FACT CHECK: The Right-Wing Smear Campaign Against Kevin Jennings
FACT CHECK: The Right-Wing Smear Campaign Against Kevin Jennings
The right wing has a new target: Kevin Jennings, whom President Obama appointed Assistant Deputy Secretary at the Department of Education for the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (OSDFS). Jennings has had a distinguished career as a teacher, author, and founder of Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), an organization that works to make schools safe for all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
It is primarily Jennings’ work with GLSEN that has so outraged the far right. The Family Research Council (FRC) launched the “Stop Kevin Jennings” campaign this week, warning that he is a “radical homosexual activist” who has “worked tirelessly to bring the homosexual agenda into our nation’s classrooms.” “His history demonstrates disregard for our obligations to safeguard the health and well being of the student population,” writes FRC President Tony Perkins.
ThinkProgress investigated FRC’s claims and spoke to people who have worked with Jennings. A look at some of the “facts” about him:
FRC CLAIM: “Jennings’ and GLSEN’s concept of ’safe schools’ means special protections for privileged groups (especially homosexuals), rather than safety for all.”
FACT: As the gay son of a Southern baptist preacher, Jennings had a “childhood of prejudice, taunts, and harassment.” As an education leader, he has used those experiences to promote tolerance and anti-bullying measures in schools nationwide. ThinkProgress spoke with Molly Spearman, executive director of the South Carolina Association of School Administrators. Spearman first heard Jennings speak at the 2007 convention of the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). Spearman said that she was so impressed with Jennings, she decided to invite him to speak at her organization’s October 2007 summit on bullying:
I was a little nervous, being in South Carolina, a very conservative state. But once again, he handled it extremely professionally. He did a magnificent job, and it was a huge success. We had a waiting list of people who wanted to come. … We had several hundred people there. … He was very very well-received — absolutely rave views. And that was in conservative South Carolina. So he handled what could have been a very sensitive topic in a very professional way that was accepted by everyone.
Spearman added that while Jennings did present statistics on the harassment of LGBT students, he more broadly focused on the bullying of all students, pointing out that it was a problem that wasn’t specifically confined to one group.
- – - – -
FRC CLAIM: “Jennings is viciously hostile to religion.”
FACT: As proof of this claim, FRC points to a passage from Jennings’ memoir:
God…had done nothing but cause me pain and anguish through His inaction and malevolence throughout my childhood. … What had he done for me, other than make me feel shame and guilt? Squat. Screw you, buddy — I don’t need you around anymore, I decided.
As the blog Good As You noted, Jennings was relaying “his frustrations as a gay teen, when his inability to ‘overcome’ his gay desires convinced him that he was detached from God.” FRC also doesn’t bother to include what Jennings writes a few sentences later: that he later returned to religion. “Decades passed before I opened a Bible again.” Jennings later went on to serve as an active member on the board of the Union Theological Seminary (UTS) in New York, the nation’s most prestigious Protestant seminary. ThinkProgress spoke with Rev. Serene Jones, President of UTS, who disputed any claims that Jennings was anti-religion:
In my role as the president [of UTS], and as pastor, I have met few people as deeply Christian and as deeply committed to the work of justice in the world than Kevin Jennings. He’s a man of enormous faith, and not just in terms of prayer and church attendance — both of which he does devoutly — but in terms of his care for the poor, the suffering, the children, the vulnerable in our society. [...]
He’s an active member of the board at Union Theological Seminary and Kevin Jennings tithes, not only in terms of his use of money, but his use of his time and his values and I just wonder how many of the people who are attacking him have taken their own faith serious enough to make the kind of financial, moral, vocational commitment that Kevin Jennings has made with his life.
FRC also points to a speech Jennings gave in 2000, where he allegedly said, “We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. … I’m trying not to say, ‘F*ck ‘em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think! Drop dead!” There appears to be no full transcript available of this 2000 speech; it seems to first appear in a 2002 article on the right-wing website Concerned Women for America. The same day that article was published (4/10/02), Jennings told NPR that he had “no recollection of [that] quote whatsoever.”
- – - – -
FRC Claim: Jennings is “unfit for the post to which he’s been assigned.”
FACT: Jennings, in fact, will be the first head of OSDFS in years to have a background as an educator. His predecessor, Deborah Price, received her BS degree in home economics, worked on the National Prayer Breakfast, on the Senate Republican Policy Committee, and then doing student aid in the Department of Education. Her predecessor, Eric Andell, was a judge from Texas and was eventually fired. He “pleaded guilty in federal court to one misdemeanor count of conflict of interest that included using federal money to pay for personal expenses.” Jennings has received many mainstream education awards, including the Distinguished Service Award of NASSP. ThinkProgress spoke to NASSP Executive Director Gerald Tirozzi, who wrote a recommendation letter on Jennings’ behalf. He said that he has “always been impressed with Kevin and his forthrightness. He’s a very courageous young man.” Tirozzi stressed that Jennings’ work on school bullying made him an ideal fit for this particular position.
- – - – -
As Good As You has noted, FRC and other right-wing sites are trying to take other parts of Jennings’ memoir — such as the fact that Jennings admitted to using drugs while in high school and that he wanted to make sure that a high school student had practiced safe sex — as evidence that he doesn’t have the “ethical standards needed for public service.”
So what is FRC’s real problem with Jennings? Tellingly, FRC Vice President for Policy Peter Sprigg — the author of the anti-Jennings talking points — once said, “I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe homosexuality is destructive to society.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
When did hate become a family value for these hyenas?
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:03 amThere is no evidence that anyone can be ‘taught’ to be gay.
There is overwhelming evidence that they can be taught to be a hateful bigot.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:12 amThese cranks really are only appealing to their lunatic base and not winning over any new converts with their current examples of ideology.
Remember that in the same breath as we hear of these people condemning Jennings, they are reminded of Sanford and Ensign.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:17 amCould someone please post a copy of the Gay Agenda? I guess I’ve never seen it, but it sure must be scary!
Tony “Pee Pants” Perkins is one sad closet case.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 am“His history demonstrates disregard for our obligations to safeguard the health and well being of the student population,” writes FRC President Tony Perkins.
Yet in truth, what Jennings does is just the opposite– he works to safeguard all children in schools.
Apparently these hateful right-wingers want children to come to harm. They are the truly dangerous ones. Why do they hate children so much?
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:28 amSo the FRC is in favor of violence and bullying of students? Jennings is advocating programs to protect students. The FRC is claiming “His history demonstrates disregard for our obligations to safeguard the health and well being of the student population.” This makes no sense to me. The logic escapes me.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:30 amGiven the republican’s need to condemn what they are, those who attack this decent man are most likely closeted, self-loathing homosexuals who don’t hate kevin for being gay, rather they hate him for being comfortable with his own skin.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:52 amI wish the Family Research Council would be aware that Mr. Jennings is a family member, including the family of God, which is supposed to include everyone if you really listen to the patriarch of this family.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:53 amFRC CLAIM: “Jennings is viciously hostile to religion.”
What the hell does that even mean? I swear these morons just string words together to scare their sheeple.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 amsafeguard the health and well being of the student population.”
Or protecting the bullies’ right to use other students as a stomping ground so he grows up to be a full-fledged sociopath.
Bloated statements of “concern” like these are dangerous to the safety of students, gay or perceived, in their quest of a public education, and to the GLBT community everywhere.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 amspencers mom Says:
Could someone please post a copy of the Gay Agenda? I guess I’ve never seen it, but it sure must be scary!
Well mom, basically it’s psychological. Imagine all of your worst fears, then bundle them up into one ball. The Gay Agenda is a method by which the ball is held together. For those people whose fear is an integral part of their religion, the bundled up ball of fear is just what they need to continue in their delusion. Without the Gay Agenda, these people fear (ah that word again) that their religion would be exposed for the fraud that it is.
Or to put it another way, the political leaders that rely on keeping religious fear in the forefront of political discussion need something, anything to appear closer to some imaginary god so they can continue succeeding in making more money than they deserve.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 amIf children aren’t taught to hate how will the Republican party get any new voters?
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:58 amIt frightens me that in the minds of countless right-wingers, a gay appointee is considered a threat to children by default, regardless of how much they research his background. It’s telling that the man who authored the anti-Jennings report once expressed his desire to see homosexuals “exported” from America. These lunatic theocrats wouldn’t even care if Jennings had a stellar, honest background in the education department (which he does). Having a different orientation is enough to make them want to furiously distort his honorable public record.
Shameful.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:58 amWho writes the Privacy Center’s dumbass trite comments?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:02 amFurthermore, to answer the question of the rabid, distorting right-wingers: I would love to have Kevin Jennings teach my children. If they have to invent quotes and take him out of context, then he must be an honorable man. Anyone who infuriates the ordinarily irrational Religious Right so such an extent is fine with me. His background in education, commitment to ending bullying, and stellar department background all convince me that they’re only attacking him because he’s gay.
Shocker.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 amFRC CLAIM: “Jennings’ and GLSEN’s concept of ’safe schools’ means special protections for privileged groups (especially homosexuals), rather than safety for all.”
OMG I cannot fathom why such vile bowel-like filth is considered “christian”.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:06 amMy oldest child and only son is gay. He is now 22 years old.
About 7 years ago, when he was around 15 we moved outside of the city so he could go to a better, more funded school. What a mistake that turned out to be. In short order my son started to recieve the most vilest of notes, IM messages, etc.
One in particular I will never forget. He recieved this on his IM and he saved the text. In short it was very long death threat. Among other things it stated “I want to kill your faggot body and then cut it’s head off pizz down it’s neck then burn it in effigy in front of the school to make an example out of your faggotty azz”
Well, of course, I went apesh*t. I called the school, where I was told that it did not happen on school property so they were obligated to do…NOTHING and suggested if I was so upset over this (like I shouldn’t be?) then I should call the local police. Which I did then call the police. They said they would send someone over to the house to take statements and to see the IM messages, etc. Well that was 7 years ago and we are STILL waiting for the police to show up!!
I told my husband that if ANYTHING at all happened to my son, I was going to sue the school district, the police and the city. Unfortunately I think that that is the only way that the schools, etc will take this seriously. You gotta hit them in the pocketbook.
So FRC where was the protection for my son? I have never heard of homosexual students targeting and bullying straight kids,
As a mother I cannot understand how people can make these statements if they are parents. With all the hate and hate crimes spreading across this country right now, I live in fear for my son’s life. A few weeks ago he went to Pittsburgh for pride in the streets festival. The entire weekend he was gone I worried constantly, that some nut job was going to open fire in the crowds. Normally I am not a person that panics or over worries about things, but with the climate around here lately has me having nitemares and these people aren’t making it any better. They are, more or less, putting price tags on homosexuals heads, as far as I am concerned. We need to STOP THIS HATE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Darr, I must extend all of my respect to you. I could not possibly imagine a mother having to deal with seeing anti-gay bullying first-hand, as words like “fag” and “dyke” have become common insults for teens. Seeing an inactive school board must be even worse. I wholeheartedly agree: right-wingers and anti-gay activists rarely see that words have consequences – and their rhetoric fuels violence that is specifically carried out due an irrational hatred of someone’s orientation.
We repeatedly express pride over America’s spirit of freedom and tolerance. Hell, right-wingers build their platform on a free America and limited government. However, some of the most potent right-wing activists are making anti-gay statements about exportation and essentially turning us into Christian slaves. What does that tell you about their warped perceptions on freedom and individual liberty?
We need more Goldwater Republicans.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:10 amThe underlying tone that is being used here is the convenient confusion of pedophelia with homosexuality by some very disturbed right wingers.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:11 amPlacing a gay male in a position of leadership amongst children is same thing as letting the weasel into the henhouse in the republican mind.
“FRC CLAIM: “Jennings is viciously hostile to religion.”
What the rest of rational Americans get from this…So tired of vicious religionists. Could you just shut up and let the adults have a shot at fixing things?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:11 amRighties in their ignorance equate sexual predators with homosexuality.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:14 amThey should look into their own ranks for the far more frequent heterosexual predators.
Hate, intolerance, prejudice, bigotry — these are the family values of the right — they are carefully taught.
Once again, we see the onerous hegemony of evangelicalism into the public sphere. That cult has no business inflicting its nonsense on our society. That cult is as dangerous a threat to our liberty as is Scientology or any other totalitarian
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:16 ammovement.
Marie, I wholeheartedly agree. Righties cannot even remain consistent with their bogus “moral” platform. They have been hijacked by the agenda of the Religious Right, which is far more frightening than a neighbor who — there’s a shocker here — pays his taxes and has a differing orientation than I do. Since when did an irrational rejection of reality and tolerance for all consenting, law-abiding citizens become a “family value” for the Religious Right?
They act like a family can only have ONE set of values, and it MUST be the values that they embrace as Christians. Nonsense.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:17 amWhat has Jennings supposed to have demonstrated that he is viciously hostile to religion?
Bearing false witness (8th or 9th commandment according to which religion)– slander, gossip, lies, the convenient christians of the right use selective process in determining which sins they condemn.
The Lord specifically regards “six things the Lord hateth, and the seventh His soul detesteth.” namely[2]:
Haughty eyes
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:21 amA lying tongue
Hands that shed innocent blood
A heart that devises wicked plots
Feet that are swift to run into mischief
A deceitful witness that uttereth lies
Him that soweth discord among brethren
who has “worked tirelessly to bring the homosexual agenda into our nation’s classrooms.”
Classy!
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 amFRC and other right-wing sites are trying to take other parts of Jennings’ memoir as evidence that he doesn’t have the “ethical standards needed for public service.”
As oppossed to:
Sen. Ensign
Gov. Sanford
Sen Vitter
Sen. Craig
all of whom were involved in extra marital affairs, all of whom ran on a “family and chrisitan values” platform, and none of whom resigned when they were caught.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 amhey stupid@25,
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:25 amcan you tell me where, as a gay educator, I can get a copy of “the homosexual agenda”? I would love to employ it in my classroom but can’t seem to find a copy anywhere.
Hi Rebublicans Love Facts:
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:25 amCould you please provide an outline of the “homosexual agenda”?
Thanks…
Bozo The clown Says
Do you always tell such lies?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:26 amSorry Bozo The NeoClown
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:26 amdidn’t mean to step upon your big clown shoes…
And let it be known that I have no disagreement with the practice of religion in a free society. However, the fact that right-wing activists representing the Religious Right want to smear a qualified man’s background simply because he’s gay infuriates me to no end. They don’t care how much he’s advocated for tolerance, quality in schools, etc. They don’t care if he was applauded in conservative states for his flawless ability to build bridges between groups that are ordinarily hostile. They don’t care if he would be one of the first nominees to actually have an extensive background in the department.
They had no issues when heterosexual, Christian nominees were selected, regardless of their religious advocacy. They only want Jennings out because of their disgust with homosexuals, not because they have any factual issues with his background. They take old quotes out of context, demonize him, and then repeatedly slam his orientation. Shame on these tiresome right-wing activists. They don’t care about flooding public schools with religious items via legislation, but they object to a nominee’s private life because it conflicts with their platform?
Idiocy. Complete and utter idiocy. I shudder at the fact that they think intolerance and distortion are family values. Everything negative seems to be a family value that these narrow-minded fools readily embrace. As ThinkProgress wisely noted, the author of this report once expressed his desire to see an “end” to homosexuality. He has a platform, and research comes second.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:27 amI think the GOP has taken a flawed track for 8 years with education, and it is very apparent with the opposition with Mr. Jenning’s appointment. They are appealing to their core base, which appears to be clueless, godless and so closed minded they could not see a good candidate even if it was Jesus Christ himself. This is the main reason I am willing to give Mr. Jennings the benefit of the doubt.
If they don’t like him (Republicans) he has to be good.
A successful education is fundamental to a successful democracy. The Republicans appear to fear a well educated populace. I wonder why?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:27 amRepublicans Love Facts Says:
“Bozo The clown Says
Do you always tell such lies?”
snitty little gutter snipe when your strawman gets blown down, ain’tcha?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:28 amYou do have the facts regarding that “homosexual agenda”, right, RLF?
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:29 amwhy would the whackjobs in the religious wrong even care? this appointment won’t effect them since they “home skool” their little spermlings
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:30 amPeople assume that because these hate groups have ties to radical right religious groups, these matter are based in religion. They are not. These people are using religion as a vehicle for hate. They need an enemy. But this is all about power and money. They are no different than Bin Laden who uses religion to further his political views. In reality, religion has little to do with the true motives.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:31 amHomosexuality is not a learned behavior.
Evangelicalism is a learned behavior.
Evangelicalists need reparative therapy, to help them overcome their insidious addiction to imperiousness and moraliziing hauteur.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:32 amjimmicdosh:-FLAGGED! for ad-spamming
Take your God damned privacy center, light it on fire, and stick it up your ass.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:33 amPags, it is clear that these individuals are devout, as you could certainly see from looking at their background on Biblical matters, education, etc. They genuinely believe that anything anti-religious constitutes a threat to society. Therefore, I must associate them with the Religious Right, which is just as valid as an interpretation as Christian liberalism. Many of them completely believe that homosexuals should be terminated in order to “save” society, but these nuts cannot view their own foolishness.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:35 amRepublican loves facts is obviously a closeted homosexual who is too scared to accept himself as he is and hates openly gay people for their courage and happiness.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:37 amRLF, since you are having trouble finding that “homosexual agenda”, perhaps I can be of assistance:
Take a Larry Craig wide-stance. Touch your toes. Put your chin on your chest. There! See that hole? That’s where the “homosexual agenda” is.
You’re welcome.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 amBozo, you forgot newtie, Jim Burton,Bob Allen, Ted Haggert Glenn Murphy, Jimmy Swaggart, Susan Smith’s step-father http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/28/us/defending-smith-stepfather-says-he-also-bears-blame.html)
To name a few.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:43 amPLC, you always find the right way of dealing with these nutcases!
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:44 amCanny55 Says:
Pags, it is clear that these individuals are devout, as you could certainly see from looking at their background on Biblical matters, education, etc. They genuinely believe that anything anti-religious constitutes a threat to society.
The members of the group may be devoutly religious just like the suicide bombers. But the people who establish and run the group are in it for power and money. These hate groups are fundraisers for those who seek political power or money for themselves. If you look at Falwell’s and Robertson’s groups and follow the money you will find it is not being used for religious purposes.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:44 amThank you, spensers mom. And please note that I find your posts and those of other regular TPers to be an inspiration. Our combined efforts are better than any single one.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:49 amPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
Thanks for that massive dose of progressive hypocrisy!
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 amIf anyone knows hypocrisy, it’s someone who would choose the moniker “republicans love fact”!
Thanks for a good laugh! Feel free to go share your wit at another site.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:57 amWow. Wow.
The LGBT folks are angry with Obama because he hasn’t rescinded DADT yet. So am I. And yet…look what he’s done. This appointment is a slap in the face to everyone on the Religious Right, and anyone who ever suggested that Obama’s Christianity prevented him from helping the LGBT folks, from keeping his campaign promises.
Myself included. I criticized Obama for that very reason. Looks like that 11-dimensional chess game is still going on…
I also liked what Obama (or Gibbs? read it on a blog somewhere) said, and I paraphrase: “I think when the Obama term is over, you (LGBT folks) will be glad I was President.”
Amen. Despite the slow-as-mud progress, I simply can’t argue that statement. Not today, not right now.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:58 amRLF, I would like to be able to ask where the facts about the alleged “massive dose of progressive hypocrisy” might be. But since you never did provide facts about the supposed “homosexual agenda” that you really don’t have any means of supporting your verbal diarrhea.
BTW, for any medical researchers present, might I suggest a study to determine if there is a link between verbal diarrhea and having your head up your a**? I am sure that there is a causative relationship.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 amRepublicans Love Facts:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:03 amCan I assume you will not be posting the “Agenda”? If you don’t know what it is how can you be sure there is one?
Bobwurst Says:
Given the republican’s need to condemn what they are, those who attack this decent man are most likely closeted, self-loathing homosexuals who don’t hate kevin for being gay, rather they hate him for being comfortable with his own skin.
You have no idea how close to the truth you really are. 1) Human beings are most disturbed by what they regard as their own failings–when they see them in OTHER people. 2) Consult any reliable sociology/psychology textbook on the subject, and what you’ll find is this: The consensus in the science concludes that all human beings–Republican AND Progressives–are bisexual, albeit at different places on the spectrum of sexuality. Gays have straight tendencies; ’straight’ folks, too. Republicans who subconsciously hate themselves for their ‘gay’ tendencies naturally turn to strike out against folks they perceive as having those same tendencies out in the open.
Makes PERFECT sense to me, and it’s true, too.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:04 ampags2 Says:
People assume that because these hate groups have ties to radical right religious groups, these matter are based in religion. They are not. These people are using religion as a vehicle for hate. They need an enemy. But this is all about power and money. They are no different than Bin Laden who uses religion to further his political views. In reality, religion has little to do with the true motives.
a strong case could be mad for religion itself being about little more than power and money
at least western religions where the church has become immensely powerful and wealthy all the while advocating that its followers continue to give what they can to the church.
i think these people truly are religious
i think these people truly believe
i think thats why they hate…
its because they honestly think “if my kids think like this they’ll go to hell” so they do everything possible to keep people with certain beliefs out of important positions.
if you don’t believe it seems bat-shit crazy, because it is, but if you do believe it makes total sense.
certainly not everyone practices their religion as such, but there are plenty who do… their bigotry comes from their belief, they aren’t using religion as a tool.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:06 amHere’s what we need to remember about these so called christians:
“Susan Smith’s stepfather, [Beverly Russell]… admitted that he had molested her when she was a teen-ager and had consensual sex with her as an adult….Mr. Russell, a former member of the executive committee of the South Carolina Republican Party and a member of the Christian Coalition”
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/28/us/defending-smith-stepfather-says-he-also-bears-blame.html
But it’s the gays who we need to watch…right…
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:08 ami think these people truly are religious
i think these people truly believe
i think thats why they hate…
And a case could be made that they believe they practice the Christian religion. They are a rabid, vocal minority as opposed to the majority of people who hold the Christian faith.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:12 amBobwurst, none of that would have happened if Mr. Russell’s parents hadn’t named their son Beverly! That probably gave him homosexual thoughts which he had to fend off with overcompensatory heterosexual activity.
/snark off
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:13 amPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
Bobwurst, none of that would have happened if Mr. Russell’s parents hadn’t named their son Beverly! That probably gave him homosexual thoughts which he had to fend off with overcompensatory heterosexual activity.
Interesting theory, what does that say about Lindsey Graham?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 amWhile there are a few passages in the Bible that Condemn homosexuality…
There is a Whole COMMANDMENT that forbids Adultery.
I believe the prescribed Remedy is Stoning.
But later on, the Bible Says that- those who are without Sin can cast the first Stone. Which should make the world safe for Several prominent Christian Republicans.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 amHoodathunktick Says:
i think these people truly are religious
i think these people truly believe
i think thats why they hate…
And a case could be made that they believe they practice the Christian religion. They are a rabid, vocal minority as opposed to the majority of people who hold the Christian faith.
hey man, you gotta own your crazies….
i don’t think christian animosity towards homosexuals is entirely a fringe movement, and i think to characterize it as such is disingenuous
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 amWhich should make the world safe for Several prominent Christian Republicans.
Is there one that would make us safe from them?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:18 amIt doesn’t appear that Republicans Love Goats has anything constructive to contribute to the discussion today. Nothing but Troll Central-approved buzzwords that he’s unwilling to defend.
So why should today be any different?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:19 amcalavzma, Faith is a double-edged sword. To hve religious faith you need to believe without proof, if there was proof that god exists there wouldn’t be a need for churches and religion. The Miracle of Jesus walking on water isn’t whether he did it or not, the miracle is that people accept it without question. This can be a good thing, and it can be a bad thing, When you don’t need facts to believe that someone or some group is evil, then you will be unconvinceable with fact and reason. When you have faith that someone or some group is counter to god, you can justify all sorts of heinous acts as being the will of god.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 amHoodathunktick Says:
That’s what I was wondering, exactly!
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 amIs there one that would make us safe from them?
Judge not…lest ye be judged ??!?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:21 ami don’t think christian animosity towards homosexuals is entirely a fringe movement, and i think to characterize it as such is disingenuous
Then you should do some more checking.
And while I have studied Christianity, I have also studied many other religions and philosophies. I hold none as the ultimate answer.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:22 amWell, I can’t seem to find a Homosexual Agenda anywhere either, but maybe if we looked at the Anti-Homosexual Agenda and turned it around, we could come up with one.
The Anti-Homosexual Agenda:
1. Only one man and one woman are allowed to be married or even be in a relationship and their activities in the bedroom must be limited to missionary style sexual congress. (If any other form of sexual pleasure were allowed, then same sex couples could do it too!)
2. Every married couple is required to have at least one child through their own means of biological conception. Everyone knows that the purpose of marriage is to procreate and couples that cannot do so should not be allowed to marry or even be in a long-term relationship.
3. Any male child deemed too effeminate or female child deemed to masculine by their peer group should be endlessly tormented and have their formative years made miserable by those different from them. This will also include anyone who lacks athleticism, dresses differently, is too smart, wears glasses or has empathy for other children.
So based on that, I would say the Homosexual Agenda must be something like this:
1. Two consenting adults should be free to do whatever they like in the confines of their own bedroom.
2. Two consenting adults should be free to get married/not get married, have kids/not have kids, and live happily ever after (or squabble into old age) regardless if they are a same sex couple or are heterosexual.
3. Children have a right to be free from harrassment and bullying regardless of their sexual orientation, skin color, fashion choices, intellectual capacity, or however dweeby they are.
Hmm …. given a choice between the two, I vote for the Homosexual Agenda.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 ambobwurst
that’s kind of my point about religious belief
i’m not a believer
and i would say that accepting something as fact without any sort of proof is never a good thing.
and believing in something so passionately that your views could never be changed by evidence that your beliefs are wrong is also a bad thing.
both of these traits are common among people of strong faith, in fact, they are practically pre-requisites to faith
these people believe they should fear homosexual influence on their children because its what they are taught to believe, they do not question it, and telling them otherwise is highly unlikely to change their minds.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:25 am#
#
Hoodathunktick Says:
i don’t think christian animosity towards homosexuals is entirely a fringe movement, and i think to characterize it as such is disingenuous
Then you should do some more checking.
And while I have studied Christianity, I have also studied many other religions and philosophies. I hold none as the ultimate answer.
what about the prop. 8 debacle suggests fringe movement?
what about these views being popularized and supported on national news (mainly fox but still)
i’m not maintaining that the majority of christians think this way about homosexuals
but i think there are enough to make it clear that its not a “fringe” movement
perhaps what you and i would define as fringe is different
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:29 amI am not disputing that the followers are devout. They truly believe in the righteousness of their cause. But every cause is an excuse for the leaders to do more fundraising. Jim Baker got caught for financial hanky-panky. Falwell was exposed by either Playboy or Hustle for one of his fundraising causes. You can find a lot of examples of this kind of shenanigans. For those who don’t know about Falwell I will give you a summary. In the 1970’s, Falwell’s church’s radio antenna was damaged during a thunderstorm. Falwell solicited his followers for money to repair the antenna. The magazine did an expose showing that the antenna was insured and paid for by the insurance company. After that article, Falwell started a pornography campaign.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:29 amSen. Ensign
Gov. Sanford
Sen Vitter
Sen. Craig
all of whom ran on a “family and chrisitan values” platform
by socky
Can you post a citation?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 amHi Republicans Love Facts:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:33 amFor real about that agenda thing. Do you have anything on that or not. Are you just playing?
With Mr. Jennings at the helm, the table is set, mom and dad, for your children to be indoctrinated into a Progressive agenda of homosexual civil rights. If you are not on your guard, everything that you have poured into your children will be watered down and potentially eliminated if the Jennings’ GLSEN agenda permeates the classroom. If the past forty-five years of negatively influencing two generations of young minds is any indication of what federal schooling can accomplish, your children and our society will continue to spiral into moral depravity. What was once considered as an adult sexual deviance just a generation or so ago will soon be an acceptable form of sexual expression to your seventh and eighth grader if the education establishment has their way!
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:34 amcalavzma, I would agree on our difference in the fringe definition but your examples (with the exception of Prop 8) show it is the well funded side that has the public voice, the whackadoos. There is quite a bit of grass roots activity that is carefully kept from the media eye.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:36 amCan you post a citation?
I think the person is busy looking for that “homosexual agenda” you can’t find. Perhaps you could get an answer to your question faster if you answer the one posed to you.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:37 amI see Republicans Love Goats is so bankrupt of any kind of defense that he’s now resorted to challenging folks for a “citation” on obvious statements.
When a troll gets that desperate, you know he’s running on nothing but fumes from the Cheeto bag.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:37 amCan you post a citation supporting that drivel?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:37 am1) Jennings’ and GLSEN’s concept of “safe schools” means special protections for privileged groups (especially homosexuals), rather than safety for all.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 amOh goody! How could my morning be complete without a heapin’ helpin’ of UGLYSTOOPID from the wingnuts along with my coffee…??
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 amIf the past forty-five years of negatively influencing two generations of young minds is any indication of what federal schooling can accomplish, your children and our society will continue to spiral into moral depravity.
—
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 amWanna talk about this part, Republicans Love Facts?
Calavzma, I’m with you, for the most part, but we accept all sorts of “facts” without proof. We take other people’s word on most scientific facts if you think about it. I don’t have any proof for instance that man walked on the moon. I’m a Unitarian (yeah, given some of the things I say to trolls here that may be hard to believe, but you’ll have to accept it as a matter of faith) and I believe that all religions are fragments of the inexpressible. Religion is socially constructed and local. The mystery of life will never be understood. Let christains, and muslims, and wiccans
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 amet al have their faith as long as they practice it in peace and leave everyone else alone. When they start forcing their will on others however…
Here’s what I think the Gay Agenda is:
To not Be Discriminated Against, and to enjoy All the Protections , Privileges, and Responsibilities that all other American Citizens enjoy.
The Religious Right tries to claim that Gay’s want specialized treatment. Bullsh*t.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:39 amWith Mr. Jennings at the helm, the table is set, mom and dad, for your children to be indoctrinated into a Progressive agenda of homosexual civil rights.
only a republican would not bat at an eye at opposing the civil rights of another.
why would having your children “indoctrinated” to support civil rights be a bad thing?
don’t you realize you take your children to church to have them indoctrinated to think that homosexuality is immoral?
if you were not religious you would not think this way.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:39 amIf the past forty-five years of negatively influencing two generations of young minds is any indication of what federal schooling can accomplish, your children and our society will continue to spiral into moral depravity.
You mean someone is going to start teaching kids not to hate others for being different? That they will finally get an education that includes things like war is bad, greed is self destructive? That the US really is part of the global community and should hold itself accountable to standards of civilized society?
Yeah!
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 amOne might be tempted to challenge Republicans Love Goats for a “citation” but it would not be forthcoming; if the troll cited his source, it would reveal yet another instance of blatant plagiarism.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 amI see dbadass/ralph is so bankrupt of any kind of defense that he’s now resorted to challenging folks for a “citation” on obvious statements.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 amShorter Republicans Love Facts at 71:
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! The GAYS are coming!! Hide your children! Hide your menfolk!
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 amI see dbadass/ralph is so bankrupt of any kind of defense that he’s now resorted to challenging folks for a “citation” on obvious statements.
—
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amHow quaintly silly. Republican Love Facts is indeed playing. Funny thing is their tired attempts at being a pot stirrer just fall so flat and leave just a lumpy mixture
Republicans Love Facts Says:
If the past forty-five years of negatively influencing two generations of young minds is any indication of what federal schooling can accomplish, your children and our society will continue to spiral into moral depravity. What was once considered as an adult sexual deviance just a generation or so ago will soon be an acceptable form of sexual expression to your seventh and eighth grader if the education establishment has their way!
Right. In the 1950’s the fundamentalists argued that comic books, blue jeans and rock and roll were sinful and should be banned. Then the Beatles came along with the sexual revolution and that was sinful. The list goes on and on.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amHomosexual Activist/ Anti-Christian Bigot Appointed
WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews.com) – Although President Barack Obama has advocated speaking “fair minded words” in debating differences on major ethical issues, his recent nominee to the Department of Education’s Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools is a homosexual activist with a history of using foul and abusive language against those who have opposed his homosexualist agenda.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amCalavzma, I’m with you, for the most part, but we accept all sorts of “facts” without proof.
this is true, but not of everyone
see physicists and people much smarter than you or i don’t accept anything without a mathematical proof to support it.
i’m not that mathematically advanced, but i do only trust people who can cite sources and evidence to support their claim and if i was to have a religion i’d point to physicists and their understanding of the universe for my “religion”
beyond that i’m a secular humanist
certainly everyone exercises some form of “faith” in information… but there is nothing i accept as fact that i would not readily abandon with strong enough evidence to the contrary.
i am an atheist. but if god came from the heavens and said, “hey man i’m here, and here’s a book that says what i think about basically everything” i would no longer be an atheist.
until that happens, i’ll stick to asking more questions than believing answers written in a book 2000 years ago by people who were trying to explain a world they did not understand.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:45 amRepublicans Hate Facts:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:45 amCan we start simple? What exactly is your beef with homosexuality? Please try and use your own words. Thanks…
Our little troll friend has unwittingly walked into a trap; by accepting the principle that was put forth and seeking to apply it to others, he has admitted that he has no way to defend his previous statements.
Meanwhile, I never challenged the troll to provide a citation, and dbadass was clearly mocking the silly little troll and its desperation.
I’m afraid it’s a TOTAL FAIL for Republicans Love Goats.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 amIs “homosexualist” a word?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 amAround the same time, Jennings was quoted in Marble Collegiate Church as saying members of the “religious right” were “hard core bigots” who comprised about 20 percent of the electorate.
“We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit – I’m trying to find a way to say this. I’m trying not to say, ‘F**k ‘em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think!” Jennings told his audience, which pealed with laughter. “Drop dead!”
According to Americans for Truth, Jennings and GLSEN never repudiated the actions of homosexual activists at the “Teach Out” conference, but instead attacked Scott Whiteman, the Massachusetts parent who video-recorded the proceedings, for violating students’ privacy.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 amaren’t quotes supposed to be cited and indicated by these ” little thingies?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:50 amShall we resolve to simply ignore any comment made by Republicans Blow Goats that is nothing more than a copy-and-paste from another source, without attribution or link?
It’s easy to tell when it does this; the comments are more than one sentence and are usually composed with a reasonable understanding of English composition.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:50 amThe “fact-lovin’ repiggie” has given us an anti-abortion site as a credible source for this story – LIFESITENEWS.
It is plastered with anti-abortion ads. It is not a credible source, fact-lover.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:51 amBobwurst Says:
Calavzma, I’m with you, for the most part, but we accept all sorts of “facts” without proof. We take other people’s word on most scientific facts if you think about it. I don’t have any proof for instance that man walked on the moon.
Well, some facts are easier to prove than others. You could, if you had the proper equipment, shine a laser to a certain spot on the moon and have it reflected back from a mirror they placed there during the Apollo missions.
Let christains, and muslims, and wiccans
et al have their faith as long as they practice it in peace and leave everyone else alone. When they start forcing their will on others however…
Ramen to that!
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:52 amKevin Jennings wrote the foreword for a book titled Queering Elementary Education: Advancing the Dialogue About Sexualities and Schooling.10 Among its essays is one by a lesbian mother who boasts of teaching her seven-year-old daughter to masturbate and declares that “‘queerly raised’ children are agents” using “strategies of adaptation, negotiation, resistance and subversion.”11
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:52 am6) By his own account, Jennings failed to protect the “safety” of a homosexual student he once counseled when working as a teacher.
Jennings has told several conflicting versions of a story about a boy who approached him for counsel when Jennings was a teacher at Concord Academy in Massachusetts in the late 1980’s. Drawing facts from one or more of three separate accounts of the story, it appears that the boy may have been as young as 15, a sophomore, a substance abuser, very troubled,
3
and finding adult male sexual partners in the bus station restroom in Boston. Yet Jennings apparently never reported these facts to the authorities, the school administration, or the boy’s parents. The only step he took to protect the “safety” of this vulnerable teen was to say, “You know, I hope you knew to use a condom.”
Well that is a fine idea ralph but don’t be suprising when our little nonthinker claims it as evidence of some imaginary victory…
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:53 amAround the same time, Jennings was quoted in Marble Collegiate Church as saying members of the “religious right” were “hard core bigots” who comprised about 20 percent of the electorate.
“We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit – I’m trying to find a way to say this. I’m trying not to say, ‘F**k ‘em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think!” Jennings told his audience, which pealed with laughter. “Drop dead!”
That’s it? That is what these freaks are ranting about?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:53 amOh, I’m expecting that, dbadass. I’ve come to where I enjoy the spectacle of such outlandish public delusion, predictable though it is.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 amKeep in mind that over one hundred years ago, these same “religious” scoundrels were condemning women’s suffrage.
Keep in mind that it took the Southern Baptist Convention over 140 years after the conclusion of the Civil War to finally acknowledge their role in the preservation of slavery in this nation.
Keep in mind that in the Confederate South, where Evangelicalism is the strongest, the resistance to racial integration was deep and murderous. It is still a major problem for the Old South.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 amBut Hooda, it’s so…. disrespectful!
Why, Jennings said things about teh religious right that are positively unflattering!
We can’t have a public official willing to say unflattering things about the opposition, now, can we?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:57 am“I got stoned more often and went out to the beach at Bellows, overlooking Honolulu Harbor and the lights of the city, to drink with my buddies on Friday and Saturday nights, spending hours watching the planes take off and land at the airport, which is actually quite fascinating when you are drunk and stoned.”
kevin jennings
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:57 amKevin Jennings wrote the foreword for a book titled Queering Elementary Education: Advancing the Dialogue About Sexualities and Schooling.10 Among its essays is one by a lesbian mother who boasts of teaching her seven-year-old daughter to masturbate and declares that “‘queerly raised’ children are agents” using “strategies of adaptation, negotiation, resistance and subversion.”11
6) By his own account, Jennings failed to protect the “safety” of a homosexual student he once counseled when working as a teacher.
Jennings has told several conflicting versions of a story about a boy who approached him for counsel when Jennings was a teacher at Concord Academy in Massachusetts in the late 1980’s. Drawing facts from one or more of three separate accounts of the story, it appears that the boy may have been as young as 15, a sophomore, a substance abuser, very troubled,
3
and finding adult male sexual partners in the bus station restroom in Boston. Yet Jennings apparently never reported these facts to the authorities, the school administration, or the boy’s parents. The only step he took to protect the “safety” of this vulnerable teen was to say, “You know, I hope you knew to use a condom.”
are we to assume that you are that teen?
are you upset because you didn’t know how to use a condom and as a result caught something in one of those bathrooms?
if you aren’t the teen from the story then how could you maintain to know what the man said.
are there any republicans who don’t solicit sex in public bathrooms? hahaha
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 amRepublicans Hact Facts:
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 amFor rel my friend can you tell me in your own words what your problem with homosexuality is? Yes or No?
So?
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:59 amAs opposed to the real men that drove around drinking cheap ass beer in their rusted out muscle cars listening to def lepard…
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:00 pmThe repiggie ranks are chock full of alcoholics, adulterers, closet-cases and criminals. Where is the “fact-lovin’ repiggie” in these cases?
Absolutely silent…
That’s some party you’ve got there, moron.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:01 pmShorter Trolls Love Pie:
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:01 pmI am so deep in the closet I found my Christmas presents.
“I got stoned more often and went out to the beach at Bellows, overlooking Honolulu Harbor and the lights of the city, to drink with my buddies on Friday and Saturday nights, spending hours watching the planes take off and land at the airport, which is actually quite fascinating when you are drunk and stoned.”
kevin jennings
you realize george w. bush had a coke habit, right?
he was also an alcoholic
not just on friday and saturday nights as jenning describes in his statement
hahahaha
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:02 pmAlso, oh my God, you cited Amurkans for Troof with a straight face. You’re either a genius or adorably stupid.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:03 pmTo be a repiggie these days, you have to be a lunatic, a moron, a crook or a sadist – with any combination thereof.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:03 pmAs a evangelical Christian I have to say that the FRC does not respresent me or many that I know. However I amc compelled to acknowledge that until we take back our faith and stop letting these people use us to raise money we deserve to be painted with the same brush they are painted with. This is a wake up call to the Evangelical community to get back to its first love….spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ….a Gospel that declares that God is Love!
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 pmBobwurst and Calavzma, I have been following and enjoying your intercourse (ooh, did I say a bad word?). I respectfully would like to add my two cents.
I disagree with the tendency to make faith and science/objective reality at odds. As a psychologist, I often tell my clients that I run my life on two principles. First, I believe what is true. However, we don’t always know what is true. Therefore, the second principle is to believe what is helpful, to myself and to others. I apply these principles to my religious faith. I do not intellectually know if there is a God or if Jesus is God in man’s form. But, I find it personally comforting and inspiring to believe that there is a God who created the incredible world and science that I objectively experience. I also find the teachings attributed to Jesus as a marvelous philosophy on which to live your life, one that is counter to the human tendency toward hate, conflict, insult, and other forms of harm. Whenever I find that there is a discrepancy between objective reality and faith, I always choose the objective reality.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 pmThe religious reich: Taking hate to heaven.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:15 pmThe repiggies had no problem putting an alcoholic recreational coke user in the presidency.
Why all the “moral” outrage all of a sudden?
This whole campaign against Jennings was hatched in some holy roller power warren. That power-mad cult is a major threat to our personal liberty.
The holy rollers want an Iranian type of theocracy. They are hyper-violent and power-mad. They have already shown that they will murder people who don’t accept their dogma.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:15 pmJennings was quoted in Marble Collegiate Church as saying members of the “religious right” were “hard core bigots” who comprised about 20 percent of the electorate.
“We have to quit being afraid of the religious right.
Put it on a billboard he will become a national hero.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:15 pmVery well stated, PLC. High 5.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:17 pmplc,
I do not intellectually know if there is a God or if Jesus is God in man’s form. But, I find it personally comforting and inspiring to believe that there is a God who created the incredible world and science that I objectively experience. I also find the teachings attributed to Jesus as a marvelous philosophy on which to live your life, one that is counter to the human tendency toward hate, conflict, insult, and other forms of harm. Whenever I find that there is a discrepancy between objective reality and faith, I always choose the objective reality
i wish there were more people of faith who could so eloquently define where their faith lies. I have no problem with someone choosing to follow a given religion because they find comfort with it. and in terms of morality, i encourage people to read the bible, koran, teachings of buddhist philosophers, daoists, etc and take the good, leave the bad.
certainly religion has much to offer the world in terms of the philosophies that are put forward via religions from all over, my only fear is when people start blindly attributing dogma as fact… we’ve come a long way in 2000 years and have since disproved the dogma.
i don’t have a problem with religion- per se… i just have a problem with dogma
and just a question from curiosity
plc, do you ever find other christians tell you that you are not a true christian because of your “failure” to accept the dogma as absolute truth?
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:18 pmI heard he had a black child, too.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:19 pmIt’s amazing to me that they can’t look at Iran and see why most people don’t want that here. (They have eyes but cannot see.) All the time and money they spend on their religious reich agenda and hate campaigns could be better spent on helping people.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 pmI believe our Republican friends are in need of some serious physiological help.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:24 pmLet’s see, we have homophobia, racism, paranoia, habitual lying (going beyond average politics) and sociopathic behavior (Iraq war, condoning antisocial behavior, ect).
The scary thing is this is from the top down.
calavzma Says: plc, do you ever find other christians tell you that you are not a true christian because of your “failure” to accept the dogma as absolute truth?
In my church, I have been known as the token liberal and have found most (not all) of the congregants tolerant of me at least publically and to my face. I have swayed some to a more open view, particularly of homosexuality.
Most of my expressions of my religious attitudes occur right here on TP becaue I have given myself the mission of countering the narrow-minded hurtful use of religion as a weapon I see here. Daryll and bitblt, two of our own right-wing religious fanatics as well as some other drive-by trolls have indeed frequently posted that I was not a “true” Christian. My response is that it is not their call to make, but God’s.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:27 pmFrom Jimmy Carter:
Fundamentalists have become increasingly influential in both religion and government, and have managed to change the nuances and subtleties of historic debate into black-and-white rigidities and the personal derogation of those who dare to disagree.
I define fundamentalism as a group of invariably male leaders who consider themselves superior to other believers. The fundamentalists believe they have a special relationship with God. Therefore their beliefs are inherently correct, being those of God, and anyone who disagrees with them are first of all wrong, and second inferior, and in extreme cases even subhuman. Also, fundamentalists don’t relish any challenge to their positions … It makes a great exhibition of rigidity and superiority and exclusion.
There is an element of fundamentalism involved, which involves the belief on the part of a human being that his own concept of God is the proper one. And since he the proper concept of God, he particularly blessed and singled out for special consideration above and beyond those who disagree with him.
Secondly, anyone who does disagree with him, since he harnessed to God in a unique way, then, by definition, must be wrong. And the second step is if you are in disagreement with his concept of the way to worship, even among the Christian community, is that you are inferior to him. And then the ultimate progression of that is that you’re not only different and wrong and inferior but in some ways you are subhuman. So there’s a loss of concern even for the death of those who disagree. And this takes fundamentalism to the extreme. This is an element of the fundamentalist cause in this country. If you are a wealthy white man, then you are naturally inclined to think that the poor are inferior and don’t deserve your first consideration. If you are a wealthy white man, then you also take on the proposition that women are inherently inferior. This builds up a sense of prejudice and alienation that permeates the Christian right during these days.
And, of course, fundamentalists don’t believe they can make mistakes, so when we permit the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, it’s just impossible for a fundamentalist to admit that a mistake was made.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:28 pmI have two words for the “Family Research Council”:
LIBEL.
SLANDER.
Ok, and a third.
MONEY DAMAGES.
Where’s the SPLC when you need them?
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:28 pmIt is just wrong when someone else’s dogma runs over your karma. Just ain’t natural.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 pmYou have to wonder about ANYBODY who is so concerned about a so-called homosexual agenda.
Not that there’s anything wrong with being closeted and unaware of that fact…
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:33 pmHoodathunktick Says:
A pun! I like puns! They inspire me:
Dogmas are always chasing karmas. What would they do if they caught one?
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pmIt might be that he has what the bigots,haters and racist call……COOTIES the airborne disease that turns you gay.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 pmRepublicans Love Facts Says:
With Mr. Jennings at the helm, the table is set, mom and dad, for your children to be indoctrinated into a Progressive agenda of homosexual civil rights. [plagerism continues word for word.]
This republican loves plagerism as well even as it demands citations:
http://www.examiner.com/x-7615-Charleston-Conservative-Christian-Examiner~y2009m6d16-Introducing-Kevin-Jennings–Bringing-the-homosexual-agenda-to-grades-K12
Get lost.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 pmIt’s pretty bad to be a part of a religion that people fear and despise now. Good job.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:40 pmpags2 says:
I remember in the 50s, preachers condeming rock ‘n roll as sinful. Dating myself with that.
RLF says:
About getting stoned.
So?
When I was in the service during Vietnam, one base where I was at, when you opened the barracks door, you could get high from 2nd hand smoke.
My advice to RLF:
LIVE AND LET LIVE!
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:40 pmMy last comment wasn’t directed to anyone here.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:40 pmPLC, it has always been my experience that when dogma meets karma dogma becomes road pizza and/or someone starts talking about soul mates.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pmUncle Ho Says:
pags2 says:
I remember in the 50s, preachers condeming rock ‘n roll as sinful. Dating myself with that.
RLF says:
About getting stoned.
So?
When I was in the service during Vietnam, one base where I was at, when you opened the barracks door, you could get high from 2nd hand smoke.
I also remember these things. I have been around for eons.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pmRepublicans Love Facts Says:
He’s so far in the closet, he’s buggering the Narnians.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pmTo the party of hypocrites, it does not matter how qualified you are. You can be as immoral as possible. And as long as you profess family values, and hide what you do from the public you are alright. You can cheat on your family and in politics or business. And as long as no one knows, it is fine. Just don’t be gay. The difference between the party’s is simple.
As far back as Clinton, when the so called Republican revolution came in with the take over of the so called moral majority, we have seen the double standard. Henry Hyde, who called for the Clinton resignation admitted he himself had an affair. Gingrich who was Speaker of the House, cheated on his sick wife then proceeded to finally marry for the third time his last mistress. Vitter, Ensign, Craig, Sanford.
And these are simply the most recent. They all called for Clinton to resign. And Gingrich as come back like indigestion after a bad meal to put in his two cents. Even though he had to leave the government because of serious ethical violations. So tell me just where family values enter into anything this party does?
Jennings will receive nothing like a fair or objective notice for anything he does. His qualifications do not matter to these people. And South Carolina is rife with hypocritical politics and people. This state would love to go back to slavery and overseers and mint julep and old time religion which they still have. These people are a throwback to an earlier time. And they will always be living in another century. Some of my family came from that state. And I can tell you nothing has changed.
As for men like Tony Perkins, I stopped listening to those people the first time I heard them talk. They all read from the same script. They live to pass judgments regarding race and their own version of morality. Jennings is a gifted, intelligent and humane man. It is too bad he had to come up against people who are the total opposite. Unfortunately, we never seem to run out of men like Perkins.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:48 pmMake sure you all go to the site in the update to sign the petition. If we do nothing, they won’t know we care.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 pmIt must really demoralize the Family Research Council and their ilk that…
While their guys are giving rambling press conferences on Infidelity in Argentina…
The Epitome of “Family Values” is the current First Family.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 pmExcellent comments, my fellow TP commenters (except the ignorant troll, of course).
The day will come when people will treat others well, simply because they are our fellow human beings. Those who don’t will be the social outcasts.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:59 pmAnother example of how faithless the, so-called, religious right really are.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:59 pmThanks Zooey. Will do.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pmThese are from a book a friend of mine wrote. He meant it to be facetious, but this list makes more sense than anything the FRC is putting out.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:05 pmZooey Says:
The day will come when people will treat others well, simply because they are our fellow human beings. Those who don’t will be the social outcasts.
I am a pessimist. Hate sells and is profitable. Each generation will have its hate groups. They have been around since the country was founded.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:07 pmGood one.
In fairness to Republicans Love Facts, though, there is some evidence that he’s not completely closeted.
He took the name of one of Keith Olbermann’s ex-girlfriends (Rebecca Lobo) as his handle here for a while. That was quite an admission for the scared little guy, and a big, brave step toward acknowledging his forbidden love.
I doubt Olbermann will reciprocate, but even so, it was nice to see.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pmpags2 Says:
Zooey Says:
The day will come when people will treat others well, simply because they are our fellow human beings. Those who don’t will be the social outcasts.
I am a pessimist. Hate sells and is profitable. Each generation will have its hate groups. They have been around since the country was founded.
I have to go with pags2. There will always be haters, whether they target Jews, Blacks or gay people. Xenophobia seems to be a constant through most human cultures. Our society may eventually stop tormenting gay people, but the haters will just find others to victimize.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:12 pmHow does that song go? “Everybody has to have somebody to look down on. Someone to be better than….”
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pmThe following is from the Amazon.com review of the book that rlf is citing as evidence of the evil of Mr. Jennings.
Queering Elementary Education is not about teaching kids to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or straight. It’s not part of a sinister stratagem in the “gay agenda.” Instead, these provocative and thoughtful essays advocate the creation of classrooms that challenge categorical thinking, promote interpersonal intelligence, and foster critical consciousness. Queer elementary classrooms are those where parents and educators care enough about their children to trust the human capacity for understanding and their educative abilities to foster insight into the human condition.
i can see why rlf would be afraid of teaching children to be critical thinkers, the republic party would die off in a generation.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pmJohn Ensign:
Mark Sanford:
David Vitter:
And, finally, Larry Craig:
Enough specific citations for you, Repugnicans Avoid Facts?
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:19 pmpags2 Says:
I am a pessimist. Hate sells and is profitable. Each generation will have its hate groups. They have been around since the country was founded.
gummble-bee-itch Says:
I have to go with pags2. There will always be haters, whether they target Jews, Blacks or gay people. Xenophobia seems to be a constant through most human cultures. Our society may eventually stop tormenting gay people, but the haters will just find others to victimize.
Thanks for ruining my happy buzz, guys. **pout**
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:23 pmKeep that fag SHIT out of my school
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:25 pmThe Young Republican flagged the piece of sheeyat
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pmNo spin, just the facts on a slumping Keith Olbermann
MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann took offense to a post I wrote Saturday that referred to him as “slumping.” He didn’t dispute any of the facts in my piece, he just went on the attack with his usual innuendo, slurs and bombast over my characterization of his performance in the ratings.
Here are two graphics from tvbythenumbers.com tracking Olbermann’s ratings the last six months. Read them and judge for yourself whether the adjective “slumping” applies.
No spin, just the facts. Especially note the one that shows him down 50 percent since the last quarter of 2008 in the key news demographic of viewers 25 and 54.
Also, note that in the first quarter of 2009, Olbermann’s show ranked in the Top 10 programs on all news cable TV. In the figures released this week for the second quarter of the year, he is no longer in the Top 10. All 10 spots belong to shows on Fox News.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pmi can see why rlf would be afraid of teaching children to be critical thinkers, the republic party would die off in a generation.
More like 6 months. Kids are more resilient than adults.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:28 pmThe Young Republican,
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:29 pmwho are you trying to kid, beyotch? you failed out of “home skooling”
centrist Says:
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:29 pm“I wanna give keith olbermann a dome-job”
Bobwurst Says:
i can see why rlf would be afraid of teaching children to be critical thinkers, the republic party would die off in a generation.
I was already under the impression that Republicans were zombies-lost souls trapped in body that can no longer think.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pmcentrist Says:
No spin, just the facts on a slumping Keith Olbermann
Speaking of “slumping” how’s that permanent majority working for you?
And nice cut and paste of someone else’s work without bothering to cite source. Plagiarism is a crime, you know.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pmAre you using abc and time mag as “sources?” Oped pieces?
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:32 pmI see the happy couple is back together.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:32 pm“All 10 spots belong to shows on Fox News.” ;)
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pmYoung Republican = Hitler Youth
Please join me in demanding that TP ban this hate troll. Yesterday, on the thread about the murder of a gay serviceman in San Diego, it wrote “1 down millions to go” and something about AIDS being God’s way of dealing with fags.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:35 pmWhen Faux and company quit ’selling’ their station to corporate franchises and ‘buying’ polls based on such, I might put some credence in centrist’s claims.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:37 pmThe Young Republican Says:
Keep that fag SHIT out of my school
And this folks is the republican mindset in a nutshell: It’s a public school, not this ignorant buffoon’s school. Everyone’s tax dollars support this school, but the young republican who undoubtedly complains about paying taxes in the first place, wants the public school to only reinforce his beliefs.
And, since it is a republican, and it uses the term “fag” it is a closeted homosexual who too afraid of it’s own feelings to be out.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:38 pmKatie Couric gets as many viewers in her half hour as the “top ten” from FAUX get in 24 hours. And she doesn’t have to yell at anyone.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:39 pmspencers mom Says:
Young Republican = Hitler Youth
Please join me in demanding that TP ban this hate troll.
I am against banning him. Everyone should have the opportunity to make a public fool of himself. And he is doing a great job each time he posts.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:43 pmEvery four years, there is a big seminar which teaches that. It’s called the Republican National Convention.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pmOver 70% of Americans support repeal of DADT, over 70% of Americans support a public option on health care.
100% of trolls think Faux speaks for America who are against everything but bombing, discrimination and hate.
Sux to be a troll.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pmHow’s the closet in your school? Do they keep a cot in there for you?
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pmHow’s the closet in your school? Do they keep a cot in there for you?
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:49 pmRepublicans Love Facts Says:
Are you using abc and time mag as “sources?” Oped pieces?
Coming from a plagiarizer who never even cites sources, this is rich in unconscious humor.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pmI agree. Always remember, we posters aren’t the only people who read the posts. It’s helpful for everyone to see what monsters the Republicans have become, so they aren’t fooled into supporting these cretins.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pmTrolls are like children seeking attention. If you ignore them and don’t respond, eventually they go away.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pmA long time ago, when I was in the 9th grade, my civics class would have a 15 minute class discussion about an article in the previous day’s paper. At the start of each class all the students would drop a slip of paper with their name and a headline then one would be picked and the student who got picked would start the discussion. And it counted towards our grade.
We would bring up a few salient points and take a position and creativity was encouraged. One inventive student made a good, if facetious, case for extraterrestrial life based on a story about “crop circles” made buy a kid doing doughnuts on an area athletic field. I have a feeling our pet stupid trolls would flunk that class.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:55 pmSheesh! That should have said, “…dropped our slips in a box..” And I should have said “by” instead of “buy”.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 pmThe trolls have a different term for plagiarism. It’s called “Standard Operating Procedure”.
They really have no choice, though. It’s not like they have ideas of their own.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:02 pmSeems reasonable to me. Why do you object?
What would you consider acceptable, objective source of information, sources in which we could all put trust?
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 pmEh? The FRC’s lead dingbat wants to “export” gays? That’s an interesting idea. He’s probably been reading the Aldolf Eichmann playbook.
Before the NAZIs cooked up the Final Solution, before the invasion of Poland, they took a shot at a policy of “exporting” the Jewish population of Germany. Eichmann, at one or more times, went outside Germany to discuss such an “export” policy, or immigration, with people in Zionist organizations. Of course, we all know that the NAZIs went on to simply export Jews, gays, “Gypsies” (Roma), Socialists and Communists to death and forced labor camps.
Tony Perkins probably wants to start with gays instead of Jews. He has to keep a Jew or two alive for “End Days” purposes.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:15 pmpete Says:
We would bring up a few salient points and take a position and creativity was encouraged. One inventive student made a good, if facetious, case for extraterrestrial life based on a story about “crop circles” made buy a kid doing doughnuts on an area athletic field. I have a feeling our pet stupid trolls would flunk that class.
That cuts both ways because there are people here who substitute name calling for logic. It does not further the discourse and wastes bandwidth.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:20 pmNo argument. We have our share of unimaginative boors. It’s part of an open forum.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:27 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
——————————————————————————–
Bobwurst and Calavzma, I have been following and enjoying your intercourse (ooh, did I say a bad word?). I respectfully would like to add my two cents.
I disagree with the tendency to make faith and science/objective reality at odds. As a psychologist, I often tell my clients that I run my life on two principles. First, I believe what is true. However, we don’t always know what is true. Therefore, the second principle is to believe what is helpful, to myself and to others. I apply these principles to my religious faith. I do not intellectually know if there is a God or if Jesus is God in man’s form. But, I find it personally comforting and inspiring to believe that there is a God who created the incredible world and science that I objectively experience. I also find the teachings attributed to Jesus as a marvelous philosophy on which to live your life, one that is counter to the human tendency toward hate, conflict, insult, and other forms of harm. Whenever I find that there is a discrepancy between objective reality and faith, I always choose the objective reality
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PatrioticLiberalChristian,
What a beautiful expression of the harmony that should exist between religious beliefs and reality. I firmly believe that life and religion should not only co-exist, but firmly support each other. This is not an easy task, it requires a deep intellectual honesty and frankness, a continuous internal dialog with ones self.
The members of the Religious Right appear to be terrified of this proposition and relegate this authority to their ministers and political leaders. Their faith and society will always be polarized. This is in their leader’s vested interest, and is a betrayal of the very Christian faith they have sworn allegiance. Faith should strives for harmony.
My diatribe has proceeded long enough, but thank you again, PatrioticLiberalChristian.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pmhumbly, flight
centrist Says:
MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann took offense to a post I wrote Saturday that referred to him as “slumping.”
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Really? I’d love to see some evidence of this. Please post a link to your original post, and to any evidence of KO taking offense.
I’ll wait…
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pmAllow me to echo the kudos for PLC’s eloquent dissertation on faith and reality.
This is the kind of contribution from our posters that make this forum so worthwhile.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:34 pmso this is where the kooks hang out. its amazing how many morons there are in this world
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:37 pmpags2 Says:
That cuts both ways because there are people here who substitute name calling for logic. It does not further the discourse and wastes bandwidth.
A very valid point and I have done a bit of troll whacking myself. I’m not even consistent as it’ depends on mood.
As for using the term; “troll”, “stupid troll”, or “stupid pet troll”? Those have almost become terms of endearment. Actually, while they don’t realize it, all they have to do to renounce the name is to stop behaving like stupid trolls.
Plus, I lost track of which sockpuppet is which a long time ago. Whenever I address a “stupid pet troll” they seem to know who I mean and respond eagerly. And that just makes me chuckle.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 pmZooey, one of our resident plagiarists, centrist, “borrowed” the following from Baltimore Sun critic David Zurawik:
Don’t hold your breath waiting for it to acknowledge it’s thievery.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 pmAw, whatsa matter Bubba? You get lost on the InterTubes?
If your really looking for morons, try this
Your welcome
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 pmRepublicans Love Facts sights a paragraph from some wingut news site…..WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews.com)
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pmWhy not just site the I’m A Naziwingnut.com Take the dildo out of your……where ever you stuff it. Ignorant bigots like you don’t deserve the freedom that this country offers. Hopefully you will be the victim of your beloved hatred groups.
It’s nice that you’ve found a place where you feel at home.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pmExcuse the bad spelling @188, got to keep it on Bubba’s level don’tcha know? *wink*
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pmpete Says:
pags2 Says:
That cuts both ways because there are people here who substitute name calling for logic. It does not further the discourse and wastes bandwidth.
A very valid point and I have done a bit of troll whacking myself. I’m not even consistent as it’ depends on mood.
I prefer subtle insults because it baffles them when they try to figure out what I mean.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:47 pmspencers mom Says:
Don’t hold your breath waiting for it to acknowledge it’s thievery.
PEACE
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
I guess I’ll be investigating all troll comments before responding! Thanks, Mom!
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:48 pmDoes TP emit an electronic pheromone on the Intertubes that attracts sockpuppets?
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pmTP.org = TherimonePheromone.ObvioslyRagingGays ?
/snark
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmThat is a hoot, RandomChaos.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pmpags2 Says:
I prefer subtle insults because it baffles them when they try to figure out what I mean.
Like I said, it’s a mood thing with me. I haven’t kept any stats but I often just treat them like test subjects. Alas, I’ve always been a bit impatient in my lab work and tend to try and hurry along reactions. And some of the trolls are just so devoid of sensory faculties that they need a strong shock or a light slap with a shovel.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pmThis is an example of the “big fish in a small pond” phenomona. Fox has managed to corral all of the rightie audience, but note that progressives are less inclined to get either news (or other entertainment) from cable TV. A truer measure of what the trolls here are trying to use as a ‘mocking’ point would be to compare the viewership of Fox News Channel to the combined viewership of of MSNBC, CNN, CBS Evening News, NBC News and ABC News.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 pm“It frightens me that in the minds of countless right-wingers, a gay appointee is considered a threat to children by default”
Well, Canny55, how about the left-wingers who excoriate,say, NRA members in the same way? I have seen just as much left-originated groundless vitriol poured out on relatively mild, well intentioned folks on the other side of the fence. You remember Robert Bork?
You see…the Left is a bunch of urban-elitist, Soros-funded, closet-Communist AIDs-diseased homosexual haters who are secretly taking over our cultural institutions to assure everyone is like them….
The Right is a bunch of gun-toting, Bible-thumping, ignorant, intolerant, cross-burning haters who are trying to effect a hostile ‘Vangelical Christian takeover of government at all levels to enforce everyone thinking like them.
Go to any number of sites and forums like this one. The bile flies..the venomous rule the debate…and it seems just about everyone has lost the desire or ability to understand, compromise, or collaborate. A plague on both your houses..leave the rest of us in peace.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:13 pmwow, even the old farts can’t resist the hate. oldcorps, you do realize your two examples of left right came from right talking points, don’t you?
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:20 pmoldcrank: One of the newly “independent” Bush voters.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pmoldcorps76 Says:
You see…the Left is a bunch of urban-elitist, Soros-funded, closet-Communist AIDs-diseased homosexual haters who are secretly taking over our cultural institutions to assure everyone is like them….
That is code for well educated.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:24 pmhooda..when you learn to read and comprehend beyond your own biases, you will have earned a response other than this. Sans the personal insult.
You are a textbook example of every sad thing about which i wrote. Even sadder is the anticipated pile-on.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:24 pmHmm… oldcorps seems to be calling for reasoned debate to bridge a partisan divide.
Yet those I’ve encountered who truly want to engage in reasoned debate (as opposed to simply “catapulting the propaganda”) tend to stay away as much as possible from broad-brush pronouncements like, “it seems just about everyone has lost the desire or ability to understand, compromise, or collaborate”.
I know from time spent on TP’s discussion boards that there are dozens of progressives here who want to understand, compromise or collaborate, and who do so when given the opportunity. The only problem is TP doesn’t seem to attract conservatives of a similar character.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:29 pmSo oldcorps76,
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:29 pmYou are saying your post @199 are entirely your own words and beliefs?
We have difficulty with people who regurgitate RNC/FOX talking points. We comprehend and stare in disbelief.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:31 pmoldcorps, I am also an old fart, one who has been listening and posting. That is why I commented that your posts were laced with the talking points.
If you want to avoid the ‘pile on’, avoid the old stuff. The elder generation is supposed to be wiser.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmOh, and just a thought, oldcorps… citing Robert Bork as a victim of “left-originated groundless vitriol” isn’t going to earn you much capital around here.
Those of us who DO remember Robert Bork (it was over twenty years ago, after all) generally think he wasn’t suited for the Supreme Court and that the questioning he faced in the Senate was fair and well-advised and his defeat was proper.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:34 pmand, just as an aside, oldcorps, if you are a newbie (which I doubt) and a member of the older, polite generation, you would not refer to me with the diminutive Hooda. Therefore, I will call a disseminating old fart troll. Particularly since you espouse knowledge of how these sites work.
But a nice try.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 pmralph–”seems”? I would say more like ’screams….’ But thank you for being one who read everything I wrote and understands. This is a site where left-progressives congregate…of course right-leaning voices are going to be minimal. People are herd creatures – and in politics, they are in character. But herding and incestuously stroking the choir produces little save more mutants. Like some of the responders who ‘piled on.’
random – cut the closet crap attack on my intelligence and character – of which you have as little cognizance as I do yours – and I’ll afford you the same courtesy.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:38 pmWhich fruity loom did this sockpuppet come from? A couple more posts and the “original” personality should surface.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:41 pmWell, oldcorps, if you think you were “screaming” that message, you might want to revise your rhetorical style. Your initial comment wasn’t especially clear on that score.
I said “seems” because that idea of a reasonable discussion appeared to be buried somewhere in there, but it never actually surfaced. In fact, the most cogent thought expressed was that both sides sucked equally.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:42 pmI am not an Urban-elitist. Less than 80K a year, living pay-check to pay-check almost.
I do not work for George Soros.
Not a Closet-communist either. (whatever that is)
Nope, don’t have Aids and I don’t hate Gays.
I am also not anything like the rest of the blather.
Guess that makes me just like oldcorps? What is that exactly?
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:42 pm“diminutive Hooda. ”
Hmmm..if I violated a protocol of which I am unaware, for that I apologize.
“Disseminating?” What am I disseminating, in my understanding of the word, which is to distribute? Maybe you mean ‘dissembling…’
We could go on about Bork. Maybe his Senate questioning was fair, but what I viewed as a concerted media campaign on him personally was not. Much as the gentleman who is the subject of this discussion.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pmTrolls aren’t all that inventive. A couple of points to oldcorpse for effort.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:45 pmOldcorps76 Said,
Oldcorps, you are wrong.
I am part of the left, and I am neither urban, nor elite, nor funded by Soros, nor closet communist, nor AIDS diseased.
We progressives are definitely taking over every government elected position to purge our government of a fascist theocracy. Progressives are not trying to make anyone “like them” because there isn’t any one type of progressive.
We are all different, but we all have one thing in common. Republicans have given us a common enemy.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 pmLet’s see if I can summarize oldcorps76’s post:
Liberals – Educated, tolerant of viewpoints other than their own, believe that old traditions should be challenged and when they are found to be contrary to a stable society, should be changed.
Conservatives – uneducated, intolerant, believes that a 2000 year old book has all of the answers without question, but anything that science and rational thought have produced since are “sins” against nature and should be eradicated from society.
Pretty well sums it up?
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:49 pmpete–’fruity loom…’ ’sockpuppet’…must be a code understood by the TP Elect.
See my point, Ralph? That is why I get disgusted. Anyway, the ‘Net – and especially ANY partisan website – is no place for any sort of reasoned discussion I suppose. The noise level is too extreme.
Random–you made my point beautifully. Of course you are not like what I wrote..doubt anyone really is. Both sides create a mental image of the ‘opposition’…then create canards…call names…and herd up with the like minded. It is happening as we all type.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:51 pm“cut the closet crap attack on my intelligence and character – of which you have as little cognizance as I do yours – and I’ll afford you the same courtesy.”
Seems you need to take your own advice.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:53 pmIt seems Troll Central has finally come up with a meme they think will combat the Intertubes.
See my point, Ralph? That is why I get disgusted. Anyway, the ‘Net – and especially ANY partisan website – is no place for any sort of reasoned discussion I suppose. The noise level is too extreme.
No one here can hold rational discussion because the partisan nature of the site dictates we all lock step.
I guess even trolls can evolve. Somewhat.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:55 pm“Which fruity loom did this sockpuppet come from? A couple more posts and the “original” personality should surface.”
Pete, if you had been reading and allowing yourself to think vice respond, you would have seen the ‘original’ several posts ago.
All the best esp to Ralph…..gotta go, I have landscaping to do. Have to do it myself ’cause the Jooz took all my money and I can’t afford Mesgins anymore….. :(
Damn, Pete…you were right! ;)
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 pmThe liberal media and elitist is a cliched chant that goes back to Nixon in the late 50’s. It never worked for me.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmBye oldcorps , don’t work to hard. Please come back when time permits. And have a Happy 4th.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 pmWell, RandomChaos, thank you for the invite!
And a Happy 4th to you too ;)
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 pmpete is one of our best, wisest and most insightful posters.
He’s also seen trolls come and go, like most of us have. Some of them have come on the scene just like you did — pleading for reasonable discourse, using right-wing touchstones as if they held the same meaning for us as they do for you. What often happens is the new poster keeps up the appearance of engaging for a few posts, then drops the act and reveals himself as the right-wing partisan troll that he was born to be.
We’ve seen it dozens of times. I completely understand pete’s cynicism.
I generally prefer to let someone prove himself before I decide that he’s not really looking for discussion, but pete doesn’t suffer fools so gladly.
If you let that kind of cynicism frustrate you, then you probably won’t last here. There aren’t many conservatives who do stick it out, probably for that very reason. (The trolls don’t really count.)
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:04 pmAnd my point is made. Thanks ralph.
A wise person would simply ignore a comment about a sockpuppet and prove their intentions by engaging in a real discourse. I’ve even apologized a few times when I’ve been unfair. And If I’m wrong and this guy is an individual entity who has not participated in a TP thread under another moniker? I apologize again.
But this particular sockpuppet immediately seems familiar. They tend to blur together so I don’t recall the particular exchange but, clearly, he remembers me.
So, I guess I should feel honored? O’K.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pmWow what has our society become. I wouldnt want this nut 10ft around my kids, they might pick up the sugar that falls from his butt. His sexual orientation is his business and not mine.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:23 pmThe Troll Central Comment Randomizer needs recalibrating again.
I warned ‘em not to go with the Diebold model.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 pmSome interesting debate here. I am a Christian. Like every Christian I know, I often struggle with my beliefs when I encounter issues that are not easy to resolve according to my beliefs. Homosexuality is definitely one of those issues. The bible teaches us that homosexuality is a sin and is wrong and there is no ambiguity there. At the same time, the bible teaches us to hate the sin but love the sinner. There is no clear reference in the bible about denying freedom or individual rights to someone based on their sexual preference, but following the example of Jesus, I think that it would be wrong to do so. It is difficult for Christians to determine the best course on the issue as, despite some of the rhetoric I read here, we are decent ordinary people who try and live a moral life and do not want to cause harm to our fellow American. Many Christians view any education around homosexuality that portrays it as anything other than wrong as contradictory to our belief. I agree with that philosophy but I also personally think that every American, regardless of what affiliations you may have, should have the same rights, period. That being the case, morality and sexuality should not even be taught at school. Educators should be teaching our kids about reading, writing, history, etc and enforcing basic rules of conduct to provide a safe environment. That is why I think that Mr. Jennings would be as poor of a choice as a Christian educator who wants to only teach creationism and heterosexuality.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:26 pmO.K. They aren’t all sockpuppets. Did TP get a shout-out from the Reichwing media?
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:32 pmWhere does Jennings say he is only going to teach creationism and homosexuality?
Please cite your source. We will wait.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:35 pmgeoswaff Says:
Wow! Where to start? I’ll just keep it simple.
Morality is the human mechanism for dealing with interpersonal relations including sexual relations. It’s very possible, with countless millions of success stories, to teach about sexuality in public schools without “teaching morality”.
And it’s also possible, with countless millions of success stories, to teach tolerance without promoting immorality. And that is what Kevin Jennings has done. His record is quite impressive.
And if you want to “teach heterosexuality” and creationism? I sincerely hope you are no where near a public school.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:41 pmI never said that Mr. Jennings was going to teach creationism. My point was that educators putting forth anytype of curriculum that teaches or discusses sexuality with children (k-12), whether it be hetero or homo, would not get my support. I think that school is not the right place for it and as parents I feel that we have no choice on whether or not our kids are taught something that we disagree with. Which is why many Christians homeschool their kids. I am sure the Mr. Jennings is a fine educator, but from I have read on this site, he seems to advocate for a curriculum that discusses these issues and I do not support that.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:45 pmThe Bible also teaches that slavery is permissible. Pro-slavery forces in the first part of the nineteenth century regularly used the Bible to defend their “peculiar institution”.
The Bible condemns adultery in much stronger terms than it ever address to homosexuality. Yet good Christians seem to tolerate it among their leaders with little more than a second thought.
There is ambiguity everywhere in the Bible, if you look for it. If you prefer an unambiguous command, you will concentrate only on those parts of the Bible that tell you what you want to hear.
Your opposition to Mr. Jennings seems to rest solely on his sexual preference, not on anything he’s said or done as an educator. Would you have the same objections to one who was an admitted adulterer? I somehow doubt it.
This is just absurd. If morality is NOT taught in school, what kind of educational experience would that make? There are certain eleents of morality that we can all agree on, at least in principle; equal rights and fair treatment for everyone, respect for others, the need to sometimes sacrifice personal comfort for the good of the community, for instance.
Formal sexual education has been proven to contribute to lower rates of sexual activity among teens, lower rates of disease and lower rates of teen pregnancy. the idea that it should not be taught is counter to reason.
What is about conservatives that they prefer ignorance to education?
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:50 pmpete Says:
You misread my post. I was making the point that in my opinion a Christian educator who only taught creationism and heterosexuality was AS POOR a choice as Mr. Jennings. The whole premise of what my opinion is that sexuality, morality, and religion should not be a part of the public school curriculum. Tolerance should be a rule that is enforced and nothing more. It does not need to be “taught”.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pmgeoswaff Says:
Many Christians view any education around homosexuality that portrays it as anything other than wrong as contradictory to our belief. I agree with that philosophy but I also personally think that every American, regardless of what affiliations you may have, should have the same rights, period. That being the case, morality and sexuality should not even be taught at school. Educators should be teaching our kids about reading, writing, history, etc and enforcing basic rules of conduct to provide a safe environment.
Public schools do not exist to teach “Christianity” in any way, shape or form. If you do not want your children to learn about this, then you take the child out of the class or put them in a parochial school. But do not expect public schools to adhere to anyone’s religious beliefs.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pmSometimes the good of the broader community takes precedence over the interests of the individual, even the individual family.
Sex education reduces rates of sexual activity, disease and pregnancy.
Lack of sex education in a formal setting increases those rates.
The problem being solved is lowering those sad statistics. You are looking at a different problem — presumably, control over your own child’s sexual awareness.
You expect the greater community to suffer increased rates of disease and teen pregnancy in order to preserve your ability to control your child’s growth (which you can’t really control, anyway; just ask Sarah Palin.)
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:55 pmWrong. Tolerance DOES need to be taught.
The fact that we live in a culture that is so steeped in so many forms of intolerance demonstrates that truth.
It needs to be taught and it needs to be modeled. Either one without the other is worthless.
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:57 pmI stand corrected, geoswaff. But by comparing your statements with Mr. Jenning’s career it looks like the two of you are in agreement about teaching tolerance without promoting any other moral lesson. Though it does seem that you do promote teaching morality lessons that meet your judgment.
And depriving children of truthful knowledge about their sexuality is unnatural and cruel. There are many kinds of sexual repression around the World but few are more damaging than the ignorance American Christian Fundamentalists would force on their children. Eliminating sex education from public schools would be an unmitigated disaster.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 pmgeoswaff,
I would like to suggest an argument and get your opinion.
The act of killing is strictly forbidden in Christian teachings, period. There are numerous instances where killing is justified, but under very strict guidelines. The individual still has to make the final decision to the moral dilemma, not society.
The Scriptures do indicate that homosexuality is forbidden. The predisposition for a segment of the population to be homosexual has been relatively constant over time (I know I should have a reference). On the surface, we have a major contradiction between what we see and our moral compass. Could it be that I, being a heterosexual, peruse and engage in a homosexual relationship would be in a serious transgression. The situation for a homosexual in a homosexual relationship could be a completely different story. The converse of this could also be true, namely a homosexual engaged in a heterosexual relationship could also be a serious sin.
The bottom line to this argument is providing our young adults the information and freedom to make these moral decisions. Again the final reconciliation of a moral dilemma rests with the individual not society.
Appreciate your consideration, flight
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:08 pmThis is the first I have ever heard of this situation. After viewing some of the many comments here, I am aghast. I used to believe that there was no place to go to hear “intelligent” conversation with “dialogue”, without someone spewing the same “hate” they claim has/is/was directed at them. As Rodney King long ago said “Can’t we just get along?”. it’s 2009, can’t we just talk intelligently, honestly and with respect to one another. If one only has opinions without any knowledge, than one will be left in the dust of the conversation.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:13 pmMy name above is from where I grew up many years ago. I learned to respect anyone that shows mutual respect. Is this all about “name calling” one another?
I am certain that this post was meant to be informative, but, it seems to be just another soap box to “blame” the “other” side/group, rather than focusing on the important point.
Perhaps we should look not at Mr. Jennings and his impeccable credentials at all, rather we should be considering why this position is necessary in the first place! Cannot the “LOCAL” people handle the problems at the LOCAL school they send their children to, rather than rely on EXPENSIVE Washington to solve yet another problem for them? It really is time to wake up my fellow Americans.
I care not what “side” you are on, rather, I care that we might, through thoughtful discussion learn from each other.
I can be reached at http://AmericasPoliticalGuardRail.com for further “intelligent conversations” on this and many other subjects. According to the Editor, the site is undergoing some changes to help make it easier to “track” the many issues of the day to help us stay informed.
It’s not his fault. He didn’t make you a hard core bigot. He just acknowledged you.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:15 pmRalph,
Fair enough. I would agree that the Bible acknowledges that slavery existed and that there are no passages specifically saying that slavery was wrong. I wont try to defend or explain it because I did not live thousands of years ago when it was the custom, nor was I alive in the 19th century when this country still had slavery. I dont understand why slaves were owned or agree with the practice.
Your view on adultery is somewhat slanted. It is a sin and our leaders have often committed it. As Christians, what we look for is acknowledgement and repentance of that sin. We also look for a pattern of behavior. A person who repeatedly commits adultery loses credibility. A person who commits it, repents, and does not repeat the behavior deserves and receives our forgiveness. Christians are not perfect people. We fail as often as everyone else. I think that it is just more dramatic when someone who preaches Christian morality fails to live up to their own expectations. Jesus’s act is a tough one to follow and we often fail more than we succeed.
As far as Mr. Jennings goes, his sexual preference is not what I am contesting. As I said earlier, based on what I have read here he would seem to want to have sexuality as part of the curriculum and I do not agree with that.
I have no issue with the teaching of anatomy. I will not dispute that sexual education in the schools has lead to lower of sexual diseases, though I would disagree that it has lead to lower rates of teen sexual activity. I still think that sexual education to CHILDREN is the responisibility of their parents and not the schools.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:16 pmYou are a sad little closeted homophobe. The leader of my boyscout troupe was gay. He was one of the best people I ever met.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:21 pmThe Christians I know, who have taken the message of Christ as their Gospel, don’t presume to judge. They also tend to trust in their own teaching to help their kids deal with issues they learn about in school and the World at large.
geoswaff keeps conflating teaching about sexuality with teaching sexual behavior. It’s kinda sad.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:29 pmThere are many passages in many old religious tomes that justify everything from slavery to goat sex. The thing is, they were written thousands of years ago.
Anybody here figure Alexander the Great is President?
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:31 pmflight Says:
Just to be clear, Exodus 20:13 (the ten commandments) states
“You shall not murder.” Murder and killing are not the same. I would have no moral or biblical dilema in killing one who threatened me someone else with death (i would probably have a legal dilema though). The ten commandments are also an Old Testament teaching. To many Christians, the New Testament represents Gods new covenant with man as taught by his son Jesus Christ. Jesus would teach us to “turn the other cheek”
If I understand the your argument correctly, you content that if someone from the portion of the population that is predisposed towards homosexuality were to chave sex with someone of the opposite sex, then they would be commiting the act of homosexualtity from a biblical perspective?I apologize in advance if I got your argument wrong.
The bible defines sex as between a man and a woman and clearly defines a man sodomizing another man as a sin. I know that it is not that simple and if one is predisposed to homosexuality then they probably feel like they have are atoumatically astrocized from Christianity. That is unfortunate and wish I had a better answer.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:40 pmgeoswaff Says:
Your view on adultery is somewhat slanted. It is a sin and our leaders have often committed it. As Christians, what we look for is acknowledgement and repentance of that sin. We also look for a pattern of behavior. A person who repeatedly commits adultery loses credibility. A person who commits it, repents, and does not repeat the behavior deserves and receives our forgiveness. Christians are not perfect people.
But the fundamentalists talk about homosexuality and not adultery. They appear to be forgiving about adultery but not homosexuality. I am sure there are a lot more acts of adultery than homosexuality. The ministers have a lot of fertile fields with adultery so they can take care of that because there are a lot more sinners who need to be saved.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:45 pmIt does more than simply “acknowledge slavery existed”. It details how slaves are to be treated. It explains what conditions are acceptable to enslave another.
Jefferson Davis famously said, “It (slavery) was established by decree of Almighty God and is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments from Genesis to Revelation4.”
If you’re going to discuss this honestly, please be more honest with your assessments of the text and the facts.
I take your point on adultery, but it still seems odd that even a serial adulterer like Newt Gingrich receives respect from the fundamentalist community, while anyone who self-identifies as gay, regardless of any acts they’ve committed, is treated as a greater threat than Osama bin Laden.
That’s is your right. As I’ve explained, I think it’s a foolish position to take, based on the effectiveness of sexual education in addressing problems that follow in the wake of uninformed sexual experimentation.
But you seek to solve a different problem, one which takes precedence for you over the community interest.
I said nothing about anatomy. Teaching anatomy had nothing to do with this discussion.
So if you only accept one or two of the points I’ve made (pregnancy must be in the same category as disease, right?) then you’ve admitted that addressing those problems are less important for you than whatever control you think you have over what your child learns.
Then you should take that responsibility seriously, as I’m sure you do. But why would you deny the opportunity for critical education for children whose parents don’t take such responsibility?
In order to preserve your control over your children’s exposure to sexual information, you’re content to subject the rest of the community to greater levels of ignorance among the population most vulnerable to risk-taking, uninformed experimentation and the potentially devastating consequences that can follow.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:45 pmpete, you once again validate my high opinion of your contributions here.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:47 pmI don’t think the Republicans hate him for being gay as much as they do for him being a teacher.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:50 pmpete Says:
You can portray my pointof view in whatever light you choose. What is sad is your statements of tolerance and openmindedness coupled with your scorn and ridicule. You cannot teach sexuality objectively in todays society as there are too many differing viewpoints. It is not a subject that belongs in schools.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:50 pmRalph and Pags,
You both want to compate adultery to homosexuality. I am now confused. My understanding is that adultery is an act and that being gay is not an act. One is either attracted to the same sex or the opposite (not trying to offend bi-sexuals or others here, just trying ot keep it simple). An act (adultery) can be forgiven or condemmed and this fairly straight (no pun intended) forward. What makes homosexuality confusing for Christians is that it is NOT an act but the “way” somebody is. It cannot be condemmed because you must hate the sin and love the sinner. It is a very tough issue for me peronally. I am friends at work with people who are gay but I cant discuss the subject with them as it is like saying “I like you but I do not condone you lifestyle”
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 pmRalph,
I chose not to respond to your other points about the “good of the community” as I have a very liberatarian view on this and am more concerned with individual rights than the good of the “many”.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:05 pmOh lawd! Anti-religious? GMAFB! So what if he were “anti-religious? So what if he were to thinking about becoming “anti-religious or he thought about it, dreamt it, went to a meeting with them, ate dinner with them or dated an “anti-religious” person? Y’all are the martians.
Think small govmint and MYOFB!
Plllleeeeaaaassseee you old used up, dried-out, and used again nasty teabaggers, STFU. I don’t give a f what others do when it come to consenting adults. What is it to you! Why can’t the repugs OD on stupid! The stupid gets worse. People with commonsense would know better.
I can go on about your reality one-note repugs.
I know y’all look at porn on the tubes!
Ask him, ask uncle limpy again. At least ask limpydic what’s what. your abnormal obsession with normal people is freakish.
Worry about your cheating-marriage-is-sacred bullshit, your closet*-user (like your old-ass-ho-down-bluebloodly-whites-only-toe-tapping-latching on holiday/good times (again) dilly dads club. Just a logical very friendly suggestion.
Damn, messy up holidays too.At least ask limpydic what’s what. your abnormal obsession with normal people is freakish.
If your “bright ideas” worked your “religous theory” (ahaha) craig wouldn’t have a chance to retire, stanford wouldn’t publicly opine for da vj via media (no cell/fax/mail (teehe) and turd would come out.
repugs should talk. Why is jimmy swaggart on TV? Trolls? Converts?
Talk about crying a river–ROTFL.
Idiots!
Uh-oh…CNN … wtf…something about moosey and balls…
later trolls!
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:10 pmpete Says:
I think you are misunderstanding when Jesus said “Judge not, lest ye be judges yourself.” He was discussing the judging of person. Its like saying “He’s a hypocrtite becuase he is a Christian who committed adultery”. Jesus would view that as wrong; however, there is nothing wrong judging the things that people do and is how we interperate things to be right or wrong. Juding the act of sodomy to be wrong is not saying that the person committing it is a bad person.
Trusting and assuming that your teaching at home are being carried through by your children at school seems to be a bit
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:18 pmdangerous. Also, what do you tell your kid when the teacher teaches them one thing and you tell them something the opposite. Do you take away their authority on the subject by saying that they are wrong and you are right?
I’m not portraying your point of view, geoswaff. You have made yourself clear and even corrected me. Your point of view that it’s impossible to “teach sexuality objectively”, strikes me as being woefully ill-informed.
But, I have a feeling that no amount of solid scientific data, or limitless personal testimonies, would convince you that objective sex education is one of the best investments in human history.
And I don’t care what the subject is, knowledge is better than ignorance. Mostly, people kill what they fear. They fear what they don’t understand. Does it not figure that the better people know and understand one another the fewer of them will want to kill each other?
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:18 pmThanks, again, for the kind words, ralph. Back at ya!
geoswaff, You make my point when you say:
” Do you take away their authority on the subject by saying that they are wrong and you are right?”
When it comes to sexuality, objectively taught, there is no wrong and right. It’s not about teaching morality, it’s health and sociology.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:25 pmThis is an interesting tack; most of the time fundamentalists insist that homosexuality IS an act; it is a choice.
If you are acknowledging that it is a condition of one’s identity, then we are off to a good start.
But beyond that, we are comparing not the act of adultery to the condition of homosexuality; we are comparing the responses of fundamentalist Christians to two areas of moral concern, and we find in those responses some very telling differences. Specifically, you folks seem to get in a much greater lather over gays than you do over adultery, and of the two, only adultery is among the Ten Commandments.
You sound quite a bit more thoughtful about this issue than most who show up here sounding off as “Christians”, whether they truly be or not. It should be a tough issue if your guide is the text of the Bible. To my mind, it should be a less difficult issue if your guide is an informed sense of what the Bible means rather than what it says. Specifically, what Jesus taught his disciples, which to me seems centered around love and peace, with the notable exception of the moneychangers.
What I don’t understand is how you can take a condition that you appear to acknowledge to be an in-born trait, similar to, say, left-handedness in its brain-structure origin, and then claim that it is a “sin”.
I’m sure your “friends” appreciate you not discussing their “lifestyle” with them, especially if all you could offer would be “I do not condone it”. Do you suppose they want to share intimate details of their sex lives with you?
It doesn’t really sound as though you are capable of loving them in a Christian way. There’s no shame in that; living the word of Jesus is a very difficult task every day it’s attempted. The challenges we all have to overcome as flawed human beings are constant and recurring.
Yet you sound like you’re capable of getting there. I’d say the first step is to stop judging them based on your perception of their sexuality, and trying to see them first as elements of or reflections of God. After all, if they were born that way (and really, who is capable of controlling who we find attractive?) then they are the way God intended them to be.
I hope I haven’t sounded condescending at all. I don’t mean to be.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:26 pmFair enough.
I think you’re wrong about that view; I find it selfish and short-sighted. But I’m not going to be able to change a view as fundamental as that.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:32 pmThere is one sided scientific data on the subject. I am not aware of any studies commissioned to identify what the negative effects are. Countless testamonies can be given for either end of the argument. If only reproduction were taught then fine, but that ignores the sexual activity of homosexuals which leads to questions by children on what those acts are and why they are committed. From my Christian point of view that is too much ambiguity for my child to deal with without my direct involvement in teaching the subject.
I share your desire for knowledge over fear, but that does not mean that you cant have both at the same time. I have optimism for a society that is “Utopian” like but i guard against the realty that it is not that way.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:33 pmLife is dangerous. You have to trust your kids sometime. In my experience, the example a parent sets is the most fundamental basis for moral choices and values that a child will ever have.
Why wouldn’t you?
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:37 pmNot condescending at all. I will think and pray about what you have said. It is a tough subject to reconcile.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:38 pmI saw that too, ralph. Unless he’s talking about abolishing public schools altogether? It doesn’t sound very libertarian to claim a right to impose one’s personal Beliefs and hang-ups on a public school system.
And the view on personal rights vs. the public good sounds rather antisocial. There’s even a whiff of social Darwinism and manifest destiny.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:38 pmThat should tell you something right there.
Right. But only the testimonies in favor of sex education will have solid scientific backing.
What exactly is the danger in giving kids responsible information about the various facets of human sexuality?
Do you think children will not be fascinated by the possibilities that other children relay to them at lunchtime, if they haven’t heard about them from an authority figure?
Do you think that a boy who is drawn to girls will somehow be convinced that he really should try kissing a boy? Does that make sense to you?
Why is it a “Christian” point of view?
Why does that seem to conflict with a “human” point of view? And who exactly is keeping you from “direct involvement in teaching the subject”?
What? Fear and knowledge at the same time? Of course you can have fear and knowledge at the same time.
But since knowledge erodes fear, where there is knowledge there will be much less fear than where there is ignorance.
In short, knowledge is pretty clearly better than ignorance.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:47 pmgeoswaff Says:
There is one sided scientific data on the subject.
There’s the fundamental flaw in your reasoning. I really don’t mean to sound cruel or condescending but, science doesn’t have “sides”. there is only data and it’s interpretation.
Personally, I have enough science background to reach my own conclusions and even use my own observations. And, when I examine a scientist’s work I can tell if the data is being fudged. Once the data is fudged? It’s no longer science.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:48 pmI would definately put my views in the “anti-socialism” category. I agree with the basic idea of Social Darwinism in it terms of competition breeds evolution. I do draw the line at manifest destiny though as it smack too heavily of “might makes right” and does not pass my moral “smell” test. You might be shocked to learn that I was opposed to the Iraq war as there was no credible intelligence of WMDs and it seemed like a “manifest destiny” call.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:50 pmFair enough. How about there is one-sided interpretation of the data the theories and hypothese used to derive the underlying datasets.
July 3rd, 2009 at 6:58 pmIf we are going to confuse “social” with “socialism” we can stop right there. That’s basic high school stuff.
You forgot the key component to social Darminism which, BTW, has nothing to do with Darwin or the theory of evolution. The foundation of “Social Darwinism” is that a society, race, or all Mankind could be improved by discarding those deemed deficient. It’s an insane, and much discredited, idea that’s based on racial, religious, nationalistic, or other social prejudice.
I’m glad we agree about Iraq.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:00 pmBut, I have a feeling that no amount of solid scientific data, or limitless personal testimonies, would convince you that objective sex education is one of the best investments in human history.
There are some numbers that suggest the government school are failing at teaching some important facts about sex. These numbers suggest the government schools simply ignore the consequences of immoral sexual behavior.
bit has quoted before the number of kids born to unwed mothers. In 2007 – check http://www.frc.org for the actual source of these government collected numbers – fully 40% of the births in the U.S. were to unwed mothers. This astounding number was as high as 70% in one ethnic group.
What does this mean? Well consider that the U.S. Government is currently spending $281 B a year on single mothers and their children. That’s the cost to the U.S. taxpayer. But who could possibly fathom the misery in which many of these women and their children live? Many of these women and their children live in emotional and fiscal deserts. Now consider what this will mean in another generation – 18-30 years from now? How many children will be born and raised by single mothers in a generation? What will it cost the U.S. taxpayers? Can the U.S. survive the cost, or can the U.S. deal with the behavior problems of children, especially young men, raised without the influence of a father? Further, isn’t immoral to make the taxpayers pay for the actions of other irresponsible men, and women?
This is where immoral behavior leads: it bankrupts – fiscally and morally – the nation that allows, permits, and encourages immoral behavior. This is what Legislator Kern In OK was talking about when she says that immoral sexual behavior in the country is going to bankrupt the country.
What’s this got to with the appointment of Jennings? This appointee is a homosexual. Homosexuality is immoral. By his appointment the government is endorsing, allowing, and encouraging immorality, and Immorality breeds immorality. Think an avowed, self-described homosexual will encourage moral choices among students in their sex education?
When you remove the morality from instruction this is what you get: 40% of children without fathers. Doesn’t that make sex education sans morality a failure?
Just another one of those little things that makes the U.S. less worth preserving.
Remember that slippery slope we use to talk about?
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:08 pmMy mistake as I misread your previous post.
Like I said, I agreed with the basic idea of Social Darwinisim as far as competition breeding evolution, which is how it got his name attached to it if my fading memory of college serves, but that is as far as my agreeing with it goes. I was trying to give you some insights to my viewpoints and am not a Social Darwinite.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:09 pmThanks for the lively debate. I am signing off.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:12 pmThank you, geoswaff. It’s been a refreshing change from the usual vandals that, all too often, provide the only voice from “the right”.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:17 pmWow, bitty. That’s batscat even by your standards.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:27 pmbitblt Says:
What’s this got to with the appointment of Jennings? This appointee is a homosexual. Homosexuality is immoral. By his appointment the government is endorsing, allowing, and encouraging immorality, and Immorality breeds immorality. Think an avowed, self-described homosexual will encourage moral choices among students in their sex education?
By the same reasoning, politicians who commit adultery are encouraging immorality. Consider how many families are broken up over adultery. And there are many adulterers who have been caught, public and private. Some of those people are teachers and other occupations that your children come in contact. But I don’t see any great outcry to remove these people.
July 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 pmI don’t mean to sound obsequious, pete, but… I like the way you’re able to deal intelligently with geoswaff’s arguments and then turn around and rightly call out bit’s nonsense for what it is.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:02 pmWhat can I say, ralph? I just call them like I see them. And much of it depends on whether dinner is particularly good and the beer is cold.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:28 pmI hear that, pete.
I trust the beer is cold. Have a great Fourth, my friend.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:35 pmYou too, ralph. As a matter of fact I’m just heading out to stock up.
Later.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:39 pmBy the same reasoning, politicians who commit adultery are encouraging immorality. Consider how many families are broken up over adultery. And there are many adulterers who have been caught, public and private. Some of those people are teachers and other occupations that your children come in contact. But I don’t see any great outcry to remove these people.
Absolutely. Kern didn’t mention adultery in her list, but she did include divorce.
It’s a very common saw among conservative Christians that if the heterosexuals were behaving, the homosexuals would simply go back into the closets.
Adultery is very definitely included when bit says immorality breeds immorality. bit also understands that divorce courts in the 1960’s referenced scripture in their decisions, but this changed when CA instituted no fault divorce around 1967.
There’s still a big difference between adultery and homosexuality. Adultery for most people is still a shameful act which needs to be hidden. TP only brings it up when TP’s motive is embarrass leaders of the Republican party. Seems to be that liberal mind set that thinks it has a special built-in hypocrisy detector.
Homosexuality, OTOH, has a major “in your face” – not hidden, not shameful – component.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:44 pmbitblt Says:
There’s still a big difference between adultery and homosexuality. Adultery for most people is still a shameful act which needs to be hidden. TP only brings it up when TP’s motive is embarrass leaders of the Republican party. Seems to be that liberal mind set that thinks it has a special built-in hypocrisy detector.
Homosexuality, OTOH, has a major “in your face” – not hidden, not shameful – component.
I wouldn’t rely on FRC for anything since it is apparent they have a political agenda.
There is no difference in morality between adultery and homosexuality. The reason why TP and the media jump all over the Republican sexual peccadilloes is because their party platform talks about family values. The Dems do not have such a party platform. It is axiomatic that the public will tear apart people who pontificate and are caught in a sexual affair. That applies to both parties. However, the people most likely to pontificate are from the Republican party and the religious right. There is nothing partisan about these attacks because the person brought it on themselves.
Adultery is still immoral by your standards and these people should lose their jobs. They don’t because adultery between heteros is so widespread. If ministers started to go after adultery as much as gay people, the churches would be practically empty. Gay people are an easy target because ministers will offend very few of their church.
Finally, homosexuality is not “in your face” lifestyle. There have been many gay people who have been involuntarily exposed and lost their jobs, particularly in the military. Many gay people are content to blend in regular society rather than become a part of a city’s gay ghetto. These people are all around you but you just don’t know who they are.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:02 pmYou still don’t get it, bitty. You have no authority, from God or Man, to judge others. Leaving Judgment to God seems to be a weak point among America’s Political Evangelists.
You can limit, to an extent, what your children learn but you can’t shut out the World. And you have no right to impose your, so-called and self-defined, “morality” on other people’s kids.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 pmpete Says:
You still don’t get it, bitty. You have no authority, from God or Man, to judge others. Leaving Judgment to God seems to be a weak point among America’s Political Evangelists.
You can limit, to an extent, what your children learn but you can’t shut out the World. And you have no right to impose your, so-called and self-defined, “morality” on other people’s kids.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
You seemed to have missed that judging is not bit’s department.
bit has a right to related his understanding of Holy Scripture, which condemns all immoral sexual behavior including fornication, adultery, homosexuality, and bestiality. You also seem to have missed that sexual immorality has a real cost – a cost that is continually paid by you and bit.
If you think you have something better pete, why don’t you say what it is?
Tell TPers what needs to be done to avoid the massive spending on the fastest growing poverty group in the U.S. – single mothers with children, or is it the case pete that you think everyone has the right to live however they want even if living that way bankrupts, morally and literally, the country and even if living that way requires that the results of the behavior of irresponsible men will be paid for by others. Can you have justice in a society that permits irresponsible men to ruin the lives of so many and have the bill presented to others?
Don’t believe you’ve figured out pete that most people today have never been told how best to conduct their lives.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:48 pmThere is no difference in morality between adultery and homosexuality. The reason why TP and the media jump all over the Republican sexual peccadilloes is because their party platform talks about family values. The Dems do not have such a party platform. It is axiomatic that the public will tear apart people who pontificate and are caught in a sexual affair. That applies to both parties. However, the people most likely to pontificate are from the Republican party and the religious right. There is nothing partisan about these attacks because the person brought it on themselves.
There is no difference in morality between adultery and homosexuality.
bit agrees with this remark.
While TP has often noted the hypocrisy involved in the adultery of a conservative notable, bit believes the only noteworthy instance of homosexuality was also from a Republican politician. That is, TP apparently doesn’t agree with your comparison.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:52 pmEvery human ever has been taught how to conduct their lives. Sometimes the education takes, sometimes it doesn’t. But one thing never changes.
When a group is taught that they are inherently superior, or inferior for that matter, the end result is bloodshed. Xenophobia has killed more people than smallpox.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 pmI’m not gay but some of the most intelligent human being I”ve ever met are.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 pmbitblt Says:
You seemed to have missed that judging is not bit’s department.
bit has a right to related his understanding of Holy Scripture, which condemns all immoral sexual behavior including fornication, adultery, homosexuality, and bestiality. You also seem to have missed that sexual immorality has a real cost – a cost that is continually paid by you and bit.
If you think you have something better pete, why don’t you say what it is?
Tell TPers what needs to be done to avoid the massive spending on the fastest growing poverty group in the U.S. – single mothers with children, ……..
Don’t believe you’ve figured out pete that most people today have never been told how best to conduct their lives.
You are judging when you tell people they are immoral. It is not your job nor anyone else’s job to judge other people’s morals. Unless you have a direct line to God, you are just another fallible human with your own dark secrets. I don’t want the responsibility of telling people how they should live their lives. Their relationship to their higher authority is their business. I stay away from judging other people because I do not consider myself a paragon of morality. You should do likewise.
July 4th, 2009 at 12:41 amThanks, pags2.
I find it hard to refute characters like bitty without letting my contempt lead to rage. You nailed it.
Though I can’t resist adding that I think bitty, and his ilk, don’t even know themselves so they are utterly incapable of telling anyone else about how to express their identity.
July 4th, 2009 at 12:49 amThe ReichWing should just give it up. They will not win – we can see through their B.S. and we are tied of it.
They fight us – and we are learning how to fight back. The one thing that makes them so bad is that they are such hypocrites.
July 4th, 2009 at 1:24 amBit it is just common sense that ignorant bigots like YOU should just crawl back under your ROCK. YOU consider homosexuality to be immoral. That doesnt make it immoral. You are a hater and a bigot. No one in their right MIND cares what you think about this
July 4th, 2009 at 5:17 amgeoswaff,
Great discussion. The point I was struggling to make is that intellectual dishonestly with oneself is immoral. The dishonestly has implications that effect the society and lead to disillusion, disappointment and loss of dignity. I don’t believe the attraction to a member of the same sex is immoral, anymore than being attracted to a member of the opposite sex. This is what it is, it should not be portrayed as a choice because that can lead to the dishonestly mentioned above.
Sexual promiscuity, adultery or any of the sexual deviations can cause major social problems if left unchecked. This is the area of immorality and is a component in both camps (gay and straight). This is an area where the parents and Churches have failed.
The young adults need the facts about sexuality, not mixed with morality. They are smart and the early we begin to trust their judgment the better off the country will be. Parents and Churches should cover the morality aspects.
Marriage may have to expand. It sounds healthy for two people who care enough of each other to spend a lifetime together, regardless of their orientation. The proposition does not sound vulgar or defacing the current perception of marriage.
Politics have perverted the morality/ sexual issues and the politicians’ exit is long overdue.
The best gift we can provide our children is their identities and the freedom to have those identities devolope and mature.
July 4th, 2009 at 2:36 pmI don’t think God parses sex sins.
July 4th, 2009 at 3:02 pmpags2 Says:
——————————————————————————–
I don’t think God parses sex sins
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
pags2,
July 4th, 2009 at 3:57 pmI really don’t how God judges, I’m not going to tell him how, and I am not going to judge.
Thank you very nice Online Müzik Dinle Müzik Dinle Türkü Dinleme sitemize bekleriz, Ayrica bu Muzik Dinleme ve Türkü Dinleme Kürtce mp3 Sitemizede Bekleriz.
July 5th, 2009 at 11:26 ampags2 Says:
There is no difference in morality between adultery and homosexuality.
Yes there is. Adultery involves lying and breaking a solemn vow and contract. Homosexuality involves none of that, and is thus victimless.
If you don’t believe that lying and cheating others count as anything, then maybe you’re the one with the “moral problem.”
.
bitblt Says:
bit has a right to related his understanding of Holy Scripture, which condemns all immoral sexual behavior including fornication, adultery, homosexuality, and bestiality.
My understanding of Holy Scripture condemns self-righteousness, judging and condemning others, oppressing the rights of others and acting “holier-than-thou.” I thus condemn you, as is my right.
Now, can I extend my right to say that fundamental Christians shouldn’t be allowed to marry and should be beaten in school?
.
flight Says:
Sexual promiscuity, adultery or any of the sexual deviations can cause major social problems if left unchecked.
Any kind of behavior “can cause major social problems if left unchecked.” It’s not anybody’s business to “check the behavior” of anybody else under a legal system based on fundamental liberty. So long as a given behavior is victimless, it should not be criminalized in any way. If one doesn’t like that, then they are free to move to or establish another country in which they can legislate their religion on everybody else.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:44 amThank you ..
Sesli Chat
July 8th, 2009 at 5:19 pmSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli kent