Username or Email
Brian Dockter: Hmmm.......And Christ didn't mention homosexuality was no longer a sin of the flesh either. But people like you have faith that's what he meant to say.[blink]
Saturday, May 4, 2013, 8:57 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Hmmm.... can you give me some citations for the passages that you think refer to homosexuality? I've read the Gospels a couple of times in English (KJV) and Greek but maybe[wink] I missed something.
Friday, May 3, 2013, 10:54 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Chuckle..... even the crazies don't believe that stuff anymore. You are way out in flat earth territory my friend.
Friday, May 3, 2013, 10:52 am
Brian Dockter: Leonard,
I may not have read the Bible as much as you. But I don't ignore the passages where Christ speaks about sins of the flesh.
Friday, May 3, 2013, 7:59 am
Brian Dockter: Yep,
And a little more debunking of global warming for ya.
Surprise! Arctic tipping point not even close
More global warming propaganda debunked
Friday, May 3, 2013, 7:55 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, I think you have to actually read the Bible to "interpret" the Bible.
Thursday, May 2, 2013, 12:44 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: So, how's life Brian? Are you still polishing the Prager?
Thursday, May 2, 2013, 12:42 pm
Brian Dockter: Leonard stated:
Brian, why don't you leave Christianity to us Christians?
-Us Christians as you put it aren't the types of Christians I am friends with. I have a dislike for people in general who are intolerant of people who have a different interpretation of the Bible. Especially when it comes to making sweeping conclusions that Jesus cherry picked.
Thursday, May 2, 2013, 8:43 am
Lawrence Steinberg: These passages and their implications concerning inbreeding (if taken literally) were discussed below.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 11:01 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Nope, I just don't believe it. To say that you are a Christian when, by your own admission, you are fundamentally ignorant about the contents of the Gospels is like saying you are a scribe when you don't know how to write.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 10:07 am
Brian Dockter: Pastor Nolton stated:
However, while Jesus didn't directly address homosexuality/gay marriage, He did give His views on the definition of marriage and sexuality when addressing the issue of divorce in Matthew 19:1-6. In this passage, Jesus quotes Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, where God established the institution of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and limits sexuality within this institution. Thus, Jesus affirmed the original intent and parameter for what constitutes marriage and sexuality in God's eyes.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 7:58 am
Brian Dockter: Ah, the redirect. Just because you interpret the gospels differently than I do doesn't mean I am not a Christian. Have a nice life Leonard. [censored]
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 7:22 am
Since the homosexuality involves sins of the flesh why do you believe Christ no lonnger comdemns it because he didn't speak of it? I know you're not reluctant to discuss how Christ condems other sins of the flesh.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 7:01 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, why don't you leave Christianity to us Christians?
Why someone who cares so little about Christ that he can't even be bothered to read our Saviors words would even want to argue about Christianity is beyond me.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 6:58 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Christ certainly didn't flip flop. His silence on the issue of homosexuality was entirely consistent throughout the Gospels.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 6:56 am
Brian Dockter: Get your head examined Leonard. Obviously you haven't changed a bit. Indeed he did speek of greed and avarice. But you had to put you're little two cents in by saying these two values define the conservative movement. And then to top it off he never spoke of homosexuality. The last sentence seems to be the driving force of the gay and lesbian movement when they imply homosexuality is not a sin or immoral. Yet, may gays and lesbians reject Jesus. This doesn't make a bit of sense to me. If they believe he gave them his blessing then why the rejection?
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 6:51 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Christ spent a great deal of time in the Gospels condemning sin in its many manifestations. He spoke at length about GREED and AVARICE, the two values that define the conservative movement in America today but he never even for a moment mentioned homosexuality, in spite of its prevalence in the Near East of the Greek Diaspora where he lived.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 6:15 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, you need to learn how to read. What I clearly said was that THE GOSPELS ARE THE GREATEST FONT OF WISDOM man has ever known.
If you had ever read them, you would know that.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 6:12 am
You need to have your head examined if you believe that the greatest font of wisdomis Christ's reluctance to speak about homosexuality and thus is interpreted by the likes of you and many others he no longer considers it a sin and immoral.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 9:42 pm
Brian Dockter: -And the same can be said. It's all in one's POV. Take off your blinders Mr. Pone.
The goal of the Liberal thought leaders is not to unite our country but rather to separate the left wing rank and file sheeple into manageable groups that, by playing to their individual prejudices and fears, the Dems can reliably turn out on election day while, at the same time, doing everything in their power to suppress voter turn out amongst the vast majority of Americans who are sickened by their treasonous agenda.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 9:36 pm
Brian Dockter: Are you going to go so far to say some of Christ's wisdom is he no longer considers homiosexuality and sin and imoral? Why do have so much trouble admitting you believe Christ condones immorality and sin?
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 9:33 pm
I may not have read Christ's words as much as you. but common sense dictates to me Christ would not flip flop on the sin and immorality of homosexuality. What part of this doesn't make sense to you? Are you that blinded by your agenda as to go so far to say Christ is immoral because he is immoral and full of sin in my mind if he no longer considers homosexuality a sin and immoral.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 9:28 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: I am reminded of Dorothy Parker's famous reply when she was challenged to use the word "horticulture" in a sentence.
"You can lead a whore to culture but you can't make her drink".
I can ask, plead even beg you to study Christ's words and Wisdom but, in the end, it is only you who can accept his love.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 8:32 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: I don't know Brian, here we are after nearly 10 years of arguing and it appears that you still have not read the Gospels. The greatest font of wisdom ever bestowed on mankind is right there before you and yet, for want of a few hours reading, you choose to live in ignorant blight.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 8:29 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, even the briefest review of the writings and speeches of Karl Rove would show that far from uniting America, the conservative movement has, over the course of the last decade, devoted itself to sowing disunion and discord amongst the American electorate.
The goal of the conservative thought leaders is not to unite our country but rather to separate the right wing rank and file sheeple into manageable groups that, by playing to their individual prejudices and fears, the GOP can reliably turn out on election day while, at the same time, doing everything in their power to suppress voter turn out amongst the vast majority of Americans who are sickened by their treasonous agenda.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 8:27 pm
Brian Dockter: Leonard, Indeed our Savior Jesus Christ brings us a new Testament of Peace and Love.And I hope you're smart enough to realize if you get the chance to meet Jesus at the pearly gates you won't want to confer with him he believes homosexuality is no longer immoral and a sin.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 7:24 pm
What a pleasant surprise to have you back on board. As pleasant as it is, it is rather unfortunate you haven't learned a thing. How one as capable as you are and still not gain any wisdom since our last conversation boggles my mind.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 6:51 pm
As for the foundations of this country, if you are going to talk about history, I suggest you first study history.
Currently,Conservatism is the glue that holds this country together. And, currently,Liberalism is driving a wedge between the glue and the two surfaces it is bonding.Now, it is this point in time where Conservatism is working the best. It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned when Liberalism played the same role in history, BECAUSE,it's quite obvious had it's role had lasting qualities then it would still be the glue that holds this country together.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 6:46 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: As for the foundations of this country, if you are going to talk about history, I suggest you first study history.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 7:47 am
Brian Dockter: Social fascism From Wikipedia:
Social fascism was a theory supported by the Communist International (Comintern) during the early 1930s, which held that social democracy was a variant of fascism because, in addition to a shared corporatist economic model, it stood in the way of a complete and final transition to communism. At the time, the leaders of the Comintern, such as Joseph Stalin and Rajani Palme Dutt, argued that capitalist society had entered the "Third Period" in which a working class revolution was imminent, but could be prevented by social democrats and other "fascist" forces. The term "social fascist" was used pejoratively to describe social democratic parties, anti-Comintern and progressive socialist parties, and dissenters within Comintern affiliates throughout the interwar period. -Even though this sounds a lot like many present day Liberals, I would never paint it with a broad brush as Mr. Steinberg has with Conservatives. But he has every right to compromise his credibility.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 7:28 am
Brian Dockter: Mr Steinberg:
I can see you too are reluctant to answer the question why you belive Jesus no longer considers homosexuality a sin and immoral. I believe it's rather mean spirited to try to influence people into thinking it is no longer a sin and immoral. I go back to the liberal mantra "If it feels good do it". Yep, if it feels good, it 's no longer a sin and immoral, let's give it a try. Suit yourself.
And since you feel that the foundation of this country, that being American Conaservatism, is evil, why do you continue to live here and enjoy the fruits of American Conservatism?
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 7:13 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, while the Old Testament certainly is full of vile murders committed in the name of God, I think you will find that our Savior Jesus Christ brings us a new Testament of Peace and Love, a message that is in direct opposition to the Evil that is American Conservatism.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 6:29 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, I think you have confused liberals with conservatives and the well known conservative mantra, "if it feels vile, evil or repulsive (legitimate rape anyone?) just do it.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 6:25 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, social fascism is conservatism. The two terms are synonymous.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 6:23 am
Brian Dockter: Mr. Steinberg stated:
I think the social fascist's love for Leviticus 20:13 and its mandate for the murder of gay people is reveals far more about the evil in the hearts of conservatives than it does about the Mind of God.
Social fascists tend to be liberal in nature. And I doubt Mr. Steinberg would be complaining about a passage in the Bible mandating for the murder of conservatives.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 6:51 pm
Brian Dockter: K Lee stated:
Since some here believe that being gay is a “choice”, you must then believe that people like Ted Haggard "chose" to be gay later in his life
Frankly I'm a bit surprised with you. Since you are a liberal and liberals are known to advance the notion of "If it feels good do it", why then do you believe Heterosexualsdo not become gay or visa versa? Also, since many and not only liberals believe Jesus's new covenant no longer condemns homosexuality those becoming homosexual later in life believe they will no longer be condemned for theses actionsIn other words. No guilt. .
Monday, April 29, 2013, 6:39 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: I think the social fascist's love for Leviticus 20:13 and its mandate for the murder of gay people is reveals far more about the evil in the hearts of conservatives than it does about the Mind of God.
As Christians, we are subject to Christ's New Covenant which tells us not to kill, not to hate and to Love all humanity as our brethren.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 3:27 pm
K Lee: Since some here believe that being gay is a “choice”, you must then believe that people like Ted Haggard "chose" to be gay later in his life. Haggard is married to a woman and has children with his wife, but you still think he made a "choice" to go out and be gay? For many years, as a pastor, Haggard vehemently preached that homosexuality is an abomination, yet you think he "chose" to be homosexual after all these years?
Personally, I believe that Haggard has been gay all along and tried to hide it all these years. Finally, evidenced by his sneaking around living as a gay man, he just couldn’t hide it any longer and got caught.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:59 am
Lawrence Steinberg: This little nugget from Mr. Nolan is particularly amusing insomuch as it highlights the pure and unadulterated hypocrisy that has come to define those on the ignorant right wing of social fascism.
"No one can marry somebody...... who is 10 years old"
Of course, MISTER Nolan is absolutely right about this law but it is hardly inspired by the Bible which is bursting at the seams with child brides. No, it is because modern American law conforms to our modern context and not that of the nomad societies of the 2nd millennium before Christ.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:42 am
K Lee: Brian wrote, "For you to believe that once sinners of any type who confess their sins and will be led to the pearly gates will not stand before God to be judged based on how they lived on Earth really takes the cake."
Brian: You may want to re-read those words at take them to heart on your own behalf.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:32 am
K Lee: The Bible does not say or use the word homosexual or homosexuality.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:28 am
K Lee: Here's just one name for you, Brian... Ted Haggard.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:18 am
K Lee: [thumbup]
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:13 am
K Lee: Robert Molle wrote, "You choose your sexuality....."
But as John Lucas said... that's beside the point.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:11 am
K Lee: Well said, John Lucas.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:08 am
K Lee: Indeed.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 10:06 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, I would say MISTER Nolan knows just about as much about theology as you know about the doctrines of naval warfare.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 5:40 am
Lawrence Steinberg: Brian, what I think is really absurd is the way folks like "Pastor" Nolan prance around and pretend to be experts on the Bible just because they took some correspondence class in theology. I would be willing to bet that MISTER Nolan hasn't even read a decent translation of the New Testament (KJV etc) let alone the actual Greek text.
The NIV and its fellow McTranslatiions have done more damage to Christ's Message than all of the non believers and atheists who have attacked it over the last 5 centuries.
Monday, April 29, 2013, 5:39 am
Brian Dockter: Mr. Steinberg,
Along with the absurdity that since Christ did not speak of Homosexuality, many believe he didn't consider it immoral and a sin. You have made my day by making an even more absurdity by stating Pastor Nolton doesn't have the common sense to not take many passsages in the Bible literally.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:42 pm
Lawrence Steinberg: Genesis 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Taken literally (as Pastor Nolton would apparently like us to do) this passage appears to advocate men marrying either their own children or their clones since such individuals would be the only candidates that were produced (like Eve) from the "bones of my bones" and the "flesh of my flesh".
Of course, a literal interpretation of this passage (like Pastor Nolan's) would be absolutely absurd.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:06 pm
Brian Dockter: It seems to me Jesus speaking through Matthew in these verses has publically and openly displayed intolerance for people he has never met.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 8:28 am
Brian Dockter: Jesus was speaking through Matthew, Kevin.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 8:24 am
Brian Dockter: Kevin,
How about Jesus's new covenant? There's some pretty harsh words in these verses. Sounds like Jesus was a bit intolerant. How about that.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 8:23 am
Brian Dockter: But Kevin and many others only believe these verses were only talking about the sins of the flesh of heterosexuals and not homosexuals.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 8:15 am
Since you brought up Matthew 18:18. Let's look at some other verses from Matthew Ch. 18. Now, we most assuradly can't them completely literally. But the points they make cannot be ignored.
Temptations to Sin. 6d “Whoever causes one of these little ones* who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7* Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come! 8e If your hand or foot causes you to sin,* cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. 9And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 8:09 am
Brian Dockter: I suppose I am intolerant of those who criticize those who point out what is right and what is wrong. I'm proud to wear that badge.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:49 am
Brian Dockter: Ah, the usual liberal response. The hate card. And it sounds like you are the intolerant one. I took a chance we might have a decent conversation without all the grandstandingyou usually do. It didn't happen. Indeed, therre are also a lot of people who think like you do. But you believe Jesus's new covenant somehow can be interpreted that homosexuaity is no longer immoral and is no longer a sin. Give me a break. Of all the wishful thinking I've ran across in my life, yours tops them all. For you to believe that once sinners of any type who confess their sins and will be led to the pearly gates will not stand before God to be judged based on how they lived on Earth really takes the cake.
Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:43 am
Kevin Paglia: I'm done with you here. People who hate as much as you are a waste of time and I have fulfilled my Ezekiel's watchman obligation in pointing out your ways. You have successfully, publically and openly displayed, by your own words intolerance for people who you have never met.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:47 pm
Kevin Paglia: After all this Brian I am struck by one truth. There are a lot of people who think like you do. In fact they travel allover the nation screaming the same condemnation of people they disagree with, the Westboro church. They use the same passages as you. They too think gays are not welcome in the Kingdom of God.
As for me I will look forward to Heaven being packed as full as possible with believers who love all, without judgment, without condemnation, and without the intolerance of not wanting "that" kind of believer in Heaven. People who understand the meaning of Matthew 18:18.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:45 pm
Kevin Paglia: I see, so ascribe to the mentality of hate the more cause they started it. Hmm, I don't remember that passage in the Bible.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:38 pm
Brian Dockter: http://www.openbible.info/topics/effeminate
24 Bible Verses about Effeminate
Deuteronomy 22:5 ESV / 15 helpful votes
“A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.
Leviticus 20:13 ESV / 13 helpful votes
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
1 Corinthians 6:9 ESV / 11 helpful votes
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
Helpful Not Helpful
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ESV / 7 helpful votes
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Timothy 1:10 ESV / 5 helpful votes
The sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
1 Timothy 1:9-11 ESV / 4 helpful votes
Understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:15 pm
Brian Dockter: http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/03/7108-public-school-forces-children-to-play-gay-mock-bible-make-humor-of-beastiality/
Public School Forces Children To Play ‘Gay’, Mock Bible, Make Humor of Beastiality
The anti-religious insanity at our public schools can be fascinating to see, kind of like watching a horrible train wreck play out in slow motion. We just heard about a University professor insisted that his class “stomp” on Jesus’ name. Now we learn that, at around the same time a public charter school in South Hadley, Massachusetts, performed a play that promotes homosexuality and mocks the Bible. It must be “mock Christianity week” in the public school curriculum.
Pioneer Valley Performing Arts Charter Public School decided that its 400 students, ranging in age from 12 to 18, would grow as artists if they performed Paul Rudnick’s comedy The Most Fabulous Story Ever Told. In 1998, the play premiered in New York as a pro-gay Biblical spoof, complete with “Adam and Steve and Jane and Mabel” in the Garden of Eden, a horny rhinoceros hitting on men on the Ark, and a Mother Mary arguing that pregnancy is impossible because she’s a bull-dy ke.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:10 pm
Brian Dockter: Kevin wrote:
Of course that is not a surprise stance from someone who also claims that gays are constantly mocking religion.
-Are you saying there aren't gays who are constantly mocking religion? Get your head out of your A$$.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 8:00 pm
Kevin Paglia: And since you endorsed the statement, what sins do "effeminate" men have to confess to? Being to effeminate? Please identify what is TO effeminate for God to accept a man into "the Kingdom of God" without confessing effeminatism?
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 6:27 pm
Kevin Paglia: Nice try. That was YOUR argument. I have never said or quoted an article saying that gays are not welcome in heaven with the exception to quote what YOU had written for the purpose of clarifying what I was reacting to. It was YOUR position that gays are not welcome (sounds like banned to me) in heaven.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 6:16 pm
So be clear: Do you agree with what the site was saying or not because it sure sounds like you agree that gays are automatically banned from Heaven. You seem to be having a split consciousness here. in one post you say/quote from an article saying gays are banned from heaven, then you say they are not.
Why quote an article unless you agree with it?
-I originally went along with you whenn you said the article said gays arre banned from Heaven. I made may case they will not be banned from heaven as long as they confess their sin of homosexuality along with their other sins. then I re-read the article and their was no mention of gays being banned from Heaven. It only said they are not welcome in the kingdom of God. Nevertheless, my position remains the same. So,I'll ask you again. Why do you believe if homosexuals confess their sins, including their homosexuality,they will still be banned from Heaven?
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 5:49 pm
Kevin Paglia: Notice you never answered my question so why should I answer yours?
I guess you DID answer my question by endorsing a website and restating their claim of "It is well known effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God."
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 5:09 pm
Why do you believe if homosexuals confess their sins, including their homosexuality,they will still be banned from Heaven?
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 2:47 pm
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the quote from the link. My understanding has always been one must confess their sins or they will not be granted entrance into the kingdom of Heaven. Now, since homosexuality is a sin it is no diiferent for them. You're taking the quote contrary to,the belief that once must confess their sins in order to be granted entrance into the kingdom of Heaven.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 2:43 pm
Kevin Paglia: So be clear: Do you agree with what the site was saying or not because it sure sounds like you agree that gays are automatically banned from Heaven. You seem to be having a split consciousness here. in one post you say/quote from an article saying gays are banned from heaven, then you say they are not.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 1:24 pm
Regarding your post at 11:55am. They aren't my words. They are from a link. Again, you're usual distortions and misinterpretations. And as far as the site mocking religion?Well, what is your explanation for gays constanty mocking religion yet they want to be bound in the auspices of HOLY MATRIMONY? What part of this is not a double standard?
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 12:38 pm
Check my post yesterday at 8:30am. I provided a link with that sentence in it. No one is saying gays are not agranted entry into the kingdom of God. If that was the case than all other sinners would not be granted entry. Now, depending on how one believes one is granted entry into the kingdom, once you enter the kingdom you are free of your sins.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 12:32 pm
Kevin Paglia: Again, it is YOU who is claiming there is a barbwired coated wall protecting heaven to keep gays out. YOUR own words. " It is well known effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God."
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 11:57 am
Kevin Paglia: Brian, you ae the one saying they won't be welcome by the website you posted and supported... Even though that website MOCKS religion.
Here is what YOU wrote:"The invasion of the Barbarians was seen as punishment for this moral transgression. It is well known effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God."
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 11:55 am
Brian Dockter: Mr. Lucas stated:
Why is those who cry freedom the most want to deny freedom to those because they say they made a bad choice? It boggles the mind.
-And it boggles my mind why those that made the bad choice of wanting to be gay should then complain why they should not be granted the same freedoms and rights as those heterosexual marriages knowing that all they have to do is seek to make amendments in civil unions so they have the same freedoms and rights as those heterosexual marriages so we DON'T have to re-define marriage. Frankly, I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 10:23 am
Brian Dockter: I just can't imagine God allowing gays to frolich in the clouds as they did on Earth. Let alone allow them to identify themselves as being gay.But Kevin has every right to believe that is the reality in Heaven.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 9:26 am
As usual, you like to twist what people say. For you to conclude that gay people will remain gay once they enter the kingdom of God is absurd. You seem to be an educated person. Therefore, I'm a little confused why you would then make such an absurd conclusion that the kingdom of God does not welcome all.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 9:20 am
Kevin Paglia: Brian:
My original post from which the second one was correcting was a rather harsh rebuttal to your claim that God kicks homosexuals to the curb. When you make claims like "It is well known effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God" then you clearly show that there are people you see NO good in even if they are remarkably good people. And when you, as a mere mortal, claim to know WHO God wants in Heaven then you show you WOULD cheer for an outsider like Jesus to be crucified.
Saturday, April 27, 2013, 7:20 am
Since you and I weren't living in those times when Jesus walked the Earth and being privy to the circumstances leading up to his crucifixion, neither of us could make the conclusion we would either be cheering or protesting his crucifixion. Also I, and I'm slmost sure you have many friends who do things you do not condone. But that doesn't keep us from seeing the good in them.
Friday, April 26, 2013, 6:40 pm
Kevin Paglia: "more homosexuals that self-righteous" should read "more homosexuals than self-righteous".
People like brian, who would have been standing in the crowd cheering for Jesus' crucifixion since Jesus hung out with sinners, get me worked up and I forget to proofread.
Friday, April 26, 2013, 11:52 am
Brian Dockter: http://religionpoisons.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/homosexuality-caused-the-fall-of-the-roman-empire/
The Roman colony of Carthage was a paradise for homosexuals and they infected many others. The invasion of the Barbarians was seen as punishment for this moral transgression. It is well known effeminate men and homosexuals have no place in the kingdom of God. Homosexuality was not rife among the Barbarians and this shows God’s justice comes throughout history.
Friday, April 26, 2013, 8:30 am
Brian Dockter: Robert Molle stated:
The fact that sexual orientation is not constant for many individuals, but can change over time suggests that at least part of sexual orientation is actually sexual preference.
-Exactly! This coincides with my theory that people are homosexual because they like it or the culture of the times accepts it. I 've never bought inmto the notion one is born homosexual.
Friday, April 26, 2013, 8:23 am
John Lucas: [thumbup]
Thursday, April 25, 2013, 8:57 pm
Brian Dockter: Ms. Bobin stated:
Tell that to ultra conservtives like Jon Hunt and D ick Cheney - they actually raised their children to be homosexuals?
I'd be willing to bet that even THEY would disagree with that theory.
-Perhaps so. However, I'D be willing to bet THEY would disagree with those in the homosexual community, that being their theory the rampant homosexuality in the Roman Empire had nothing to do with the fall of the empire.
Thursday, April 25, 2013, 7:40 pm
Thomas Heuer: Mr. Molle, Mr. Molle this is now geting so old I can't believe you would actually commiting this to print for public onsumption. You really have to ask yourself WHY WOULD ANYBODY CHOOSE TO BE GAY? If you are going to be he the scape goat for every sexually insecure hetero , be damned for all time by ignorant christians and muslims be threatened by bullies of your very life why on earth would you choose to be gay? And why do christians always want to damn science and find it handy at other times to bolster a lame argument? Are allergies geneticly determined? Is being ignorant geneticly determined?
Thursday, April 25, 2013, 11:39 am
Joanne Bobin: Mr. Molle quoted: "Attempts to find a "gay gene" have never identified any gene or gene product that is actually associated with homosexual orientation..."
If this researcher believes that, then does he also believe the corollary to it, i.e., "attempts to find a "straight gene" have never identified any gene or gene product that is actually associated with HETEROSEXUAL orientation...?"
If Mr. Molle believes that, then he would have to believe that heterosexual and homosexual urges are ONLY attributable to NURTURE, not NATURE.
Tell that to ultra conservtives like Jon Hunt and D ick Cheney - they actually raised their children to be homosexuals?
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 11:39 am
Joanne Bobin: Didn't realize that the gift of genius was defined by the ability to use someone else's words and make it your own by exchanging a single word.
I think the only other person in this forum who believes that is "Mr. Copy & Paste" himself.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 11:29 am
Joanne Bobin: I never go to bed in a bad mood, Mr. Walters. In fact I am rarely in a bad mood.
Reading some of these comments (mentioning no names, of course) in fact elevates my mood tremendously after having a great laugh!
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 11:26 am
John Lucas: The reality is that whether someone chooses to be gay or not is beside the point. The law defines committed couples as a man and a woman. This is the heart of the matter. Committed same sex couples are being discriminated by law. They are not allowed the same rights as heterosexual couples. It is the definition that is the problem. Why is those who cry freedom the most want to deny freedom to those because they say they made a bad choice? It boggles the mind.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 10:47 am
Robert Molle: You choose your sexuality..... You dont get to choose you gender or race.... This is not a civil rights issue. Civil right cover freedoms based on what peple dont get to choose like being a woman and not being denied the right to vote because you have no control over being born a woman or being able to vote as a minority because you didn't get to choose your race. Not twisting the law around your choice to be gay, that is not a civil rights issue because you have sole discretion to make the choice of what your sexuality is. Here is a quote from a genetic researcher for all you "Born this way fans"
The fact that sexual orientation is not constant for many individuals, but can change over time suggests that at least part of sexual orientation is actually sexual preference. Attempts to find a "gay gene" have never identified any gene or gene product that is actually associated with homosexual orientation, with studies failing to confirm early suggestions of linkage of homosexuality to region Xq28 on the X chromosome. The question of genetic influences on sexual orientation has been recently examined using DNA microarray technology, although, the results have largely failed to pinpoint specific genes as a factor in sexual orientation.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 9:52 am
John Lucas: Not so much
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 7:01 am
Too bad Mr. Dockter was so dumbfounded by my genius that he was compelled to simply repeat my words with the lame substitution of "liberal."
-Actually, I was hoping you would notice how lame the sentiment was whether it was speaking of liberals OR conservatives. But you didn't. YOU were dumbfounded by MY genius.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 6:54 am
Ed Walters: Kevin and Thomas: congrads on making it that far, especially with the same woman, it is the same woman-- Right? Perhaps there is someone with more time than myself. Getting away from this anger, I`ll switch gears, date myself as being married to the same woman for over 51 years. Aaaaaaa Joanne, almost time to go to bed and you don`t want to go to bed in a bad mood, I won`t. Pleasant dreams everyone.[wink]
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 9:08 pm
Joanne Bobin: I couldn't have said it better, Mr. Dockter, if I had written those sentences myself.
What? I did write them? Only I was speaking about conservatives.
Time to go back to the clocks - tick tock.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 8:23 pm
Thomas Heuer: Congrats back at you. I'm otta here
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 7:09 pm
Brian Dockter: And so we have the ongoing problem with Liberals like Joanne Bobin and John Lucas THEY want to be respected and not mocked for their religious beliefs, but they have absolutely no problem telling Conservatives they are immoral, indecent, and hate freedom.
And to top it off - they don't even think they are doing that.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 6:59 pm
Kevin Paglia: I agree with you, Thomas.
BTW, Congrats on the 32 years. Wife and I are hitting the 19 year mark this year.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 2:44 pm
Thomas Heuer: Kevin in response to your 8:57 post which is to far down now in this vacated thread.I've learned that the greatest boost in my life, or anyones life, whether exercising or working is the power of a change in attitude. Change your attitude and change your life. Often thats what religion does for people but they've been convinced by others that it came from outside of them rather than their own mind. Promise bored or cranky kids an ice cream and you see the immediate attitude change. Read a good book, watch a great movie or play and you get the attitude chnge. Now as adults you don't need the external stimulus to have the eperience but many people feel they need the external to have the boost in performance or personal highs. Much like the dependence we have with drugs, alcohol entertainment (yes and cable news) are quick boosts. When there were no other distractions in times past (before TVs) church was the boost but it is fading. Its all about story telling from the old street story teller in ancient Babylon to the priests and pastors in the pulpits (also politicians) its been about the attitude changing power of stories.
The churches are loosing the power to change attitudes against the ever changing stories and characters on stage and all screens. The church tries to create happy stories but from ancient gloomy mediteranian sources like the bible or koran, etc. And those stories have been recycled ad infinitum for over 3000 years. They were written to serve a purpose for them that has little relvance today despite the churches efforts to continually revive relavance. They are simply old stories that tell people there is something wrong with them and to fix things is like saying exercise and diet are your only way out. Downer.
The church often sees science as an enemy but it is only through science that churches can find newness and relavance. The churches real failing is from the competing stories of modern media that are capturing peoples attention. Even more telling is the fact that "reality" TV has become so popular. Whats going to happen on "Survivor", "The Great Race", "American Idol", "Pawn Stars", etc? They reinforce the idea that there are nobody but us shadow casters making our way through life. We make it by our own efforts and the most successful are those that can change their own attitude positively. If you can't come up with the way to make yourself buck up and think affirmatively you will be a loser no matter how much time you spend in the pews.
BTW I met my wife out of the clear blue when I wasn't looking and wasn't really sure when I met her (being a happy batchelor) but eventually I was drawn to her and decided I wanted her in my life. That was over 32 years ago and it was the most important good decision in my life as well.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 2:20 pm
Kevin Paglia: Actually my proposed actions are all in the NASA playbook for WHEN they find that one asteroid with our name on it. It is called a gravitational Tractor. Ok. The Mag-Ion drive is a theoretical engine system but uses sound science. The last part with the tow cables would only work with a solid mass asteroid and not a rubble mass. I guess I could have mentioned the solar parachute that NASA has looked at or landing rockets on the surface to use thrusters in direct contact to slow/push the asteroid. NONE of NASA's plans include sending Bruce willis to the surface to blow it up.
Here is more info on the gravity tractor idea.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 1:24 pm
Ed Walters: Perhaps Kevin helped Walter consume a case of Chang beer for coming up with that out of this world idea of roping an asteroid. Asteroids come in all sizes and the one that will hit the earth might be thousands of light years away. The protective zone that encompasses the earth helps keep the little ones away, however when asteroidzilla has a direct bearing on mother earth, sticking your head in the sand won`t work. However sticking your head in your rectum and kissing the earth good-bye might. Will I get bounced for this comment, I`ll know in a few minutes.[wink]
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 11:51 am
John Lucas: My experience is that it happens all the time. People and things come into my life all the time just when I need them. It amazes me how the universe seems to be at my beck and call. It has happened so often in my life that is seems like a normal occurrence but it is truly against the odds.It may be because I am open to it.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 6:27 am
Doug Chaney: What is "devine" intervention? LOL
Monday, April 22, 2013, 10:00 pm
Thomas Heuer: Ah Walter late again but always welcome.Either you were resting from your weekend posting or enjoying the wonderful weather with a case of Chang beer. Its been hard posting during daylight with such fine weather. But as evening prevails and cooler temperaturs zap the last remaining heat lets once more to the breach and... oh forget it. Have a beer.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:06 pm
Kevin Paglia: "I realized the only voices I heard were my own and only those who can cast a shadow."
Twice in my life, related to the same event but separated by two years, I distinctly "heard" voices outside of me, guiding me. Ever have a spotter in the gym encouraging you to lift when you were to tired to and they are right there behind you screaming "UP!" and you do it just because of the voice? That was what I experienced, twice. And they lead to the greatest blessing in my life, my wife.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:57 pm
Kevin Paglia: Already have the asteroid problem figured out. Using a Magnetic Ion system on heavy mass (lead should work well) Move within range of the asteroid and use a combination of gravitational forces (mass of the lead), magnetic attraction and even tow lines the threatening asteroid can be moved to a safer orbit, preferable missing above or below our orbit plane.
I have a lot of time to build such things (in my head) on my long bike rides.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:50 pm
Ed Walters: Mr. Chang: You said it best, what a mess. Time to regroup and get ready for another days worth of going now where in a hurry. [smile]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:23 pm
John Lucas: [smile]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:11 pm
Walter Chang: Wow, what a mess.
Soapbox speeches, biting critique, hurt feelings, tacit warnings, inappropriate mocking...
Standard operating procedure (SOP) and its just another day at the LNS online comments section.
Rest up folks, a new batch of mean spirited letters is coming tomorrow!!
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:01 pm
John Lucas: Ed you might look at three first letters in assuming. That is what makes of oneself when makes an assumption. I put in 100 weeks for months at a time for decades of my life and have never worked a job that was only 40 hour a week. Be careful getting off your high horse. As to my spiritual beliefs they are nobodies business but my own but I think anyone who thinks we are the smartest thing in the universe is a fool. Even if there is nothing else I will still go to my grave grateful for this beautiful thing called life. How could I not?
Monday, April 22, 2013, 7:36 pm
Ed Walters: Kevin: Since we are on a first name basis, I told myself, self I am not going to get involved with this post. Well I did, and here is one thing that is proof positive, somewhere in the cosmos there are billions of asteroid and one with the earths name on it, and as sure as the sun will rise in the morning, that asteroid will hit the earth, not sure when but it will. Just like the one that hit in a remote part of Russia a few months ago and took out the dinosaurs millions of years ago. So Kevin, I would suggest you work on a plan to save the earth and please include me in that plan, I am not a bad person, just don`t see what you see. Well enough of this, I`m all for letting people believe in what they want, I`m just stating my point of view. Politics and religion are similar to whiskey and water. One is for sippin and one is for fighting over. Mark Twain.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 5:59 pm
Thomas Heuer: My last post is to Kevins earlier (yesterday) comment in particular. I usually respect Kevins comments even though I don't always agree with him. In this case I disagree with his claim "...here is my position: The federal, man made government should reflect the desires of the people, not enforce the ideals of those elected. This means that same sex marriage should be allowed for federal purposes."
We are so close to agreeing here. That is exacly how government should work. We are witnessing the implementation of the peoples will to approve gay marriage. However that approval does not infringe on 1st amendment rights You say "
BUT for me to support the action, religious organizations who see the behavior as wrong should NOT be forced recognize, endorse it (Protect religious organizations from discrimination lawsuits on the grounds of religious freedom)."
What your church does as a church is protected as religious freedom. Now where I think you may be headed is where your church and secular society meets is a grey area as in the birth control issue of secular employees of church business serving the broad public not just the smaller religious community. But they ALL have religious freedoms as well. As I said if your church is taking government dollars those dollars are not heavenly manna.
And finally as a former christian (and believer) I must disagrtee with your
"...Taking action based on faith, defending that faith and belief will NEVER make logical sense to non-believers." So after years of unanswered prayers, being a witness to the misery of the world which didn't make "LOGICAL SENSE" I realized the only voices I heard were my own and only those who can cast a shadow. If they don't cast a shadow then there is no one else there.
PS I rode a motorcycle and after some friends and aquaintences were badly injured and I realized its not a matter of "if" you get into an accident but "when" you get into an accident that I got both sides. It was kind of like smoking. Yeah you had to do it to understand it (and I did) but when I became a born-again non smoker I can't talk against smoking enough.
So now I liken faith to smoking. You're free do do so but don't blow it in my direction. I've seen too many hurt by it including the LGBT community. I enjoy the buddhists more.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 4:06 pm
Kevin Paglia: "Devine Intervention, another fable for weak people"
I can understand how someone who refuses to accept the POSSIBILITY would think so. But for people have experienced it, it is NOT a fable but part of who we are.
Oh, and it takes a lot of strength to open up publically about one's faith when there are people like Ed who will call you WEAK for doing so and mock your life's experiences.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 4:02 pm
Ed Walters: Mr. Lucas: Since you don`t work 16 hours a day and most likely never did, and even if you did, who would you repay for this beautiful life. There is only one thing I believe in and that is the miracle of birth as I saw my kids, grandkids and now my great grand daughter being born. Everything else can take a back seat. The idea of my grand daughter and her husband conceiving a beautiful baby girl makes me glad I am what I am. You live everyday with a sense of gratitude, just remember to pay your taxes to make that sense of gratitude continue. Test your memory, do you know what Jessie said that made him a one term Governor ? Hint, he stated that church was a crutch.
Devine Intervention, another fable for weak people. If God were to show his disapproval , humans would have been gone right after the fable of Adam and Eve flopped. A talking snake and an apple, let the fables continue. Bible people believe the earth is only 6,000 years old. How about 6 billion since there is proof of that.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 3:44 pm
Kevin Paglia: Thomas: I have had divine intervention in my life. I wrote the experiences (personal prophecies so to speak) for two years and had them come true. I have had overwhelming evidence throughout my life that angels and demons exist, felt God acting (or commanding angels to act) in my life including how I came to be and how I met my wife.
But NONE of that is worth anything to people who reject "God" because they reject any personal evidence. I have shared the story before, here on the LNS pages, and non-believers always say the same thing, "it was all in your head". That is fine, that is YOUR choice to reject a common man's experiences with the spiritual world. MY choice is to always look to that which created the universe and everything in it, that which has directly interceded into my life. And I choose to attempt to represent "God" as best I can, despite being a creation with failings. In a news story on the new Pope I read one commenters words stating that he couldn't believe in a "god" that created us to be imperfect and punish us for those faults by casting us out of Heaven. Truth is we CHOOSE our fate. It is the ability to choose evil like the Boston bombers did, or choose good like the rescuers did. We CHOOSE to believe and be in God's presence, or choose to not believe and remove OURSELVES from God's presence.
Ok. I'm off the pulpit now.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 3:17 pm
Kevin Paglia: "Since I got nothing from the time I was forced to go I saw no reason to continue."
Very recently a priest at St Anne's did a homily on this mentality. On how many people go to church looking for "what they can get out of it". His message: you get out what you put in. If someone is "forced" to go then of course they won't get anything out of a church service. When I was young I went because that was where I wanted to be, and I got A LOT out of being there.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 3:04 pm
K Lee: Thank you so much, Thomas! [beam]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 3:00 pm
Thomas Heuer: As I said earlier I wish that someone could point out any time a prayer was answered or that any god showed approval or disapproval for acts of people (other than bibical claims) that can't also be explained as coincidence. For thousands of years it has been told that god(s) will show disapproval if certain things occur (or don't occur) yet you can never rely on anything of the sort to happen. Only other people say god will show his disaproval over some infraction. But people want to not only plan their lives around the absent dieties they want to control the lives of other based on this "devine intervention" myth. That is what Mr Luxcas is saying earlier to Jerome controling other not by himself but collectivly with other like minded. It is really sad. And they lament they will lose this fictional relationship if gay marriage is approved. Its pathetic. Nobody is going to take away heterosexual marriage. No body is going to take away a churches right to hold their beliefs. However if they want to accept that dirty secular money from the government then they need to be fair with ALL the tax payers who made the money possible. Chris Christie did a 180 when he needed the dollars in NJ for Sandy. Now the staunch anti government Texas governor is singing the praises of government lucor for his fertiizer disaster. Conservatives. Got a love em or... Whatever the later is I'll take it.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 2:58 pm
John Lucas: Ed saidEverything I have I worked for, nobody gave me anything as I believe in myself and what I can do as an individual.
That is the difference between you and I. I know that even if I worked 16 hours a day every single day there is nothing I can do to repay for this beautiful thing called life. That is why I live everyday with a sense of gratitude.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 2:37 pm
Thomas Heuer: Ms K Lee it is so refreshing to see your name grace these pages agian.[beam]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 2:32 pm
John Lucas: I stad by what I said
Monday, April 22, 2013, 2:17 pm
Monday, April 22, 2013, 2:15 pm
John Lucas: So true. Nail hit head [smile]
Ed Walters: I will agree with Kim, my mother and father thought it would be a good for me to go to church, I disagree with them then, and even though they are gone I still disagree now. Since I got nothing from the time I was forced to go I saw no reason to continue. My mother and father were all I needed to teach me right from wrong. The right thing to do, get off the railroad tracks as a train approaches was common sense, and can`t be taught. I have never been in the back of a police car and was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps. Everything I have I worked for, nobody gave me anything as I believe in myself and what I can do as an individual. Since I don`t need Preacher Nolton nor Billy Van Fields telling me I am on the wrong path, I will leave it go. However, I can recall what the one term Governor of Minnesota Jessie Ventura said about church, can you, and most likely the reason he wasn`t re elected, however was he wrong???
Monday, April 22, 2013, 1:17 pm
Joanne Bobin: Mr. Kinderman wrote: "This is where liberals/progressives part ways with most freedom-loving Americans.
A cursory review of what's gone on here provides an excellent sample of where we are now as a nation." (Presumably, according to Mr. K., on the highway to h ell).
Here we go again with charges that liberals "are not freedom-loving." Can't get any freer or liberal than the ACLU, which you most likely despise, Mr. Kinderman, as a far left wing institution.
Another gem from Mr. K. - Conservative women are the only "decent" women - ostensibly because they don't support birth control and abortion and certainly wouldn't go out partying the day after an abortion and get pregnant again as liberal women do (Ask him - he actually said words to this effect).
That is the problem with conservatives like Jerome Kinderman and Brian Dockter - THEY want to be respected and not mocked for their religious beliefs, but they have absolutely no problem telling liberals that they are immoral, indecent, and hate freedom.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 12:29 pm
Jerome Kinderman: “Force?” How can I force anything on anyone? You give me way too much power Mr. Lucas. Of course I do have my vote - but that’s just ONE vote. But using your argument, isn’t the homosexual community trying to “force” their agenda by making what they want “the law of the land?” They’re entitled, but I’m not?
This is what we’re supposed to do, Mr. Lucas - as American citizens, along with our one vote we do have other means to get our ideas and opinions across to others – the Lodi News-Sentinel is just one. Now if those who read what I put forth and don’t do their own homework to ensure that what I’m espousing is factual and/or against what they “believe” to be true, how in the world can I be blamed for that? In point of fact, I don’t want anyone to simply take my word for anything; I want them to figure things out for themselves.
The difference between you and me appears to be in the manner we try to influence others to believe as we do. Or are you really suggesting that I have no right to attempt others to believe as I do? Because if you do, I suggest you take a Civics 101 class at a local community college or maybe online. Furthermore, I have never told anyone here to “shut up” or even “back off,” but there have been quite a few who disagree with me who have. Generally I ignore them because to engage in an argument would be futile.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 12:06 pm
K Lee: Ugh... I need coffee! [yawn]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:37 am
John Lucas: The problem is not what you believe but the fact that you try to force those beliefs on others by making it the law of the land.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:34 am
K Lee: Excellent!
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:29 am
K Lee: Oh... You're talking to Kim Hester. LOL! [rolleyes]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:27 am
K Lee: H...e...l...l...o... ???
Are you okay?
I have not posted the words/comments that you just attributed to me. Stop making things up, again!
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:23 am
K Lee: Evidently.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:21 am
K Lee: Hello?
Anybody home over there?
I have not posted the words/comments that you just attributed to me. Stop making things up.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:20 am
Kim Hester: Very well said!!!
Monday, April 22, 2013, 11:05 am
K Lee: LOL!
Jerome Kinderman: Mr. Dockter - While I applaud most of your efforts, you do have to understand and ultimately accept that each one of us must be free to choose what to believe. Whether it's based upon our faith, rumor, popular culture, the news or whatever - this is one of the things that makes this country great. On the other hand, so long as we're respectful of one another, there should be nothing wrong with offering a different opinion. This is where liberals/progressives part ways with most freedom-loving Americans. A cursory review of what's gone on here provides an excellent sample of where we are now as a nation.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:48 am
Kim Hester: Some of us have school and work to attend to, so I'm going to leave you with some "food for thought" that you so dearly need.http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=hlVBg7_08n0&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhlVBg7_08n0
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:27 am
John Lucas: [smile] perfect
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:22 am
Thomas Heuer: Kim I like your style[smile]
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:19 am
Thomas Heuer: Brian stated"If it wasn't for religion, humans would still not be able to differentiate or know what is moral and what isn't." Where on earth do you get this? Which religion are you refering to? Morals were around before religion. People learned morals from their mothers and fathers and friends. It was lifes experiences that said this is aceptable and this is not. It was a harsh world that clued us into good and bad. Philosophers discussed morals and ethics all over the world till they could write them down. Religion offered people dreams and opportunities of escape from a chaotic and often cruel world to places of moral existence like nirvana, temples and heavens. But the idea that there was a price to pay here to get that idilic life made religions as bad as the world they wished to escape. Aztecs had lots of religion but it included the idea of human sacrifices. Religion made you believe there was an unseen controller of favorable opportunity on earth and certain obligations (sacrifices, life or money or goods) and homage to the nether world provided a world of peace. Stray from these obligations meant a penance was due or a catastrophic event would bring ruin to you and /or your neighbors. Later as people alized that rewards were not consistent and If all the rules were obeyed catastrophy still would occur so an ingenious idea came that said never mind its not on earth what matters its in another world after you die. Well now so when I pray for crops and give offerings it may or may not give me the crops I want (as I hoped in the old days) but it is now an investment in the next life regardless. And thats how most see religion simply as a life insurance that the hoped for earthly utopian dreams may be realized upon eath. Hey better safe than sorry they say.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:18 am
Kim Hester: They absolutely did not. I went to church on my own terms and decided after two years my own thoughts and opinions. They obviously chose the right way to raise me I would hate to have ended up being someone with opinions such as yours.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:15 am
Brian Dockter: Kim stated:
Dear Brian,I was raised with morals and taught right from wrong with absolutely no religious affiliation and I am just fine. Thank you for your input though.
-I highly doubt Kim's parents never thought of what the Bible said or some other religious text when determining what was right and wrong.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 9:06 am
Brian Dockter: Kim,
FYI, I don't read the Bible very often.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:56 am
You are right it is a privilege not a right yet we let ignorant people like yourself marry and not those homosexuals who spread nothing but love.
-To assert that only heterosexuals are ignorant is quite a bold statement. Though I'm not homosexual I feel comfortable asserting there are many homosexuals who believeignorance is present in all humans. and, I grow tired of people like Kim who suggest homosexuals have done nothing wrong and it's all the heterosexual's and the religious's fault. Ah, the victim card strikes again.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:53 am
Kim Hester: Created 35 hundred years ago.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:24 am
Brian Dockter: I suppose, according to Mr, Lucas's assertion, we could use the level of committment Cal and Bob have in their relationship as a template to lower the divorce rate. However,marriage is still a priviledge, not a right. It's rather simple to qualify to marry. One must be a man. One must be a woman. Now, we still have civil unions. Homosexuals have this right with just about all of the benefits and rights of a marriage. It seems quite clear to me that redefining marriage is not necessary. Granting homosexuals all of the benefits and rights as marriage by making amendments to civil unions takes care of the problem. But, not according to those whose agenda is redefining marriage when it's not necessary. Of course they don't see their selfishness. And they also don't see how redefining marriage opens the door to other redefinitions of marriage.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:07 am
Kim Hester: Dear Brian,I was raised with morals and taught right from wrong with absolutely no religious affiliation and I am just fine. Thank you for your input though.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:01 am
John Lucas: I completely agree with you.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 7:25 am
Kevin Paglia: John: Unfortunately, as I have learned and relearned over and over, when it comes to addressing matters of faith to those who vary not accepting to outright mocking our faith walking away is the ONLY sensible action. Taking action based on faith, defending that faith and belief will NEVER make logical sense to non-believers. There is Motorcyclist saying "If you don't ride, you don't get it". The same is true when it comes to defending something like faith. Those who don't believe will never "get it".
Back on subject here is my position: The federal, man made government should reflect the desires of the people, not enforce the ideals of those elected. This means that same sex marriage should be allowed for federal purposes. BUT for me to support the action, religious organizations who see the behavior as wrong should NOT be forced recognize, endorse it (Protect religious organizations from discrimination lawsuits on the grounds of religious freedom). In today's lawsuit happy society this would have to be part of the law, in my opinion.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 7:10 am
John Lucas: As usual you miss the point. I have a very close friend who was in a committed relationship with a person of the same sex for over 25 years. When his partner died I witnessed the pain and anguish my friend went through. The question is not what any of us think about homosexuality. The question is whether my friend who was clearly in a committed personally relationship should have the same rights under the law as legally married couples today. It is just that simple. You, Jerome, Pastor Nolton and others think that they do not deserve those rights on religious grounds and the insane belief that it somehow badly reflects on heterosexual marriages. The truth is that if all married couples brought the level of commitment to their relationship as Cal and Bob did the divorce rate in this country would be close to zero. I have seen the pain and anguish your bigotry causes among people who I care about and you should be ashamed but you are blind to your insanity.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 6:28 am
John Lucas: Yes religion was so moral when it was used to burn people at the stake, its use of torture, the wars in which millions have died, having pedophile priests and covering up for them, it's destroying of civilizations that had the audacity to differ with them etc . Religious history is an apt description of what hell would be like.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 6:01 am
John Lucas: I would have to disagree. When you look at the likes of Joanne, Tom, Eric, Jeff etc you find people who articulate their ideas well, have their facts straight, and are willing to engage in open and honest debate. However I do stand my claim that the right wing fanatics on these pages such as yourself give Conservatives a bad name. William Buckley is rolling over in his grave because of what the right wing fanatics have done to the Republican party.
Monday, April 22, 2013, 5:54 am
Brian Dockter: John Lucas Posted:
I have noticed that too. Jerome when confronted with an argument he cannot deal with retreats to his cave but not before one attack. example:
What a pathetic display of Lodi's liberal/progressive representatives.
It used to be sort of funny but it has lost its flavor with the repetition.
-Indeed it is the vast majority of Liberals who post here give Liberalism a bad name.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 11:15 pm
A little food for thought for you:
If it wasn't for religion, humans would still not be able to differentiate or know what is moral and what isn't. And, YOU should be ashamed of yourself for even suggesting Jesus would go against his Father. You people are really reaching. AND, how is it disgusting that I believe Jesus would not go against his Father on an issue like this?
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 11:05 pm
John Lucas: Brian, if you believe that it is only proof that you live in a fantasy world.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 9:25 pm
John Lucas: Sorry Samantha, I thought I mistook you for Pat Maple
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 9:23 pm
Brian Dockter: Mr Lucas stated:
I am so glad you and Pastor Nolton have the absolute lowdown on God's thinking.
-It doesn't have anything to do with what God thinks Mr. L.. Frankly, only an imbecile would speculate that the son of God would think Homosexuality is no longer immoral.Oh sure, Jesus brought us a new covenant. Then why didn't he flip flop on other things that are still considered immoral today? The fact remains, he didn't say yay or nay on the issue of homosexuality. so, common sense should dictate he followed in the footsteps of his Father. But there will always be those believing otherwise he most assuredly must have betrayed his Father in order to keep the peace with the homosexuals.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:41 pm
Kim Hester: This is by far the most ignorant and disgusting post that has ever come from Lodi. You all should be ashamed for your close minded thoughts. Love comes in all forms and comparing a relationship of same gender to one between siblings is absolutely ridiculous! That is not even close to being a logical comparison. It is the 21st century welcome to the new generation where love is more than just between a man and woman. Close your bible and open your eyes before you make more ignorant posts.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:28 pm
Brian Dockter: Jerome Kinderman,
Thank you for your words of wisdom.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:15 pm
Brian Dockter: Mr. Lucas,
Jerome when you come off as some latter day Moses with a direct phone line to the Almighty you can expect to be mocked. It comes with the territory.
-Hmm, Only those who are intimidated by Jerome's wisdom and observations would say such a thing.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:08 pm
Jeff Tillett: He. I believe Sam is Samantha...
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 7:33 pm
Jeff Tillett: Way to finally take Jerome to task!
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 7:32 pm
Brian Dockter: Mr Lucas, that is.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 7:09 pm
Brian Dockter: That is your opinion and you can believe what you want. Who in your life is going to tell you what they think? The fact is that you are a man consumed with his own importance and have a need to feel better than others. Another way of saying it is that you are a self righteous blowhard who could That is your opinion and you can believe what you want. Who in your life is going to tell you what they think? The fact is that you are a man consumed with his own importance and have a need to feel better than others. Another way of saying it is that you are a self righteous blowhard who wants me to believe you have read and learned from the works by various American Indian writers, shamans and philosophers. I will not hold my breath.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 7:08 pm
John Lucas: They are not into Jesus. They are into the Old Testament and Paul.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 6:29 pm
John Lucas: You might not just quote her, you might try doing what she says. :)
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 6:27 pm
Sam Heller: Well said K [beam]
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 5:22 pm
Sam Heller: [thumbup]
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 5:21 pm
Sam Heller: Oh I need to quote my Spouse here ... "Clean up your own back yard before you come into mine."
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 5:20 pm
Sam Heller: Pastor Frank, I have been married to the love my life for 40 years. Why should your religious beliefs matter to our marriage? You do not have a monopoly on marital beliefs. As for the other so called "religious" bloggers who have been divorced once or twice ... or have had pre-martial sex ... or use ungodly birth control ... really? You are in a place to judge others? You are far from Christ like.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 5:16 pm
K Lee: Eric Barrow wrote, "I could be wrong but I have not heard of Christians not being allowed to remarry and I'm assuming they are marrying in there own churches? Were is the outrage."
Eric: Well said. This has always been a very good point.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 1:15 pm
K Lee: Jerome Kinderman insisted, "When others insist (demand) that they be tolerated, accepted and even embraced for who and what they are yet refuse to provide the same in return, they're only revealing how petty and juvenile they really are."
Jerome: Please re-read what you posted here and take note in how it indeed pertains to you.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 1:12 pm
K Lee: I can't imagine that anyone would be interested in listening to this sort of thing every Sunday at this church.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 1:07 pm
John Lucas: I like Matt 7:5 better
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 12:54 pm
John Kindseth: Take your guidance re bloggers from Matt 7:6.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 11:23 am
John Lucas: I think you actually believe what you said. Amazing
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 11:02 am
John Lucas: I have noticed that too. Jerome when confronted with an argument he cannot deal with retreats to his cave but not before one attack. example:
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:52 am
Jerome Kinderman: I've read this before from other liberals/progressives that some here "deserve to be mocked." In fact, no one ever "deserves" to be treated in such a way. At least not as far as I'm concerned and because it’s contrary to the Posted Rules of this forum. Never have I treated anyone like this even when the discussion gets out of hand as it is now. Do homosexuals deserve to be mocked, disparaged and ridiculed? No they don't - and I've never referred to them in such a way. All I have ever attempted to do is intelligently and maturely discuss our differences of opinion regarding same-sex marriage and how it relates to my own personal faith in God. Of course I understand (and accept) that there are those who do not believe in any higher being, but do I treat them with disdain? Of course not.
If I'm retreating from this so-called debate, I don't do so because of a lack of a defense or affirmative facts; I retreat because when participants behave in the manner displayed on this forum, there is no debate - only sophomoric name-calling and utterances of intolerance and disrespect. So I have to ask myself what's the point? There is no point. Further attempts to engage in rational discussion are now futile - so it's indeed time to move on.
Thanks Mr. Maple for your comments.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:45 am
Rick Houdack: Unable to defend, retreat is the only option left to the theocrats in the discussion.
"Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense." -Chapman Cohen
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:21 am
Patrick W Maple: JK: This is the typical carp that the Liberals spread...hoping to grow discontent with their refuse and tears. Someone with morals, convictions, faith and beliefs are mocked and often ridiculed...so what...it is the strong who survive the debate. Thank you for who you are.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 9:40 am
robert maurer: If there is good and decency in us, it has to come from somewhere? Where? Mr. Kinderman left us 5 clues on this thread. One thing that nobody mentioned:AIDS! Who pays for this? the unsuspecting victims and the taxpayer for their lifetime medical bills.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 9:39 am
John Lucas: Jerome when you come off as some latter day Moses with a direct phone line to the Almighty you can expect to be mocked. It comes with the territory.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:51 am
Jerome Kinderman: When outright mocking and disrespect take the place of intelligent and respectful debate, it's time to move along. When others insist (demand) that they be tolerated, accepted and even embraced for who and what they are yet refuse to provide the same in return, they're only revealing how petty and juvenile they really are. What a pathetic display of Lodi's liberal/progressive representatives.
Sunday, April 21, 2013, 8:38 am
Ed Walters: Mr. Kinderman: I fail to see where "you have the right to remain silent", along with if "you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you" is relevant to Romans and John, perhaps I have been watching Cops too long, never the less Miranda rules the land. Sounds like your making apples and oranges to me when attempting to show Romans 3: 23-24 along with John 14:6 can in some way come close to the rights read to everyone that will be put under arrest. You need not read the Bible to talk you way out of trouble, try that by not being read your Miranda rights, case closed.[wink]
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 10:41 pm
Walter Chang: Or...
Was that a slam at the Buddhist??
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 9:05 pm
Walter Chang: Good job.
Clearly one can be gay, married, Episcopalian and go to heaven.
Jesus is the ticket.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 8:56 pm
Jerome Kinderman: Mr. Walters - there is a "Miranda Rights" warning from God – it’s found in the Bible where it states: “. . . for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. But they are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:23-24) and “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 8:37 pm
Ed Walters: Perhaps if Jesus read everyone their Miranda Rights the troubles of the world would have never taken place. Straight or other wise does it really matter, a ruling, if there is one will come from the Supremes by a 5-4 vote and the country will have to live by that ruling, same as Roe v Wade. No one will ever be happy, perhaps that's the way human civilization was meant to be. Just look at the posts and tell me I`m wrong.[sad]
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 8:12 pm
Joanne Bobin: Am I correct in interpreting that first sentence correctly, i.e., "my FIRST wife?"
Maybe we can work out same-sex marriage via "exchanges."
For every failed opposite sex Christian marriage, they can allow one same-sex marriage.
No doubt there will be an abundance of the former - plenty to cover the latter.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 8:02 pm
Walter Chang: "it’s the behavior (the sin) that has them wondering where I might fit within the Church"
Somebody's in denial?? Just recently, here in the LNS, a couple of local churches openly invited homosexuals into their fold.
"Clearly I could never teach a Sunday School class about keeping a marriage alive and healthy"
Yeah! Don't know anything about guns or Christmas parades either but that doesn't keep you quiet.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 7:10 pm
Walter Chang: "perhaps my first wife and I... work it out before being granted a divorce... been able to succeed"
Not a chance for a stubborn uncompromising man!
"However, the subject before the Supreme Court at this time..."
They'll settle it shortly. You'll get upset. You'll blog about your displeasure with the high court. It will be very therapeutic.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 7:09 pm
Eric Barrow: See that's what I.m talking about I had no idea that Christians were worried about divorce. I'm very well informed about there objection to gay marriage but that's the first I've heard they were "very concerned" about divorce. It states in the Old Testament, same book that denounces homosexuality, that a man should not marry a divorcee, actually what it says is that he should only marry a virgin but that's a whole different debate. I could be wrong but I have not heard of Christians not being allowed to remarry and I'm assuming they are marrying in there own churches? Were is the outrage.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 7:02 pm
Jerome Kinderman: Christians ARE very concerned about the high rate of divorce in this country. As a divorced Christian myself there is concerned about men and women like me. But just like homosexuals, it’s the behavior (the sin) that has them wondering where I might fit within the Church. Clearly I could never teach a Sunday School class about keeping a marriage alive and healthy - and I would never expect to be a pastor. But since I’ve already decided that I will never again divorce another wife, I’ve also decided that in order to be successful in this regard I’ve modified my social life that literally guarantees I will never sin like that again.
Of course when it comes to the actual process of obtaining a divorce, it’s never been easier to get one. In California all one need do is file the appropriate paperwork citing “irreconcilable differences,” provide the proper fee and then within a few months the marriage is over. Without revealing any other information regarding my own personal situation regarding my failures in this regard, I have to wonder if perhaps my first wife and I had been challenged more to work it out before being granted a divorce, we might have been able to succeed. In short, let’s make it harder to dissolve marriages.
However, the subject before the Supreme Court at this time isn’t Christian marriage, it’s the definition of “marriage” that’s being challenged. Anyone is permitted to write a letter to the editor of this or any other newspaper to voice their concern about divorce - I’m sure they’ll print one of yours Mr. Barrow. In fact, I’ll look forward to it soon.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 6:08 pm
robert maurer: When was that updated from dial-a-prayer?[smile]
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 5:43 pm
robert maurer: The Last Supper?[smile]
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 5:40 pm
Walter Chang: "direct line to God"
"Hello, Levite priest from antiquity, because your call is important to us..."
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 4:59 pm
Thomas Heuer: Mr Johansonwrote "I noticed the worn-out argument that says since Jesus never condemned — or even mentioned — homosexuality, He must approve of it. This is a straw-man argument." Yet he posts "Gay marriage is all about societal acceptance. If it is legalized, it sets a precedence that opens the door for an "everything goes" definition of marriage." He refers to his worn-out "straw man" argument that this slippery slope leads to pedophilia or bestiality. Gay marriage is simply two adults "CONSENTING" to a relatonship they as human beings on this earth wish to mutually have. There is no mutual consent relationships in pedophilia nor with animals. To further stray from reality the subject of incest is added when there is no known group advocating these genetically problematic relaions.
It never ceases to amaze me that a bunch of old guys want so desperatly to pass legislation fostering their preferences when the upcoming generation (who will have to live with these laws) could care less and are happy to let people live their lives as they see fit.
I wish that someone could point out any time a prayer was answered or that any god showed approval or disapproval for acts of people (other than bibical claims) that can't also be coincidence. For thousands of years it has been told that god will show disapproval if certain things occur yet you can never rely on anything of the sort to happen. But people want to not only plan their lives as well as the lives of others based on this "devine intervention" myth. It is really sad. And they lament they will lose this fictional relationship if gay marriage is approved. It pathetic.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 4:54 pm
Walter Chang: Correction: Pastor Frank's last name is Nolton not Nolan. Thanks
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 4:41 pm
Walter Chang: Folks, help Pastor Frank out. He's trying to fill seats.
Do you detest gays and lesbians?
Check out New Hope Community Church - http://newhopelodi.org/
Are you adamantly against gay marriage and equality??
Pastor Frank Nolan is your man!
Come on by Sunday morning and check it out. He's located in a small business park at 330 South Fairmont Avenue, Suite #1.
Uncompromising theologically conservative (think Jerry) sermons are his specialty.
Judging by the picnic photos it looks like a fine group of followers in attendance.
The main service is at 10:30 am. Bring a seat cushion and give generously.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 4:31 pm
Walter Chang: Regarding picnic photos: Well fed or misled?
Eric Barrow: Forget homosexuality and gay marriage why aren't the Christians screaming about an over 50% divorce rate. It appears it's talked about in the old testament Jesus preached against it. So where are all the LNS letters claiming we are headed for destruction as a society ( I mean if Obama doesn't destroy us first.). Maybe the LNS should put a forum of local spiritual leaders together and see if we can eradicate this scourge. Seems Christians are kinda selective with their sins.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 4:10 pm
John Lucas: Joanne you forget that Jerome has a direct line to God which the rest of are not privy to.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 3:12 pm
Rick Houdack: People are obviously able to hold any outlandish belief they want; Liebich and Hutchins and their fellow conspiracy fans are free to gather their tin-foil hat support group and worry about jet con-trails raining death upon them, they can whisper about the insidious real reasons fluoride is added to toothpaste and compare ideas on what the utility company's smart meters are reporting.
Hebacker, Van Amber Fields, Kinderman and the rest are free to preach their fire and brimstone nonsense. In pre-internet days these unfortunate men would have been found yelling on street corners, wearing "REPENT!" sandwich signs, scaring children and sane adults alike.
They are able to believe whatever notions they want, but not every crackpot theory deserves respect; everyone else is equally free to voice their disagreement with the tin-foil hat cranks.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 2:56 pm
Joanne Bobin: "Sadly, it appears that that “road” is precisely where the majority of this once-decent society desires to travel."
A society that believed that owning another human being was OK?
A society where said "owners" of other human beings could commit sexual acts on them without their consent?
A society that condoned/ignored white people who lynched black people?
A society that believed that whites were superior to other races and made special rules to exclude other races from participating in said society?
ON AND ON AND ON.
A "ONCE-DECENT SOCIETY?"
Who is Mr. Kinderman kidding here?
Must be tunnel vision to a minute segment of societal rules that once made sodomy, either committed by heterosexuals or homosexuals, a crime.
Must be tunnel vision to laws that put homosexuals in PRISON.
Must be tunnel vision to deny that a society that believed that whites were superior to other races and made special rules to exclude other races from participating in said society.
Marriage is a civil institution, not a religious one. If it were a religious institution, one would go to their respective churches to have one dissolved.
Where did Mr. Kinderman go to dissolve his? Not his local pastor, I'm sure.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 2:32 pm
Jerome Kinderman: Now as for those who errantly believe that according to what we believe we have no right or standing to desire legislation be passed and enacted that would follow our line of thinking and beliefs, they’re simply wrong. So long as the legislation is deemed to be Constitutional, we’re on solid ground.
Shortly, the U.S. Supreme Court will render their opinion on two matters having to do with the subject of marriage. Of course both sides want to win. And as I stated before elsewhere on this forum, if they decide against what we would like please don’t expect any riots or other violent actions from us. Yes, there might be some religious folks who might not behave accordingly; after all, both sides are passionate about what they believe. But as far as I’m concerned I would hope they’d go back to the teachings in the Bible where we are expected to obey the laws of man just as we’re to obey the laws of God.
Still, depending upon the reason(s) why the court might rule against us, we might be able to advance further legislation that would abide by their ruling(s) while at the same time satisfy our beliefs according to the Holy Bible.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 11:32 am
Jerome Kinderman: As for those who believe me and anyone else to be “crackpots” because we do believe in a higher being (God), I really don’t care; and by using such disparaging language (and worse, but not permitted on this forum) in an attempt to get some kind of “rise” out of us perhaps to force a virtual temper tantrum of sorts that would then have even greater shouts of “hypocrite,” well that’s just not going to happen – at least not as far as I am concerned.
Just as the First Amendment permits them to voice their opinion, it also protects me as a “crackpot” to believe in whatever I choose - and then to voice it here and in any other town square of my choosing without being controlled or otherwise shut down by any governmental entity.
The framers of the Constitution were quite wise. They understood that in this great melting pot of varying backgrounds, opinions, religions, sexual orientations, etc., etc., there would be disagreement. Their hope might have been that a little decorum might enter into the debate. Sadly, at least on the Internet that’s very rare. Nevertheless, so long as we each abide by the posted Rules of Conduct clearly accessible with each comment we add to this conversation, no one will get a complaint from me.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 11:20 am
robert maurer: If one goes back even further in US history, there was a time when only land owners were allowed to vote. Personally,I could care less whether gays are allowed to marry: to each,his own. I could care less about using a spouse's medical coverage as heterosexual couples do. I have a real problem with gay couples receiving the tax breaks that heterosexual couples are allowed since it is assumed that it for the children produced. If a gay couple adopts, then I believe that they should receive the same tax breaks and benefits.I think the tax break issue should be looked into very carefully on an individual case by case basis. It is not fair for a single person to have to pay more taxes; I can spend my money into the economy a lot better than our government can. I think I'll rant and rave and write letters to the annointed ones until this is addressed. That is another form of prejudism and unequal rights.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 10:59 am
Rick Houdack: Anyone who believes he must give voice to some divine all-powerful (and curiously mute) super being is a crackpot. Anyone who makes his living doing so is a con artist.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 10:23 am
John Lucas: I am so glad you and Pastor Nolton have the absolute lowdown on God's thinking. Though I imagine the Boston bombers also have a direct line to God also. I guess we have to pick and choose.
As to the terrible "road" we are traveling on. You and the Pastor sound exactly like and are using the same arguments, Religious and otherwise, that the people who fought against the civil rights of women and minorities so many years ago. Almost all Americans, including you and the Pastor, think how could those people think that way. That is how people are going to think about you and the Pastor in the future. This is not a religious issue. It is a civil rights issue.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 9:18 am
Jerome Kinderman: Where I am beginning to disagree with Pastor Nolan’s view of this issue is where he states: “If it is legalized, it sets a precedence that opens the door for an ‘everything goes’ definition of marriage. And we, as a society, don't want to go down that road.”
Sadly, it appears that that “road” is precisely where the majority of this once-decent society desires to travel. And in a free society such as ours, it’s free to traverse it - of course we do so at our own peril. At some point even God won’t be able to help us. Because just as I stated in previous comments to other LTE’s and columns printed and published in this newspaper, the definition of marriage will then have no limits – just as the good Pastor hints in his letter.
And one more point, according to Mr. Lucas’s lesson on bigotry, he also believes God to be a bigot. And that’s okay - he's certainly entitled to his own opinion, even if he is wrong.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 8:58 am
John Lucas: Pastor Nolan I will repeat a comment I made In response to a comment made by Jerome Kinderman. It applies to you as well
Government is not in the business of marriage is any religious sense. Atheist couples do not get an marriage license because they want to meet any religious obligation. It is in the business of dealing with the rights and privileges of committed couples under the law. Traditionally couples were defined as a man and a woman. The issue is the definition.I will tell you why you are bigoted. You want to define what a couple is according to you personal religious views. You are entitled to those views as far as it goes. It is when you want those views( i.e.: your definition of what a committed couple is) codified into law and forced on everyone else that you cross the line. It is the same thing when women were denied the vote because some thought they were in some way inferior. It is the same as when blacks were denied the vote and other rights because some thought they were inferior. You think committed same sex couples are inferior and the law should reflect that view. You are clearly bigoted in this regard. You are not God.
Saturday, April 20, 2013, 7:55 am
Signing in from multiple locations may be the cause.