golly darn what this bozo thinks about anything. He was leading the charge for impeachment over a bl*w job. His opininion is on par with stuf I wipe off my shoe after walking in the park.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:25 pmTrouble is, when the draft is enacted, all those able-bodied young Americans won’t have homosexuality as an out, were “don’t ask, don’t tell” repealed. The thought that as of now, one only has to go down on one’s own, and one is free of being sent into, say, an illegal invasion should be a comfort. Growing a cyst on one’s ass is so much more difficult.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:28 pmflaco,
what is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is. I hear about it all the time.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:32 pmTrouble is, when the draft is enacted, all those able-bodied young Americans won’t have homosexuality as an out, were “don’t ask, don’t tell†repealed. The thought that as of now, one only has to go down on one’s own, and one is free of being sent into, say, an illegal invasion should be a comfort. Growing a cyst on one’s ass is so much more difficult.
Comment by jeffreydj — June 13, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
Hell, last Draft registration card I saw said “You do not have to register for the draft if…. you are a female”
and that was after they started letting women into the military. Just because they enact the draft doesn’t mean they’re going to tidy up all those exemptions. This IS the federal government we’re talking about. Efficiency only counts when you’re considering blast radius.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:33 pmImpeachment over a blow job?
Impeachment was for lying/perjury/obstruction.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:35 pmHistory rewrites itself.
what is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is. I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother
Bend over Crump’s other. They (HAg) would be glad to show you.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:37 pm#229
This is not entirely accurate.
The marriage license is a government issued document – mine was issued by the county – which makes a record of the marriage.
Legally that license is the document that records the fact that a man and a woman are married. The marriage itself is when a man and a woman declare their intention to be married. I say this because the constitution of the U.S. doesn’t remark on “allowing†a man and a woman to be married.
This is the accepted manner for almost forever. Government simply recognizes this relationship since controlling it is impossible, and it’s in the state’s interest to encourage marriage between a man and a woman.
That’s why there are signature spaces for the witnesses on the license. It is that declaration of intention to be married that makes a marriage, and those signatories are witnesses to that declaration. If the state simply allowed it, there be no need for any signatures.
The license makes a record, and the state recognizes certain sharing of property rights and responsibilities to children of that marriage based on that record.
The Old Testament records that Jacob and Rachael were married when he took her into his tent. Of course, he did this so they could have sex, but this was the recognition of the intent to be man and wife.
You might want to note what it takes to declare a cohabiting couple as man and wife. If the couple is ever addressed as Mr. and Mrs. – and they don’t correct the person making this address, then the state may try to declare them common law marriage should this be in the interest of the state.
Many Evangelical Christians belief that oldest human institution – marriage – was created by God. Genesis suggests, but does not make clear, that marriage is even older than religion.. This is the scripture to which Christ was alluded when he quoted from Genesis in Matthew 19(which is quoted somewhere above.) In Matthew Christ confirms that a man and a woman are one flesh when they are married.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:37 pmflaco,
what is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is. I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — June 13, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
The Homosexual Agenda is: Get the Republicans to think there’s a Homosexual Agenda.. then when they all have nervous breakdowns, we’ve won.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:40 pmFlaco,
Nice Dodge.
What is the homosexual agenda?
June 13th, 2007 at 5:45 pmThe license makes a record, and the state recognizes certain sharing of property rights and responsibilities to children of that marriage based on that record.
Comment by bitblt — June 13, 2007 @ 5:37 pm
If that’s true, then the legal side of marriage is unconstitutional as it violates the first ammendment. It makes a law respecting the establishment of a religion. It also brings in religious intolerance, because if a religion has no problem with homosexual marriage and they’re in a state where the marriage is illegal, then that’s violating their religious rights.
They can’t have it both ways. If it’s a religious issue, then all we have to do is found a religion that allows homosexual marriage. If it’s a legal issue, then it violates the foundation of civil rights by exempting homosexuals from a legal protection under the law that everyone else qualifies for.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:49 pmwhat is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is. I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother
Google it? lazy
June 13th, 2007 at 5:52 pm#246
June 13th, 2007 at 5:53 pmInteresting. How do you feel/think this compares to the same licensing of same gender pairings in those states which alow them? Also how.why is it in the interest of the states to encourage marriage between man and woman? Thanks
what is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is.
I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother
What did you hear about it? Tell me
June 13th, 2007 at 5:54 pmwhat is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is.
I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother
No website sorry:(
June 13th, 2007 at 5:55 pmwhat is the homosexual agenda? Is there a website? I can’t wait to find out what it is.
I hear about it all the time.
Comment by Crump’s Brother
I think it is sort of like something here they call the “New Hampshire Advantage”. I think it is somekind of mythical force which resists forward motion
June 13th, 2007 at 5:59 pmYou’re no bible scholar unbelievable.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
I’m more of an expert than you. I’ve actually read the whole thing…
Deuteronomy very explicitly demands a equalization of wealth.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:05 pmHomosexual marriage is not going to fix the divorce rate.
Exactly our point. It can’t hurt nor harm heterosexual marriage.
That comes from society/culture devaluing marriage by shacking up, sex outside marriage, mainstreaming porn etc. idiot.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 5:09 pm
No, actually, it comes from the fact that humans want what they cannot have, are not naturally monogamous like ducks and geese, live for 70 years on average in our society.
All the stuff you listed has been around as long as marriage has – but you want me to believe it’s only just recently having an impact? Sorry, I’m not gullible.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:09 pmHomosexuals are already divorcing each other.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 5:12 pm
Doesn’t say much for marriage does it?
unbelievable u married right?
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
No thanks. I don’t believe marriage is healthy, or natural in the long run. All kinds of studies show that anyone but very happily married people are mentally better off than happily single people – and most married people are not very happily married… At least not for long.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:13 pmI’m more of an expert than you. I’ve actually read the whole thing…
Deuteronomy very explicitly demands a equalization of wealth.
Comment by unbelievable
Whose wealth? which culture/people? expert
June 13th, 2007 at 6:15 pmI’m more of an expert than you. I’ve actually read the whole thing…
Deuteronomy very explicitly demands a equalization of wealth.
Comment by unbelievable
By the way reading the whole thing does not make you an expert.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:19 pmYou think pretty highly of yourself? You’ve got that look down on others attitude that is so prevalent here
unbelievable
Expert on marriage but never married?
I guess that makes sense to some.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:22 pmunbelievable I think you read to much and you need to get out more.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:25 pmTake risks, live life, enjoy. You do not come across as a happy single.
I totally agree with comment #8 by GAY! Why the devil should gays fight for the rights of other Americans, that are being withheld from them? As the proud mother of a wonderful gay son and a close friend of many fine gay people, I want nothing less than full equality for all of us.
Obviously Barr is backing off on opposition to gays in the military, only because there’s an understandable shortage of fools willing to risk their lives in an insane (not to mention illegal) war.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:32 pmunbelievable I think you read to much and you need to get out more.
Take risks, live life, enjoy. You do not come across as a happy single.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
I am way confused. Are you advocating free living, risk taking, and life fufillment? Seems like pretty sincere and honorable stuff. Now let’s encourage our gay friends to enjoy the same be it military service, marriage, or whatever. I apologize Flaco as I must have misunderstood you earlier.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:47 pmNo, actually, it comes from the fact that humans want what they cannot have, are not naturally monogamous like ducks and geese, live for 70 years on average in our society.
All the stuff you listed has been around as long as marriage has – but you want me to believe it’s only just recently having an impact? Sorry, I’m not gullible.
Comment by unbelievable
Certain “religious” types would have us believe that marriage has always been a sacrament between one man and one woman, ordained by God. This is neither cultural nor historically accurate, nor is it even borne out by the Bible. Lots of polygyny in there in the Old Testament, not to mention Hebrew kings with swarms of wives and concubines without any knocking about of them by God.
Historically, marriage is about the disposition of property, the accumulation of wealth, and incidentally about children. In plenty of cultures, “marriage” was something reserved for property owners only; couples might raise a child together in what we would recognize as a nuclear family, but without any ritual associated with the bonding, especially no ritual associated with the Christian church.
There is just as much justification in the Bible for slavery as there is for “traditional marriage”, anyway, but that would only apply to a minority of human population anyway. Humans have successfully invented any number of variations on “marriage” that include multiple wives, multiple husbands, and kinship connections that look nothing at all like one man+one woman=family.
It’s all an attempt to impose one particular religious ethic on the entire planet. Talk about “one world government”.
June 13th, 2007 at 6:53 pmComment by gummitch — June 13, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Indeed!!
June 13th, 2007 at 6:58 pmI’ve seen a few mentions of “the homosexual agenda”. Could someone please explain what it is? I’m gay and, from my experience, if you put five queens in a room you could never get them to agree on where to have brunch, much less some all encompassing “agenda”.
June 13th, 2007 at 7:26 pm:{
June 13th, 2007 at 7:59 pmLots of polygyny in there in the Old Testament, not to mention Hebrew kings with swarms of wives and concubines without any knocking about of them by God.
Lots of sodomy in there in the Old Testament too =:]
June 13th, 2007 at 8:00 pmLots of sodomy in there in the Old Testament too =:]
June 13th, 2007 at 8:01 pmI guess that means it’s OK?
unbelievable
Expert on marriage but never married?
I guess that makes sense to some.
I wonder if you have kids? I’m sure you have read about that too.
Care to offer any expert advice on raising kids?
June 13th, 2007 at 8:08 pmI’ve seen a few mentions of “the homosexual agendaâ€. Could someone please explain what it is? I’m gay and, from my experience, if you put five queens in a room you could never get them to agree on where to have brunch, much less some all encompassing “agendaâ€.
Comment by Spike Heels
The Homosexual Agenda is much like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, only it describes the Gay Plot to Achieve World Domination. The difference is that the Moral Orels are too lazy to actually forge the document. Suffice it to say that the Secret Cabal of Homos intend for all straight men to be forced to give up their pickup trucks and listen to Judy Garland records.
June 13th, 2007 at 8:11 pmWhy should homosexuals be expected to die for a country that hates them?
Why should homosexuals fight to protect a society that persecutes them?
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is completely irrelevant, it is not the real issue at all. The real issue is the place of homosexuals in society and their treatment by society.
June 13th, 2007 at 8:23 pmUntil those problems are resolved, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is exactly how homosexuals are forced to live each and every day.
The Homosexual Agenda is much like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, only it describes the Gay Plot to Achieve World Domination. The difference is that the Moral Orels are too lazy to actually forge the document. Suffice it to say that the Secret Cabal of Homos intend for all straight men to be forced to give up their pickup trucks and listen to Judy Garland records.
Comment by gummitch — June 13, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
This may be the best thought I have heard all day and funny too. Mind if I promote it as a quote for the ages?
June 13th, 2007 at 8:45 pmThis may be the best thought I have heard all day and funny too. Mind if I promote it as a quote for the ages?
Comment by dbadass
It’s all yours.
June 13th, 2007 at 9:02 pmSuffice it to say that the Secret Cabal of Homos intend for all straight men to be forced to give up their pickup trucks and listen to Judy Garland records.
Comment by gummitch
Too funny, gummitch. I’m gonna use it, too. :-)
I know guys who would cock their heads like Scooby Doo after hearing that. :D
June 13th, 2007 at 10:47 pmIf you can’t answer your own question there, man, you are dumb.
June 14th, 2007 at 12:48 amSo glad you support the imprisonment of Scooter Libby. Bravo!
June 14th, 2007 at 12:51 amHomosexual Agenda is all an attempt to impose one particular homosexual moral code on the entire planet.
In other words you soon will be thrown into jail for statements like :
I believe homosexuality is wrong and unnatural.
Christians are immoral.
June 14th, 2007 at 2:36 amHomosexuals are moral.
So glad you support the imprisonment of Scooter Libby. Bravo!
Comment by fourdogs
Sorry asshat that Libby thing was a dog and pony show for you boneheads.
June 14th, 2007 at 2:38 amHomosexual Agenda is all an attempt to impose one particular homosexual moral code on the entire planet.
In other words you soon will be thrown into jail for statements like :
I believe homosexuality is wrong and unnatural.
Christians are immoral.
Homosexuals are moral.
Comment by Flaccid — June 14, 2007 @ 2:36 am
…and here, my friends, is a perfect example why drinking while blogging DOES NOT MIX!!!
Friends don’t let friends blog drunk (assumming flaccid Flaco has friends)
well, at least I hope he/she/it was drunk. being completely incoherent while sober is an indication of a) a child
June 14th, 2007 at 9:06 amb) illiterate
c) schizophrenic
or
d) all of the above
Whose wealth? which culture/people? expert
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 6:15 pm
Oh, I see, you want to pretend thatthe OT god was just talking to Jews, so it lets you off the hook to be a greedy little pig. Don’t be silly. If the OT was just for the Jews, it would have been omitted from the bible. It applies to you too, if you follow that sort of commanding from invisible sky daddies.
By the way reading the whole thing does not make you an expert.
Again, I only said that I’m more profocient than you. The word ‘expert’ was your interjection. Stop building strawmen, it makes you look incapable of actual debate.
You think pretty highly of yourself? You’ve got that look down on others attitude that is so prevalent here
Not at all. You just assume that about people who are smart. Because you can’t get it (because you refuse to get it), you think anyone else who does get it must be arrogant. I’ll make you a bet. If you started to educate yourself by reading and keeping an open mind, you’d get it too, and understand that we’re not speaking arrogantly, but are simply informed.
Expert on marriage but never married?
I guess that makes sense to some.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
You don’t have to be married to have an opinion on marriage, or to see what marriage does over time to your friends and family members who get married.
The only person using the word ‘expert’ is you.
unbelievable I think you read to much and you need to get out more.
I’m one of the most travelled people my friends know. I’ve visited 35 US states, and 50 different countries outside of our own. And I don’t count airports or travel in packs on air-conditioned buses. I’ve lived in 5 different states, and am planning now to go to graduate school.
You?
Take risks, live life, enjoy. You do not come across as a happy single.
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
Actually, I’m very happy. You just can’t see it because you’re projecting your own misery on to others.
June 14th, 2007 at 9:46 amIt’s all an attempt to impose one particular religious ethic on the entire planet. Talk about “one world governmentâ€.
Comment by gummitch — June 13, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Well said – and true. I’ve heard Christians claim that marriage is religious in nature. I guess they cannot understand that there are legal marriages performed at city halls by secular authorities?
June 14th, 2007 at 9:50 amI wonder if you have kids? I’m sure you have read about that too.
I’m a teacher. I do raise other people’s kids. I have more experience at it than you.
Care to offer any expert advice on raising kids?
Comment by Flaco — June 13, 2007 @ 8:08 pm
As a paid professional (that does make me an expert on the matter by definition), and someone who has an active role in raising her niece, it’s simple – respect them, while teaching them to respect you and others simultaneously. It really isn’t that complicated. They are people too. They also respond better to praise and reward than to punishment and damnation, by the way.
June 14th, 2007 at 9:55 amFirst off, the federal government has no say whatsoever about marriage — that is a state issue.
That being said, anybody that would date, make love to, or try to marry a person of their own sex is a certifiable freak. If colon commandos want to raid each other’s buttholes in their homes, fine. If clam-bumpers want to do each other with strap-ons in their homes, I’m not going to lose sleep over it. Frankly, I consider lesbos one of the most laughable wastes of space imaginable. But when they start demanding that society validate their pervert relationships in civil ceremonies, they’re going too far. Only a country begging to destroy itself would even remotely consider putting up with this shit.
For Christ’s sake, even the flamers that wrote the constitutions for Athens and Sparta weren’t braindead enough to codify marriage for faggots. So what’s the excuse for people in this country that would endorse such errant stupidity?
June 14th, 2007 at 11:19 am#283 – “So what’s the excuse for people in this country that would endorse such errant stupidity?” Comment by Big M — June 14, 2007 @ 11:19 am
You hear of all the stupid decisions that come out of the Bush Administration, and you’re all up in arms about equal rights?
The true freaks include you and those of your ilk.
I’m glad I spent my time in the US Army protecting your right to spew that kind of mindless crap, but I’ll take you to the woodshed if you call me “faggot’ to my face, you pitiful loser. It’s MISTER Faggot to pansies of your stripe, coward!
June 14th, 2007 at 12:10 pmAs a paid professional (that does make me an expert on the matter by definition), and someone who has an active role in raising her niece, it’s simple – respect them, while teaching them to respect you and others simultaneously. It really isn’t that complicated. They are people too. They also respond better to praise and reward than to punishment and damnation, by the way.
Comment by unbelievable
There is a big difference raising your own children and others. It is nice that you are involved with your family but there are many like you that think yourself an expert and that you know how to raise kids and you do not. You are not a parent and do not have that expertise sorry. Book knowledge is all you have which is not fine for you.
June 14th, 2007 at 12:28 pmBook knowledge is all you have which is fine for you.
June 14th, 2007 at 12:30 pmI’m glad I spent my time in the US Army… doing what pushing paper?
Comment by Democrat Soldier
June 14th, 2007 at 12:35 pmI’m more of an expert than you. I’ve actually read the whole thing…
Deuteronomy very explicitly demands a equalization of wealth.
Comment by unbelievable
You did say you were an expert in the bible.
June 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmYou have convinced yourself of that for sure.
#283
What did you do in the army?
What was your primary MOS?
June 14th, 2007 at 1:16 pmWe must be losing for this nut to
change his mind! How about following
this guideline:
1. Fairness
2. Tolerance
3. Peace
4. Concern for the well being of others
I find it works well for about everything.
June 14th, 2007 at 1:31 pm#287 & 289 – My primary MOS was 74D – Computer/Machine Operator.
I ran the mainframe for the Command & Control Support Agency. There are sites all over the world. I was at the Pentagon, MF741C (Mezzanine Floor, 7th Spoke/Hall, room 41C). This was from 86-80.
Basic Training at Ft. LeonardWood, Missouri, Bravo Company, 2 Battalion 3rd Brigade.
AIT (Advanced Individual Training) at Ft. Benjamin Harris, Indianapolis, Indiana. This base has since been closed.
June 14th, 2007 at 1:44 pmFlaco & Bitbit,
I ponied up my military info.
What was your respective MOS? Where did you spend time in the Military?
June 14th, 2007 at 1:56 pmDraft dodger 1st class
June 14th, 2007 at 1:59 pmGuns, bombs, killing people not interested.
Democrat Soldier, did you ever kill while in the service?
June 14th, 2007 at 2:03 pmMainframe operation sounds very important.
Thanks for your service and protecting me from bad people.
Mainframe operation sounds very important.
June 14th, 2007 at 2:13 pmThanks for your service and protecting me from bad people and I hope you”ve recovered from the paper cuts. You are so courageous.
#291
I was a medic.
I spent 16 months working in the Canal Zone(Panama).
I was in a HHQ company.
That command, at that time, was USARSO – U.S. Army Southern Command.
I trained at Fort Sam Houston and Portsmouth Naval Hospital.
Please note that I’ve made no claims about my military service.
June 14th, 2007 at 2:21 pmFlaco, if you study hard and get good grades. . . .
Oh, wait. That won’t work anymore.
If you abuse drugs, drop out of high-school and steal, then you’re just what the new US Military is looking for!
Mainframe operations kept the US safe from cyber-terrorism. What kind of cyber-terrorist knows Cobol and can hack into a mainframe? Not a one!
Everyone in the Army is a scond-line troop. If I had been ordered to war, I would have gone. Unlike any of the neo-cons that love war, but refuse to offer service to the country.
How do you justify your action in avoiding military? Let me guess, “you’ve got too much to live for.”
June 14th, 2007 at 2:41 pmHey Flake-O & NitWit: Pleeeeease keep posting! I love laughing at pathetic loser wingnuts!!!!!!!!!
June 14th, 2007 at 6:38 pmHey Flake-O & NitWit:
Pleeeeease keep posting! I love laughing at pathetic loser wingnuts!!!!!!!!!
June 14th, 2007 at 6:39 pmInteresting, now that the religious right cannot use the bible as the authority for making second class citizens out of racial minorities, nor use the bible to compel a “legal” basis against interacial marriage, the nearly EXACT modus operandi of justification is dredged up to support a Christian Fatwah against hating another group.
Jesus said what ever one does to the least of their brothers they do to Him. So, if they consider gays a “lesser human” and justify hating them, do they not, by extention, hate Jesus?
IF one is going to say the bible is literal an inviolate, then full kosher compliance with dietary laws should not be optional, and one should own slaves, and our leaders, such as Bush who is closest to a Soloman should be allowed multiple wifes and concubines. UNTLESS AND UNTIL all of the Evangelical show me by their actions that ALL of the bible is as important to them than passages they use to justify hate, I cannot take anything they say as anything except hypocritical rhetoric.
And yes, I am a Christian who is HUMBLE in my approach to God and Jesus, PERSONAL in my relationship to my faith and, like JESUS Himself, critical of those who try to show society how much better and more faithful they are through making an ostentatious show of their “faith” and Wealth…after all, it was not the poor Jesus drove out of the Temple now was it? Last time I looked it was self-engrandizing religious leaders and money changers who took advantage of the poor as they entered the house of prayer!!
I fully expect to be condemned by those who feel I am not “christian” as defined by the Evangelical Radicals, but I am secure enough and humble enough in MY faith to accept that.
June 15th, 2007 at 1:13 amStephen Colbert this week limited the number he was citing just to Arabic translators and his number was 58.
The difference between us being I specified competance and not language.
We are of course both lying, as you well know by your own studies of the data quoted which somehow didn’t involve looking at it or posessing even the most basic math skills.
June 15th, 2007 at 9:47 pm“Arbeit Macht Frei,” eh, Mr. Barr?
Y’all watch what kind of free ride the Congressman gets from the Hannity/Limbaugh brownshirts after characterizing folks who answered our nation’s call as “a hodge podge that includes ex-cons, drug abusers and high-school dropouts.”
Tell it to the Marines, jackass !
Dwight Whale
June 16th, 2007 at 10:34 am