Awesome this is a good thing now it can be determined who to send to THE FRONT as I would prefer not being the behind. ???sorry top or bottom??? now we know thanks

Just playing. I honestly don't really care if you are or aren't. These men and women that have CHOSEN to serve this COUNTRY are the very best that we have. I CANNOT CONDEMN ANYONE that has taken the OATH to defend America as they are still 100 times better than these pinko commie basterds that are only here to create chaos and failure such as our pos or what ever you call him. I cannot CONDEMN ANY SOLDIER that defends this country. It may not be what I like or condone, but I will not and cannot ever turn ANY American Soldier away. Just my 2cents.

To all the "I Don't Like Gay People" People,

I'm posting this one more time, just because I enjoy a good futile endeavor.

Please find me credible scientific evidence that homosexuality is a chosen behavior. And, pssst, The Bible, Morals, Christianity, Beliefs, God's Word do not equal credible scientific evidence.

Can you quote Jesus's opinion on homosexuality? And what about that whole, forget the Old Testement, Live by the New one, stuff? If that's true, why quote Leviticus?

Also, please show me a link to any pillar of salt, plague of locusts, or strange dead frog epidemic that has occured since repealling DADT, or fighting DOMA has begun, and then please prove that it is a direct result of God's wrath. And again, asserting anything about The Bible, Morals, Christianity, Beliefs, God's Word isn't proof.

And while we're at it, can any of you present a legal argument to back up your point? I mean after all you're saying this should still be illegal right. Now here are a few things to remember when making your argument...

1. Marriage is a contractual/property agreement predating Christianity, and provides benefits to those that enter into it.

2. The Supreme Court has ruled over 14 times that marriage is a civil right.

3. Amendments 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10 of the U.S. Constitution gaurentee both privacy and freedom not only to practice religion, but to be free from it.

4. We are a Republic and civil rights are not voted on, ergo majority opinion means nothing in civil rights cases.

5. None of the following are legally recognized arguments used to outlaw or enforce something... The Bible, Morals, Christianity, Beliefs, God's Word, nor can The Bible, Morals, Christianity, Beliefs, God's Word be used to prove how The Bible, Morals, Christianity, Beliefs, God's Word are true, or that you have it right.

Until you can do this, you are welcome to your opinion, but not welcome to speak with any authority upon the issue. Also, I find you a little presumptuous. You really think you've got God's ear, and speak for him? You're that cool? Really?

Go get em Sarah!

Neither do I. That's why I stopped doing my shopping at the malls. Too many men and women groping each other and stickinh their toungues down each others throats. Or is that OK since they are opposite genders?

They are celebrating because they are getting closer to the equality granted to them in the Constitution. They no longer have to risk their lives for the freedom of this nation while hiding who they are.

Unfortunately whynot, from this point forward, we will have gayness slammed in our faces like never before. Those girly parades in California and New York? Well you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Who is forcing you to click on these links? No one forced you to, correct?

Seems to me that you intentionally put your face into just for the sake of being able to bitch about it.

I see advertisements for Jersey Shore all the time. I dislike how they act so I don't watch it. I don't sit there and piss and moan about it expecting them to be something they are not.

It's real simple. Don't click on links like this and don't read articles about it. Don't attend functions or parades about it either. It's only in your face because you choose it to be.

NYMike: You don't know much about Newsvine do you? The very purpose of the forum is to express opinion and agree or disagree, without resorting to name calling, which too many people ignore too often. If you don't read the posts, how do you know if you agree or disagree? As for opinion, I happen to feel that the vile things gay people do to each other, especially males, is disgusting and I'll be d>>>ed if you or anyone else will tell me to stop saying it.

I highly doubt there will be any gay military parades. If that's what you think this is about, you are missing the point.

Yes, some gays behave inappropriately in public. Many straight people do too. Inappropriate behavior should be condemned or ignored. Fighting for one's country and having a same sex partner rather than one of the opposite gender waiting for you at home is not inappropriate behavior.

Let's support all our soldiers for the great sacrifice they are making.

You knew you disagreed with this article before you even clicked the link.

we will have gayness slammed in our faces like never before

Once again, who is forcing you to click on links you know you have bias against? It's one thing to disagree with something, but to state it's being shoved in your face when you were the one that stuck your nose in the article is a bit hypocritical, don't you think?

whynot - a private party (are you upset you weren't invited?) is NOT:

...parade around and act like an idiot.

I'll make this very simple for you. If you were born purple, and purple people were discriminated against in public, in the workplace, in the military and as a child you dreamed of being in the military, so at an early age you applied layer over layer of make-up to hide that you were really purple....keep in mind you knew that you were EXACTLY the SAME as other people yet you were just born purple (as were others)...now imagine the FREEDOM of being accepted as purple, no more worrying when it rained that your make-up would come off and you would be FIRED from your beloved job, no more FEAR of discrimination that goes unpunished... are you saying you would NOT CELEBRATE? Let's not forget if you fell in love with another purple person, what if the law against purple people marrying was overthrown, you could now marry your purple soul-mate..... you would not find that reason to be happy? To hold a party with your friends? To finally have the ability to walk proudly purple? Yes, bigots would remain but you finally had the law on your side as well as support from non-purple people....I would celebrate!

myopinion13-Bingo, thats the point i am trying to make...be gay...be straight...be bisexual, i don't care. just please don't jump around in front of me and try to make me notice you. you are born gay, it is not a choice, i am certain of this now act like a human not some sort of freak.

whynot, they had a private event. They weren't "jumping around in front of you." No one held a gun to your head to make you read the story. So, I think the problem is your'ss, not their's.

The parades are vile. Drinking, dancing, exposing sexual body parts for chotchkies, flagrantly flaunting their sexual orientation....and all in public! Yes, I'm talking about the christian, Mardi Gras celebrations!

You're right, whynot. There's plenty of hetrosexuals who parade around and act like idiots. You are probably one of them.

As a straight male I love all the parades! The gay people have known have consistently shown themselves to be of a high moral caliber. This may be a perception bias, the ones I knew were gay were the ones I got to know. What ever the reason is for the existence of all the "Fabulous-Americans" I am glad they do exist and think they should have all the parades they want.

Here's a thought on the parades coming from a gay person: I do indeed think that many of them are disgusting. But try to see them for what they are: overcampensation (mispelling deliberate).

Since gays were oppressed and harassed for so many years, and they still have memories of being oppressed, and indeed still face oppression today (there was just another story in the paper the other day about a gay father who had his beloved kids taken away by a bigoted judge for no valid reason), then gays tend to "overcampensate" when they put on their parades. The anger comes out in public, and a lot gay people go out and put on the skimpiest or most ridiculous clothes they can imagine and jump around in front of the TV cameras to "put it in your face" that we are here and not going anywhere.

I'm not justifying it, because I don't agree with it. Other minorities didn't attempt to gain their freedoms by dragging all their stereotypes out into public in a way that makes people believe the stereotypes are true. Believe me, most gay people will ONLY act in such ways during Gay Pride and Halloween. The rest of the year, we just try to live quiet lives and maintain our rights.

The parades are still necessary to show people just how many of us are out there. I do, however, wish that gay people would be more constructive in the ways they try to draw attention to themselves.

Styro-well said. I'm glad someone understood what I was saying.

Amusing that people are complain on this topic that they will "flaunt their gayness". Remember these people who are now able to be true to themselves protect your rights whilst over seas.

And imnotlost II wonder how girlie a gay marine in Iraq brandishing an automatic machine gun would really look. Do you?

Its great that gays now have the right to serve openly in the Military.............However I have rights too.I have the right to "Not enlist" in the military and be subjected to serving with openly gay men. Thats the one thing despise about the gay community... they dont seem happy unless everyone accepts them and their lifestyle............ Anyway, Ill not enlist in the military now.and thats my right!

Nobody is trying to force you to enlist, Enstrom.

Enstrom and for that very reasoning you blurted you don't make the grade to enlist.

I don't want to serve with someone like you who is not there to protect his brother/sister in arms. Let others who make the grade defend your freedoms and your right not to enlist.

The very purpose of the forum is to express opinion and agree or disagree, without resorting to name calling, which too many people ignore too often.

I read NYMike's posts quite carefully. Didn't see any name calling. Just a respectfully put opinion. So I'd say he has a REALLY good idea about the very purpose of the forum.

And yet I hear no objection to "Girls Gone Wild."

I don't understand all the celebrating and throwing your sexuality in peoples faces. Maintain yourself and be gay. Being gay does not mean parade around and act like an idiot.

Yea! why celebrate for equal rights! After all, when segregation ended, people just went on with their daily lives like nothing happened at all!

I hate those parades, I think they're gross, but I will defend the right for them to have the parades, because we live in a free society, and they are not hurting anyone (not to mention following local laws and regulations).

I have gay friends that when they "act gay", I roll my eyes and think it's lame. But I will never tell them to act another way because they are not hurting anyone, and that is who they are and again we live in a free society.

Ken, most gay men do not "act gay" as you put it. And most gay men do mot march in parades. Even most gay men in parades do not "act gay." The media's attention is just drawn to the few who are seeking attention and succeeding.

Americans 9/20/2011

Thankfully we are doing away with basing laws off of biblical quotes and are heading back to the Constitutional beliefs that all men are created equal and not all men are created to be religiously persecuted.

I am not a Christian and don't think we should have laws based of Christianity or any other religion.

Key word there "created". If you recognize a deity, you might want to consider what He thinks of all this. It is no secret that our society was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Folks wonder why our glory is fading, and they think that we'll better ourselves when we get rid of those values. But they only accelerate the process.

I can not change the text of the Constitution. For me, the word created means being born and not some divine action by a God.

I agree, let's leave religiosity out of it. Simply look at biology and genetics.

When input does not equal output, you predicate the death of that species.

Ah relativism. For me, this, for you that. What really matters is what the framers meant. You think the highest document of the land is the Constitution, and yet you fail to recognize that the Framers saw the highest document as the Bible. That document you revere and from which recognizes your freedom, comes from inalienable rights simply because you were created equally, because that it was the Bible says. By evolution standards, we don't all evolve equally as natural selection would create an uneven society. Some new genetic trait would arise and a class of super humans would take root, the elimination of the weaker would only be natural. And your "rights" would not exist.

Amen. Now since serving almost 17 years in the military, i see this "ban" being lifted as a very bad thing. Apart from the personal veiws i have against this, this can be very dangerous for people who may openly flaunt their new pride especially in deployed locations. Men and women are seperated in differant tents or dorms based on whats called "General order 1", which stictly forbids sexual activity between each other, and many arent going to tolorate gays bunking, showering, and co-habitating with them. So it brings up the question will they be allowed their own tents or dorms? If so, do you really think an "accidental" fire might just take out a gay tent or two which houses these people? Also there is enough close minded people who will target these people for other "accidents". I know people will yell about an investigation on the "accidents", but unless it makes media attention, it will get knocked under the rug.

I also dont see this working out as well as many might think. Here is why...the military rule of Zero-Tolorance of Sexual Harrassment. Plain and simple if a straight man talks about his sex life even a little he is toast, gays will be targeted even more so and it will be a valid complaint to kick them out. Nothing i have said here is hate talk or even wishful thinking. These are all things ive heard countless people say in my time say and threaten to do. Im hoping everything goes the path it should and no one gets hurt in the next upcoming years as well.

Brian our country was not founded on Religion, You go ahead and read up on the Constitution now where in that document is God, the devil, Jesus or Christianity mentioned.

Our country is a Republic not a theocracy...

We won't leave religiosity[sic] out of it. It's a system of beliefs, just like non-religiosity is. If you ask me to leave out "religiosity", I might as well ask you to leave out your beliefs too.

Right you are, about the Republic/Theocracy. Wrong you are about "not founded on religion". The Constitution is a derivation and conclusions drawn from the Bible, and they intentionally left out those things to allow you maximum freedom even if it meant your disbelief. I think you folks are misunderstanding my quote of the Bible scripture. I didn't say it should be law or not law. It was a comment of disapproval and vote against that life style. Everyone is free to agree or disagree with me. I thought it would be interesting to see what reaction folks would have to the Bible.

Brian-1034055

Romans 1:26-27

What is this? The new math? It's 27-26=1.

Plain and simple if a straight man talks about his sex life even a little he is toast

Calling BS on this one.

I served 23 years and that's all the younger guys did. They talked about their sexual exploits with their spouse, girlfriend or the bar fly they met the night before.

If we were to discipline everyone that talked about their sexual escapades, we would hardly have anyone serving.

I'm with NYMike, hetero "fraternization" happens all the time, adultery, etc...same as the civilian world.

Unless the military is going to put a pink triangle on their uniform, normal people (gay and straight) don't discuss their sex life with co-workers 24/7. Why would gay soldiers need a different tent? They have served in the military since it's inception, nothing has changed, they just can't get fired now for loving someone of the same sex - get over it.

Sorry Brian but our country was not founded on religion, Please show your proof, The Treaty of Tripoli which was signed in 1797 specifically stated:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. "

The treaty is cited as historical evidence in the modern day controversy over whether there was religious intent by the founders of the United States government. Article 11 of the treaty has been interpreted as an official denial of a Christian basis for the U.S. government.

"By their actions, the Founding Fathers made clear that their primary concern was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. Individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States. Thus the Founders ensured that in no official sense would America be a Christian Republic. Ten years after the Constitutional Convention ended its work, the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its negotiations would adhere to the rule of law, not the dictates of the Christian faith. The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers."

Sorry But the USA was never founded on Religion.

www afn org/~govern/Christian_Nation.html

www jeremiahproject com/culture/heritage html

I think some of the folks debating me are probably gay - it's why they overload the rest of us that don't care about it as much as they do. But in the end, our society will change if we leave it up to the vocal minority.

Someone show me where JESUS said anything about gays or lesbians. That's Paul. Paul also said women should cover their hair because it caused men to sin. So, you, therefore, support a hajib? If you are going to live by the literal word fo the bible, perhaps you should live by ALL of them. I hope to gosh you aren't wearing cloth made of mixed fibers and that you never eat shellfish.

I can show you were JESUS selected Paul as his apostle. The covering Paul referred to was womens' hair, not a covering over that. Women should have long hair and men should not was the argument there. And don't confuse the entire Bible as something for everyone. Much of the old testament was written specifically for the Israelites (that answers your question about shellfish and mixed fibers). Really if you don't know what the scriptures say, I recommend reading it.

Key word there "created". If you recognize a deity, you might want to consider what He thinks of all this.

Yep, and my deities are all perfectly fine with people being honest about who they are and who they love, whether they're gay or straight.

Thanks for your consideration

Brian the first link you provided doesnt work it brings up a google search, the second didnt work as well and I had to put in periods so the link was formated properly so it would work and it is a link to a Bible study page. Can you provide any evidnece that isnt biased by religion you know like Govermental proof as in from the founding fathers, the framers, you know the actual people that created our great country?

Instead you provide me with religious links? Links that will do, lie and stretch out things to push thier religious agenda? Seriously how about real source evidence that came from our Government. I provided you with concrete evidence, plus the constitution itself doesnt suppost your claim at all.

By the way just an FYI I am a straight male, infering that people that dont agree with you are gay is pretty much an indication of your lack of being able to prove your point.

The difference here is I support equal rights for all American citizens.

Even animals and children? You are in fact Godless.

The links don't work because msnbc won't let me post links...I removed the periods to post it. Put the periods back in where there are spaces.

Gays do have equal rights. I can't marry a man any more than they can under our current laws (Texas). The difference is, they want to.

Brian, Paul was not an Apostle in the sense of being one of the Twelve Leaders of the early church. Timothy or Steve where also Apostles in the same way Paul was. He was never a leader of the Church. He answered to Peter and the other of the original Apostles. Christ entire interaction with Paul was to blind him and send him on to other Christians for healing. My gosh, you want to quote the bible and you don't even know what is in it.

Wiki "Paul the Apostle". Do you even know how much of thew New Testament was written from Paul's words?

How many times do you think I need to have read the Bible before in your opinion I can quote it? Let me know, I'm sure the number I've read it is enough.

Apostle in the sense of Paul the Apostle, could be applied to ME! I too am a follower and teacher of Christianity. *sigh* Brian, I sincerely doubt you've read the bible even once. In my denomination, we managed to read the bible through every 3 years. We also study the apocryphal books, the writings of the early church fathers and many of the great saints. It's clear that your understanding of the bible is actually comparatively quite weak.

The covering Paul referred to was womens' hair, not a covering over that. Women should have long hair and men should not was the argument there.

Wait, you want to ban short haircuts for girls too?!?

a·pos·tle

noun

1.
any of the early followers of Jesus who carried the Christian message into the world.

2.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) any of the original 12 disciples called by Jesus to preach the gospel: Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot.

3.
the first or the best-known Christian missionary in any region or country.

4.
Eastern Church . one of the 70 disciples of Jesus.

5.
the title of the highest ecclesiastical official in certain Protestant sects.
6.
a (religious) messanger or ambassador.

So, lets review Brian. You will note that Paul is not listed in definition 2. He does qualify under definition 1, but as I said, so did Timothy, Apollos, Stephen, Junia and others. Under definition 6, I qualify as an Apostle.

Let's see, you have seen Jesus, been asked by him why you are persecuting him. Been Blinded, sent on a mission by God to speak to the gentiles, written how many New Testament books that are nearly 2 milleniums old, performed miracles, written most letters to the early churches through which Christianities doctrine is revealed. You sir are trying to publicly undermine the Bible and it's credibility and are calling into question one of God's chosen. It seems to me, the only thing miraculous about you is calling yourself a Christian and finding a brother to publicly fight with. You may be the one needing remediation.

@EngEsq I don't, but you find yourself a Christian and a woman, you might want to follow the manual.

Even animals and children? You are in fact Godless.

Brian what the hell is wrong with you? You are a complete moron, where the hell did you pull that statement from? Can you tell me exactly how and why your brain made that completely illogical connection so you had to post it to demonstrate your complete lack of sanity? Since you brought that subject up are you that stupid that you cannot distinguish between the term consenting adults, you just lost all credibility with that statement, Its morons like that that make such a statement when the issue of gay rights come up.

Let me educate you since you are lacking in common sense.

Homosexual marriage or rights involves two consenting HUMAN ADULTS. (Did you see the Human and Adult?)

Pedophilia involves a child and a adult, It is against the law, the child is a victim and cannot enter into a contract per the constitution, they cannot consent and besides that fact its a freakin kid, hello?

Bestiality, seriously I need to explain this to you? Again its an animal not a human, it cant consent, it cant reason, it cant enter into a contract plus ITS AN ANIMAL!!!

Seriously is that was you resort to, I take it you are a Christian and this is the tactic you take.. Seriously can you at least try to be intelligent?

Sorry but a gay couple do not have the same rights as you do, you tell me how exactly a gay couple marrying will affect you, your life, your marriage(if you are married) tell me a reason that isnt based on your personal religious beliefs.

@Different, Totally agree with you. We do qualify as Christs ambassadors. In fact there isn't that much difference between the early apostles and a Christian. And I do agree that there may have been more than there were cited in just the New Testament. Many of them were given more power and authority, but if God chooses, he could do the same for me.

@Pirate, peace be still. Inflamed much? No need to get all freaked out.

@Mke-3

When input does not equal output, you predicate the death of that species.

Oh really? So why do we have to cull herds? Why is their such famine in Africa?

Why are over 1,500 species bisexual?

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

The most well-known homosexual animal is the dwarf chimpanzee, one of humanity's closes relatives. The entire species is bisexual. Sex plays an conspicuous role in all their activities and takes the focus away from violence, which is the most typical method of solving conflicts among primates and many other animals.

"Sex among dwarf chimpanzees is in fact the business of the whole family, and the cute little ones often lend a helping hand when they engage in oral sex with each other."

Lions are also homosexual. Male lions often band together with their brothers to lead the pride. To ensure loyalty, they strengthen the bonds by often having sex with each other.

Homosexuality is also quite common among dolphins and killer whales. The pairing of males and females is fleeting, while between males, a pair can stay together for years. Homosexual sex between different species is not unusual either. Meetings between different dolphin species can be quite violent, but the tension is often broken by a "sex orgy".

Homosexuality is a social phenomenon and is most widespread among animals with a complex herd life.

The ONLY thing declaring homosexuality/bisexuality as wrong is religion, nature has no problem with it.

If you guys are feeling inflamed by my comments...see what they did to Jesus for his!

@Pirate, you asked how it would affect me. I believe it is wrong and look what they've done in California...they're now teaching it in the school systems. It's a systematic reprogramming of our society.

Brian - how many times was the "Bible" rewritten? You could not even read the first Bible if it was sitting in your lap now. Back to YOUR "God" - I thought he was supposed to be nice? I thought there was something that Christians were supposed to do like "Treat others the way you want to be treated," etc.....

Luckily, I'm not baptized so I can accept people for who they are and not what an outdated ignorant book wants me to believe.

PS: Most of your "Christian" holidays are rip-offs from the pagan ones.... and let's not forget about the Crusades...aka "Killing for Jesus."

Here is a bit of a tangent on the topic:
Is there any, any, support for Democracy in the Bible? Or even Capitalism? The two founding principles of Modern Western Civilization are about choice; choice of leadership and choice of trade. The only biblically supported form of government is the Divine Right of Kings. Yahweh, knowing more than the illiterate nomads who originally worship him, decides which warlord is elevated to the post of King. Yahweh then gives implicit approval for the position to be passed from eldest son to eldest son.
Then his son/self Yeshua came along and declared himself King, not President or Prime Minister, of the Jewish People. Also he said a bunch of socialist things about redistribution of wealth.
So now we have a system of government designed by Hellenistic Pagans with Universal Civil Rights. Rights that allow Brian to claim martyrdom for his religious beliefs, while simultaneously allowing him to freely exercise his religious beliefs.
Frankly, I think we should place more faith in our fellow man [and gay man] than any Bronze Age Semitic War God.

@Black:

It was not rewritten, it was translated.

You are right, it is was not in my language.

He is nice, but he is Holy.

This world will pass away but his word never will...it is not outdated and will never be.

Christian holidays are of no importance, what the Bible says is. In fact there are no Christian holidays listed at all in the Bible...they are as you say derived from Pagan ones.

The crusades were to stop the expansion of Islam. 9/11 was the date in the crusades that Christians defeated them, thus 9/11 was chosen as the date to continue the fight.

Brian, come on, really? If gays took over and mandated homosexual marriage for everyone or no marriage at all, would you really feel like you were subject to the same rights that gay people have? Don't try that "we're already equal" crap with me.

@ Brian

If you guys are feeling inflamed by my comments...see what they did to Jesus for his!

Now he wants to liken himself to Jesus. I'm pretty certain Jesus left the hating to the Old Man and didn't encourage being judgemental.

The Bible's support for Democracy is actually derived from it's doctrine of love and that all of us are on the same level. That from least to greatest we are each accountable to God and that all of us were created with equal dignity before Him. Capitalism is based on the same principle that each should reap what they sow, and that those who will not work should not eat, and that charity is an individual act, not to be legislated upon society from those that would place themselves as God.
You are quoting the old Testament where God selected Israel as his chosen people. Being God, he has authority, power, and sovereignty to do this. He was supposed to be their leader, but Israel rejected him and wanted a King of their own like the other nations. God allowed this to happen though judges and prophets had been Gods chosen way to lead the people before hand...God Allowed Samual to ordain a king for Israel. This didn't work out as they'd hoped and eventually they led Israel into sin. Jesus God's son, was born via the virgin, in the Kingly line and as the Priestly line. So he is both King and High Priest forever...and since he did not sin, he could pay for those who call on his name.
In the end there will be a Theocracy, but it will not be led by man, but by God himself. When the sin of this world runs it's course and destroys itself just like happened during the flood of Noah.

@Styro you are not debating me..but the Bible's words...I'm merely quoting it.

@ Brian

The Bible's support for Democracy is actually derived from it's doctrine of love and that all of us are on the same level. That from least to greatest we are each accountable to God and that all of us were created with equal dignity before Him.

So why do you propose to take dignity away from the homosexual? You seem to think that being "openly gay" means running around in assless chaps with a riding crop. What about being able to talk about your significant other? What about not having to live a celibate life for 25 years to conceal that you are in fact gay. DADT was a policy whereby the military retained the right to discharge you if they found out you were gay. Where is the dignity in that?

Romans 1:26-27

Try again. Read the passages from Romans 1:18-27.

That's what I love about the chapter and verse pickers. They only read what they want and ignore the rest. Kinda like the people who only obey some of the ten commandments. Next will be the Soddom and Gamorah references. Again and again people refuse to turn the page and read the entire story.

Stop quoting chapter and verse and sit down and really read the damn book! And then go back and read it again.

@bjc-1003482

I agree that it was probably hard for them, just has bearing other types of sin is difficult for believers. I am not for taking away their dignity but restoring it for the purpose for which they were created.

@Fudge-Factor

I can find no point to the versus you quoted that contradict the two I quoted. In fact you expanded upon the versus I quoted...To me all the better.

Soddom and Gomorah are excellent references.

I am now on my 8th time through it.

Brian, as a Christian myself, I believe everything you wrote in #7.43, and yet I'm still gay. Just what are you trying to prove?

We don't know why things are sometimes different in God's plan. Some babies are born with horrible deformities, and some kids develop mental retardation. While I'm not trying to compare gaydom to deformity and retardation, it's something that didn't quite develop according to the "norm". You wouldn't punish someone for having a mental disability, so why punish someone for being gay? It's not a choice. If it were, we'd all have to overcome the same aversions before we could be gay. There never was a time in my life when I was naturally repulsed by thoughts of male sexuality, but I'll bet that you've always had that repulsion without question. Either that, or you've always been attracted to men and are externalizing your self loathing.

@ Brian

I am not for taking away their dignity but restoring it for the purpose for which they were created.

What does that mean? How do you restore it? Send them to a retraining facility where they can simulate heterosexual relationships.

You may not be for "taking away" their dignity but you seem okay with keeping things status quo and "denying them of their dignity."

Brian's gonna pray away the gay.

@Styro

May God bless you and peace be upon you. Your affliction is no different than the affliction of the heart I have/had.

I am merely shining the light of God's truth and boldly speaking his words even though some are offended by it.

There are many terrible things in this world that exist in this world, some are there because of sin, some are because of someone elses sin, some are to glorify God. Some malady's exist so that the power of God can be seen in their lives. I understand your feelings, and it is somewhat accurate to compare a disability to sinfulness. I do not condemn you nor wish to punish you. I wish for you to know Christ and love you so much as to tell you about him. This knowledge can lead you to all truth and even "heal" you or give you power over being gay. I am not gay or even attracted to men, but it would be to your benefit if I were since I would be better able to minister to you about it. Those who have struggled the most are the ones who are able best to minister to others. Perhaps you will be God's next apostle.

Brian-1034055 - sorry, but the "Bible" was written 200 years after Jesus died, it is full of stories passed down and yes, much of it was rewritten, especially during the Dark Ages - the Church rewrote the bible to suit itself. Mainly to get money for itself and control entire countries - we will never agree on this point, I can accept that. I agree to disagree for I will not change your mind and you will not change mine - that does not mean that either of us are "bad" people. However, no matter what anyone believes, I think one should treat others with respect (until the point that they have completely disrespected you).

Back on topic, a private party after Don't ask, Don't Tell is repealed - should not turn into a Bible lesson, talk of murder (that Nick guy), etc. It was a private party where he could be himself in the military, I think that is something to celebrate. You are free to disagree.

@bjc-1003482

Restoring their dignity is realizing that their creation was to Glorify God. I'm not going to restore anything, I don't have any power to do so. But God and his word have that ability. I never said anything about a facility, unless you mean a Church, then yes I would be for that. The status quo in our society is that we have rules by which we live, this anarchy and desire to do away with all social norms is not of God, but of a human desire to rebel.

@Idaho Spud-1126196

I just may. :)

but you find yourself a Christian and a woman, you might want to follow the manual.

Wow, must suck to be a christian woman... or even worse to be the kid of a christian. Not only does the music suck, but you get stoned to death for talking back to your parents.

Also, being a christian lobster diver must suck...

Glad I'm not delusional.

@Black

The does say that it is protected from tamper. If you believe in God and his power, you also believe this is possible. If you do not, then the Church wisely put that in there to keep myopic zelots like me believing :P

I appreciate respect even if we remain in disagreement. <hat tip to you>

Brian, actually, you are somewhat wrong on the "rewritten" nature of the bible. For at least the first 200 to 300 years of Christianity, the bible was constantly being revised with books being added and subtracted. For instance, the book of Revelations was considered apocryphal for almost 150 - 200 years after its writing and was not included as a book of the bible. It wasn't accepted as cannonical until the Council of Carthage in 397. Brian, your understanding of the history of the bible is typical of most evangelical Christians - extremely poor. One must understand the origins of the sacred texts to even know why certain interpretations are inadequate.

Brian

I suspect you're talking about praying your own gay away. Nobody who is so obsessed with preaching like you do against gayness is innocent. I agree with Styro, " you've always been attracted to men and are externalizing your self loathing."

@EngEsq - because of long hair? That's not that bad.

If your parent are true Christians you are lucky as a Child.

I used to agree that the music sucked....but then I found these 9 songs.

"Your Great Name"

"Everlasting God"

"Here I am to Worship"

"Cling to the Call"

"He Reigns"

"Come, Now is the time to worship"

"The Blessing"

"Peace Be Still"

"My Savior My God"

It's not wrong to be a Christian lobster driver, we can eat lobsters...it was the Israelite that were forbidden from eating them.

You are not delusional, just not very focused.

@Idaho Spud-1126196 Ok I admit it! Just kidding. I would if it were true, but it's not. But if it were I would not be ashamed. It would be my truth.

OK I am not religious but I'll fight fire with fire.

If you are religious how arrogant of you to judge when by your teachings god is the only one who can with the full knowledge of everything. So just quieten down and let people be who they are it is none of your concern, your only concern is to make sure YOUR house is in order.

Enough already here are my bible quotes:

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged” Matthew 7:1

“Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. Matthew 7:3-5

@differnet

You may be the most difficult to debate. Misinformation is much harder to dispel the mere ignorance.

@Krestov

Bravo, keep those scriptures coming! Have I judged anyone? Name one person I have condemned. I have merely called sin, sin. I even admitted in my previous posts that I too am a sinner and have different problems. The difference is, I'm not trying to say it is not sin.

Brian, you simply don't understand. Should I pray for your own wisdom? I spent over a decade trying to "pray away the gay" and even went so far as to date girls and even try to have heterosexual sex in order to learn to like it. It ain't happenin'. I'm not going to waste another three or four decades living my life in misery and dragging some poor innocent woman down with me. If I'm wrong, God will forgive me. God would not make me wait this long for "healing". When someone cries out to God for guidance and righteousness, He's not going to just throw that request back in your face and say, "Nope, you're still attracted to men. Good luck with that."

You know what is sinful in your heart. For me, sinful would be leading a woman a stray and taking an opposite gender spouse when everything about it goes against my very nature. You say that many former gays have gone on to inspire others through God's work. Why do you think the Catholic church has such a problem with altarboy-molesting priests? They tried to suppress their natural desire to take a spouse, gay or straight, and it came back to bite them and cause pain to innocent others.

on youtube you can put this after y o u t u b e . c o m for good music

watch?v=IuuLBPOYcI8&feature=related

No Brian, not because of long hair, because it limits ones ability to think rationally about certain topics, and limits individual choice.

Why would god ever care how your hair is cut?! Religion, and its beliefs, are simply strange.

@Styro

I would be honored if you would pray for me. I am so sorry for your struggles, I know many have tried to do what you describe. Consider the woman that had a hemorage for 40 years or the blind and crippled...who had to wait an entire lifetime for Jesus to heal them.

To answer your question of Catholic Preists, they should have taken wives. But if they were gay, they should have dealt with that first too.

I still struggle with my sin, which happens to be lust. It's for women, but porn calls my name. God has not taken it away, I live with it. I mostly live in victory over it, but not always. I live in his grace and continue to call my sin, sin. Brother, one of the defining moments for me was getting involved in a church that has strong life groups where we share our burdens. I hope that if you are still going to a church, share your sin and the let community share your burden with you. One day you will be risen from the dead and receive a new body one without such a burden. Keep trying, keep striving....onward Christian soldier. I will pray for you now, please take that as love and not condemnation or self-righteousness. I will be on my knees as you write you reply.

@EngEsq

The limit is on those whose mind is unaware of the realities of Heaven. God cares about everything. In the Bible it says that even the hairs on your head are numbered. A sparrow does not hit the ground without God knowing about it. Every star in the sky is named for he placed each one.

More specifically, the hair is a covering. Man was created in the image of God and woman was created in the image of man. For the first man was created from dust of the ground by God, but the first woman was created by God from Man, using Adams rib. This may have seemed strange to people, but all the requirements for a human are in the dust of the ground, just add water. But this is a respect and authority issue God is imparting. Man is the glory of God, but woman is the Glory of man, so the hair is a covering God gave to cover her as she stands in his presence. Men and women are no independent of each other, women can better understand their importance when they understand their purpose. But in any case, if she doesn't have short hair it's not the end of the world...it's more important that she be filled with inner beauty, love and compassion, than following that simple request.

Yes, Brian, I go to church. And no, it's not a gay-affirming church, but neither does it condemn me, and I don't have to hide from the pastor.

For those who think being gay is some shameful sin, I wonder what you think of American soldiers. "Thou shall not kill" is a commandment. You must hate America's military men and women, straight or gay.

@Bart

I believe it says, thou shalt not murder. Murder is something quite different than killing. As with all things God is more interested in motives and what is going on in your heart than any specific act. This is why Jesus says that, you've heard it said that you shall not commit adultery....but I say, if you even look at a women with lust in your eye you have already commited adultery in your heart. (paraphrased).

There are also scriptures where Jesus give additional authority to governments and those acting on government authority than an individual might have.

deep thoughts, by dontgivemethepenguin...

Brian-

You ever going to stop camouflaging your hatred as religion?

You seem to follow a 2000 yr old book that many kings and religious leaders have edited throughout the years to work in their favor pretty closely. Why would you believe a 2000 yr old game of "telephone"?

Also what's so wrong about teaching the accomplishments of gay men and women in history? They teach history and mention if the person was black, white or indian. Why not mention if they were gay?

The worst part about your whole screwed up "theory" is that your argument is based on a religious book which everyone knows would never lead you in the wrong direction./s

Religious, probably. Bigot, yes.

@Jeffinva

To be honest, I don't mind teaching about anyone accomplishments. But I do mind when it becomes a politically correct movement by Godless people to teach Children to accept something their parents and their God do not accept. But further I think it's wrong to marginalize humanity wins and categorize it by this is a gay accomplishment, or a black accomplishment.

You have called me a bigot for no reason, but you disagree with me and insult me and call me hateful....yet I have not done the same to you because I disagree with you.

I am merely exercising my right to free speech. And doing it well, which is probably bothering you.

Brian, nothing I have said is not correct. I suspect you wouldn't be able to discribe the difference between the concept of transsubstantiation and consubstantiation without looking it up. But go ahead, if you don't believe me look up the Book of Revelations. You will find just what I said, that until 397 it was considered an apocryphal text and many of the apocryphal texts were considered cannonical at one time. The bible has been retranslated and reedited many, many times. You are missig key elements of understanding Christianity. And FYI, I'm layity. You can wave your bible about, but the odds are that you will only knock yourself out with it.

You have done a grave disservice to the faith today. You have been negative and angry. You have shown a face of Christianity that is bigotted. A God that so loved the world that he would send his only son to die for us, is not one who is likely to contemptuous of any of his children. Moreover, we have great work before us - feeding the poor, visiting the sick, comforting the grievng and so on. Christians are called to live an example not to tell everyone else how to live. As St Francis of Assisi said, "Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words." Oh and I'm not Catholic - before you go down that road.

@Krestov

Bravo, keep those scriptures coming! Have I judged anyone? Name one person I have condemned. I have merely called sin, sin. I even admitted in my previous posts that I too am a sinner and have different problems. The difference is, I'm not trying to say it is not sin.

Yes you did Brian with this little senseless reach of "reasoning"

Even animals and children? You are in fact Godless.

Sorry to say but that was pretty judgmental there, In fact all your rantings are pretty high and mighty, that might not be the angle you were going for but for those of us that dont believe in your "God"(Not that it matters but I am Agnostic) It comes off pretty strong that way.

@Pirate, peace be still. Inflamed much? No need to get all freaked out.

Freaked out? No, Inflamed, Yes; you made an illogical reach for subject matter that had nothing to do with our original discussion, you still havent provided any proof what so ever supporting your claim that our country was founded on Religion.

@Pirate, you asked how it would affect me. I believe it is wrong and look what they've done in California...they're now teaching it in the school systems. It's a systematic reprogramming of our society.

Your first reason (that you think its wrong) isnt a valid reason to deny equal rights to gay couples, As for your second, schools dont teach kids how to be homosexuals, they teach them about homosexuality its a part of Sexual Education. If I am not mistaken parents can opt out of having this subject matter taught to their kids.

Besides what is wrong with providing kids with education about the subject, based on your statements regarding the founders of our country you need to brush up on your US history?

@differnet

I refuse to debate you.

@Pirate

In your citiation, I merely asked a question and exposed the truth about that person. He said, "All my gods say..." The truth of the matter is most likely that he doesn't believe in any. He was being provocative....if he did believe in multiple gods, I'm sure he would have called me on it.

I sent you 2 links, and there are many others about our country being founded upon Judeo Christian values. That argument has been fought by many scholars...and will never be agreed upon. Rather than get deep in to that, I just referred u to arguments already been waged.

I believe you may be mistaken about opting out. But in either case, that my answer and I'm sticking to it. Education about all subjects is one thing, casting it as ok is another.

@Brian-1034055, it really is amazing the massive lack of knowledge you have about the Bible and the country CLAIM to live in. Honestly, you would flunk out of just about any seminary school with what you claim to know.

Oh and for your information many of the most revered framers of the constitution and presidents WERE NOT CHRISTIANS. They were Deists. Look it up. Deism doesn't believe in a Christian god just that there might be a god and he just doesn't care to get involved in our world anymore.

@Brian-1034055, you refuse to debate differnet because you know you will be soundly trashed. LOL

@Sandy, I have not seen you educate any of us with your profound knowledge. All you have done is say I don't have any. So I wait for your explanations.

I won't debate different because I am almost certain he is a member of some type cult. I could wear myself out with a person such as him who is overly concerned with technicalities and "deeper truths"... I believe the Bible is simple and easy enough that even I could understand it. God doesn't write it so that we need clergy and degrees to understand simple truths.

Sandy, I determine your amount of understanding by the amount of love you are projecting. Let the person with the most love, be the greatest among us Christians. If either of you can show me amazing love and correct me with kindness and compassion in your hearts I will accept your exhorting me.

God loves all of you.

Even Sandy?

:P

I have an even better verse to quote:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

- "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

I am sorry to say but the links you provided me with are religious in nature and biased, they mentioned quotes made by people (which are not legal documents and what ever any one or few framers may have said that doesn't dictate what our country was founded on, it is legal documents that are ratified and signed that make the laws) The other link you provided what a main page (not going to sort thru religious dogma to find the subject matter that pertains to our conversation) I have provided you with a legal Treaty from 1796 as proof that our country was not founded upon Christianity.

Can you point to a single Legal US document created by our government that supports your claim? Anything predating the Constitution (other then some wording in the declaration of independance it doesnt exist) is moot because the US constitution is what our country was founded on. If our country was to be founded on Christianity don't you think the framers would have put something that important in the constitution?
Please do tell me exactly where in the constitution it states it is based on Christianity?

Look up the treaty of tripoli. go to wiki if you have to.

Here is a link to Yale law school web site about the treaty avalon(dot)law(dot)yale(dot)edu/18th_century/bar1796t(dot)asp

Seriously look up the Treaty and tell me what you think about it and its contents, mainly this except from Article 11:

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

It's on every single dollar bill. Those are legal documents. A quick study of our founding fathers would reveal to you their great reverence for God. Which God. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The God of the Bible who is Christ, Holy Spirit and Father.

I read your treaty. It is true that our Government didn't institutionalize a religion. But it was based on those values and from them was born our Govt. Those Christians made our Govt and just like when you get water from a hose you taste the hose, you are getting a Govt made by Christians...and you got a set of rules that give you freedom and respect because of God. You don't have to acknowledge it for it to be true. But you look up the beliefs and the writings of the framers and you know their beliefs crafted this nation.

Jesus didn't date chicks, and spent all his time with 12 dudes. Seems to me that Jesus was gay!

Funny that the teachings of the book they authored would contradict that conclusion.

Brian seriously you want to use the In God we Trust? First of all Currency is not a legal document,

(Legal instrument is a legal term of art that is used for any formally executed written document that can be formally attributed to its author,[1] records and formally expresses a legally enforceable act, process,[2] or contractual duty, obligation, or right, and therefore evidences that act, process, or agreement.[3][4] Examples include a certificate, deed, bond, contract, will, legislative act, notarial act, court writ or process, or any law passed by a competent legislative body in municipal (domestic) or international law)

Seondly, I guess you are not aware that the term "In God We Trust" was adopted as the official motto of the United States in 1956 for paper currency (Did you catch the date 1956?) Prior to that the phrase has appeared on U.S. coins since 1864 two-cent coin, followed in 1866 by the 5 cent nickel (1866–1883), quarter dollar, half dollar, silver dollar and gold dollars.[1][4] An 1865 law allowed the motto to be used on coins.[5] The use of the motto was permitted, but not required, by an 1873 law. While several laws come into play, the act of May 18, 1908,[6] is most often cited as requiring the motto (even though the cent and nickel were excluded from that law, and the nickel did not have the motto added until 1938). Since 1938, all coins have borne the motto. (taken from wiki)
The US constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787, big date difference there.

Here is another bit of info for you.

On July 11, 1954, just one month after the phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance,[7] the U.S. Congress enacted Public Law 84-140, which required the motto on all coins and currency. The law was approved by President Eisenhower on July 30, 1956, and the motto was progressively added to paper money over a period from 1957 to 1966.[1]
(taken from wiki page)

Critics contend that the motto's placement on money constitutes the establishment of a religion or a church by the government, thus violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Separation of church and state. The motto was first challenged in Aronow v. United States in 1970, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled: "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise."[9] The decision was cited in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, a 2004 case on the Pledge of Allegiance

Brian you are aware that morality isnt intrinsic to religion. I will agree with you on one point many of the founding father were religious and I am sure that their religion influenced the morality of their input on the contents of the constitution but regardless of that the US Constitution isnt based on Christianity or any religion.

The cut and dry aspect of the Treaty of Tripoli specifically states that our country was not founded on Christianity. How much more black and white can you get, the fact that our constitution may have borrowed some morality from the bible (of which very little) does nothing to negate that fact.

Just to give you an idea, Here is the religious make up of the founding fathers

Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and three were Roman Catholics (C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.

A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson[13][14][15] (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible") and Benjamin Franklin.[16] A few others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.[17]
(Taken from wiki page)

Brian in short How many times is god alluded in the constitution?

Once: "the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven"

(Sorry if this is a repeat)

Pirate C, the main reason the congress added "in god we trust" to paper currency is not because of any real christian influence. It was mainly added because of the Cold War with Russia. It was for propaganda purposes to tell the Russians that god was on the side of the US. Notice the hubris of that? Something Jesus preached against.

Brian, what, exactly, does "Moses' Book of Fairy Tales" have to do with this?

The limit is on those whose mind is unaware of the realities of Heaven.

Sure. My mind is able to comprehend more of this world than you, I can almost guarantee it. Belief in a faerie tale provided you nothing beyond peace of mind.

God cares about everything.

Why?

In the Bible it says that even the hairs on your head are numbered. A sparrow does not hit the ground without God knowing about it. Every star in the sky is named for he placed each one.

So he is omniscient. Great, one word conveys all that by the way.

More specifically, the hair is a covering.

So?

Man was created in the image of God and woman was created in the image of man.

Strange, woman is not identical to man. How is this in man's image.

For the first man was created from dust of the ground by God, but the first woman was created by God from Man, using Adams rib.

Rib clone... sure. That makes a ton of sense. Forget all the archaeological evidence to the contrary.

This may have seemed strange to people, but all the requirements for a human are in the dust of the ground, just add water.

How about carbon... not a ton of it in soil. Whatever.

But this is a respect and authority issue God is imparting.

Seems pretty petty of him. Further, how does long hair equal respect in any way? A woman could have long hair, but not give a flying crap about god, or the inverse may be true.

Man is the glory of God, but woman is the Glory of man, so the hair is a covering God gave to cover her as she stands in his presence.

Sure. Women are the "glory" of man. You are full of it. There is no man without women.

Men and women are no independent of each other, women can better understand their importance when they understand their purpose.

Purpose... breeding?!? You are even crazier than I thought.

But in any case, if she doesn't have short hair it's not the end of the world...it's more important that she be filled with inner beauty, love and compassion, than following that simple request.

You are missing the point apparently. I pity you.

Krestov, that is how they told the DATE in those days. That's not alluding to a "god," it's basic eighteenth century grammar.

Brian, you won't debate me, because I've already "won." I can't say I really won, because you continue to spew hate in the name of our Saviour. But I hope at the very least, I've shown people that all Christians are not afraid of people who are gay and lesbian.

FYI, I belong to a mainstream, protestant denomination. My denomination goes back to the original reformation. But then, I doubt Brian could tell anyone what the reformation is without looking it up.

Toasty that was my point :)

Gays do have equal rights. I can't marry a man any more than they can under our current laws

That same argument was used to justify bans in interracial marriage: blacks and whites can each marry within their own races, so there's no discrimination.

Where gays don't have equal rights is that you, as a heterosexual, may marry the consenting adult to whom you are sexually and emotionally attracted. Gays don't have that right, at least in Texas.

and women were created equal also, they were created with body parts that accept cocks, they need cocks, they want cocks, pooper shooters are not designed to accept cocks.

Right. Neither are throats. And hetrosexuals NEVER have anal sex or oral sex because those are abominations. Don't even try and think about having a three way with two men and one woman.

Hello all, I'm back...by popular demand!

@3rdviewfromleft

Everything

@EngEsq

You can call me crazy, but nearly everything I posted I read straight out of the Bible. But you thought I came up with it....I didn't, it was all already written before either of us were born. All those things you mocked are written in the Holy Bible.

@Different

I am probably most concerned about you of all these people. They geer and sneer at the name of God, but you remind me more of a Pharisee or a Scribe from the new Testament. Your concern is about "winning" or showing who knows more. Your speech isn't filled with love, so you use religion like a club instead of building me up. This is why I won't debate you. You seem full of knowledge that doesn't come from the Bible itself. I am happy to talk about the Bible, but I won't debate whether or not the Bible is true or hyper-inflated terms you like to use that are also not in there.

@bjc-1003482 -Re: "Now he likens himself to Jesus"

John 15:

18“If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first. 19The world would love you as one of its own if you belonged to it, but you are no longer part of the world. I chose you to come out of the world, so it hates you. 20Do you remember what I told you? ‘A slave is not greater than the master.’ Since they persecuted me, naturally they will persecute you. And if they had listened to me, they would listen to you. 21They will do all this to you because of me, for they have rejected the one who sent me. 22They would not be guilty if I had not come and spoken to them. But now they have no excuse for their sin. 23Anyone who hates me also hates my Father. 24If I hadn’t done such miraculous signs among them that no one else could do, they would not be guilty. But as it is, they have seen everything I did, yet they still hate me and my Father. 25This fulfills what is written in their Scriptures^a: ‘They hated me without cause.’

Don't you people see, you accuse me of hatred and bigotry, but it is your hearts that are so filled with anger and seething with contempt for me and my words. I am not angry, I am not upset with anything you have said. I merely answer your words with more words, and you guys are foaming at the mouth to tear me apart. Can't you see that you guys are acting just like what is spoken about in scripture?

Peace and love to you all.

P.S. Can any of you wish me well? If you cannot it is a sign of the condition of your hearts.

Love Brian :)

I've come back a few times, because I suspect this was the kind of person you were Brian. In some recessed, fetid corner of your imagination, you actually believe that having the last word makes you right. I wonder how that's working out for you in real life. *shakes head*

Hey, Brian, the bottom line: God and the bible do not make our laws; we are a secular nation, not a theocracy. As has been pointed out already, God, Jesus, the bible, and any other religious deity or text is not mentioned in the Constitution -- which is the basis for each and every one of our laws -- for that specific reason.

Oh, Brian, you poor boy. To base your whole life on a book written and edited by men must be a sad thing. I will admit that the bible is a wonderful story book. It is full of stories meant to teach a lesson, and if used in that respect... as a learning tool... it is an awesome book. BUT... that is not what it is... is it? It is a book of power. A tool used by powerful men to keep the masses under control by quoting only specific lines and stories out of it. It was first put together in the 4th century... by the romans. You know... the guys who killed Jesus. Problem is, not everyone liked the job that they did, so there were a lot of different versions floating around until the late 16th century, when they got together and made a single... official... bible. Do you know what that means Brian? That means, for 1200 years, your god was saying different things to different people. How can that be? It is the word of god. It is not allowed to be modified in ANY way!! Tell me, Brian, when they decided on that final version... who decided what god's words really were? I tell you... men... not god. You are quoting from a book written and edited by men, Brian. I'm not going to argue with you on this, because you obviously only know how to spit things from the bible. You obviously know nothing about the real history of your book or of your religion. Tell you what, Brian. Why don't you do something unique for yourself. Set down your bible and learn something else other than the word of man disguised as something more.

Brian, I don't wish you ill at all. May you have a wonderful day.

Hello all.

@different

I have tried not to answer you, and I gave u the last word on many topics. In fact, I again....give you may have the last word. Come back, read this, insult me and I won't respond. One more thought, different - where is your love? I keep bringing this up, because I'm surprised that you would appear to be so angry. Show me your love for me, lift me up, encourage me. Consider the words of Paul when he spoke of a loud gong or a clanging cymbal. I keep looking for Christian love in you and am not finding it.

Hi ErinNJ

I never said we were a theocracy, but I don't believe we are a secular nation. We are (less and less it seems) comprised of folks who believe, and who don't believe. Most of our laws are secular, but the constitution is merely a document that "recognizes" that which is already true. The constitution doesn't "give" us our rights, but recognizes them. That recognition starts with the word "created" to demonstrate what our founders knew to be true. They could have said evolved, but they didn't.

@Kinkomaster

Hi, I thought it was funny how many times you used my name. But I digress. I read the Bible several times and discovered that the Words written in it were Holy. I found the message resonated with truth. Many folks like yourself like to give the Bible cursory credit, such as "it's a good book, it's great, it's awesome" But in the same breathe you turn around and call the message and the messenger, "Liars". So it's either fact or crap. It can't be both. If it's a book of wisdom based on a lie, then it's not wisdom at all. And if it were written for control of humanity by humanity, then it is also crap. But I have discovered by the continuity of it's message and by the infallibility of it's teaching that it is more than perfect, it is Holy. So much so that it makes all other books pale in comparison. Did you know this book is the #1 best seller of all time? The New York times doesn't even publish it as #1 because it would be in that position perpetually. So those ancient dudes (perhaps God) must have been crafty, because I cannot imagine ANY one else able to accomplish that.

I further believe the Bible to be self proving. I'm not going to go on an archaeological hunt to try to prove or disprove it. I say the proof is in the "pudding". If it isn't of God, it would lack power to change lives. I recommend you read it and make a determination. I recommend the NLT version of it as that one is an easier read than say a King James Version. But even still, if you want to make up your mind before reading it, you are free to do that.

God bless.

Brian

Kinko, since we are friends, I'm sure the fact that your comments towards Brian were inadvertently attacking me as well was totally in response to his tone and not my faith. I respect beyond believe your beliefs - or right not to believe, and based on previous conversations between us, I am under the impression you feel the same.

Tam, as an atheist, I believe what I believe. I will never attack YOUR faith, but I will attack your religion. I know you understand what I mean by that, so never take anything I say personally... BUT... if it brings up something you'd like to discuss. I will be more than happy to discuss it with you and give you how I see it so maybe you understand it better.

Now... on to you, Brian. You see, Brian, I kept mentioning your name... Brian, because I was speaking to you. I see you have a problem with people addressing you... Brian. Nonetheless... let's get on with your ranting response, huh, Brian. First off... I never called any names. Never called anyone liars. Never called the bible crap. I see that you place words in people's mouths when you speak. That would be given the description of a forked tongue in the past... or a deceiver to make things clear for you. You obviously don't know me, because I was very gentle with you on my last post, and you decided to disrespect me, so... I will do the same. What does that mean, Brian? That means get a cross and some spikes, because you are about to get nailed!

Let's start this off right. I grew up catholic, so I've read the bible several times. I've also read other holy books... older holy books. Ones that have stories that ring very familiar, but we won't get into the fact that christians stole holidays to get the pagans to worship. You wanna talk bible, so let's do that. Which one do you want to talk about? The Old Testament evil god that killed, tortured and sadistically punished his followers... all to show their faith? Maybe the New Testament's good god, that changed and wouldn't harm a soul, even after stringing up his only son... altho, I thought we were all supposed to be his children. Where he lays out a list of traits that all christians should aspire to, and I have found only a handful that are even close to true christians. Just because you can spew a few lines out of the book does not make you a good christian, Brian... sorry.

As for it being the #1 seller of all time, who cares. All that shows is how many sheep are in the field... it has nothing to do with the faith behind the book. I really hate to break this to you, but NOTHING can be used to prove itself. When you do that, it just makes a mockery of whatever you say. You might think that you are righteous, but as I said, you lack the traits of a true christian, and you have proven thru these boards that you lack humility. You should know these traits, Brian, they are in your book that you profess to love so much.

The other thing that I've noticed is that you are very black and white. If it isn't wisdom, it's crap. It's either fact... or crap. Here is the interesting thing, Brian. The bible says that no many is perfect/ infallible, yet you... an imperfect man... can judge what perfection is. How is that, Brian? You don't even know what perfection is. To twist your head just a little more, since man is an imperfect beast... and man is the writer and editor of the bible... how can it be considered perfect at all? It was written by imperfect men, copied for hundreds of years by THOUSANDS of years by imperfect men and now being judge by a very imperfect man as... drum roll... perfect. You see, Brian, this is why faith is so important to you. When you look back down the line of all the imperfect men that have touched and copied the bible... you need to have faith that what you are reading is anything close to how it started.

Alright, Brian, pick up your #1 best seller... clutch it close to your chest... click your heels 3 times and whisper... "make him not right."

Ah. Is this why you didnt want me to stalk you?

Hi Kinko, thank you for taking the time to respond to me.

I would like to take some time to respond to some of the statements you made, if I may, as I respectfully disagree with some of your points.

I would like to point out that the Old Testament God you are referring to is not evil, nor sadistic, but in fact Holy and Sovereign. And further, he is the same God who came as a lamb to be sacrificed. He was demonstrating, as is his right, since this is His show...what it is to try to please God and be "good enough" under your own strength. No one in their own power can ever please God, nor be "good enough" to go to heaven. It was this that was being demonstrated. God used physical situations as an analogy for things to come. As you know the 10th plague of Egypt was the death of the first born son, but those who were covered by the blood of the Lamb (the blood on their doorposts) were "saved". They were lead out of "slavery" on a long journey of faith (trust in their God) to the "promised land" (heaven). But physical sacrifices and penance can never make anyone clean in God's eyes for the wages of sin is death. So God's way of making himself right with us comes by a perfect sacrifice by a perfect lamb. When we accept his blood we are clean before God (even though we remain imperfect - as you have correctly pointed out regarding me). It says in the Bible that we are made right with God by our faith. So when we trust God to fulfill his own promises in our life, it is counted to us as righteousness. This is why I trust God with my salvation and call Jesus my savior because of the blood of a life lived perfectly - he has paid for my sins if I accept it. So you are correct to notice a contrast between how God presented himself in the Old vs New Testament. So a true Christian is one who places their hope and trust in Jesus and lives by faith. Not a person who is perfect, and spewing scripting doesn't make me "good" anymore than anything else in this life I could do. It is the recognition of my failure that has allowed me to reach out for salvation. As Christ said:

"Healthy people don't need a doctor--sick people do. I have come to call sinners, not those who think they are already good enough."

So looking at that statement, I recognized my sickness and Jesus healed me (it's actually a process - this life - when I get to Heaven I will be completely healed).

I take issue with you saying that nothing can prove itself. At some point you either believe that the Universe was created out of nothing by the power of nothing, or you believe that it was done by the power of God. But either way, you spoke those words given a reality that is somewhat of a god to you. One of those realities either always existed or came in to existence. Folks who believe in evolution use only what they can see to prove how they came about, but are unable to answer the fundamental question of how all of it, any of it came about. God says he has always existed, if I deny that, then I have to turn to the Universe and decide it always has or somehow popped into existence.

With regard to your statement about how I can judge perfection, I can't....I don't even fully understand it. But to the extent that I have personally experienced something much higher than this life we are living, I can recognize it. Much the same way you can recognize talent or great music, even if you have no talent or do not know how to play any instrument.

As for your assertion that the Bible was written by man. I agree a man's utensil wrote it, and their hands preserved it. But God authored it, and since he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent do you think it would be that hard for him to protect his words? If he really does exist, is this so impossible? So whether man wrote it or not, it all comes back to does he exist or doesn't he. Fact or crap.

Blessings and grace to you.

Brian

Kinko, to clarify, to mean my religion, Christianity? Because my faith in Jesus as Savior is mutually inclusive to that religion. Now by religion, do you mean denomination? Because I will never argue that wit you, as most denominations have their faults, and although I am happy with mine, and very clear eyed on it's imperfection.

My faith can be summed up by 2 things. Love you neighbor (which is everyone) as yourself and love the Lord your God with all your heart. I hardly think you'd deny there is any harm in the first, and if I don't shove the 2nd down your throat, you'd have no reason to critisize me for that believe.

I would NEVER disrespect you for your lack of faith in my - or any other God- and just ask for the same from you.

(Kill a child, duct tape her mouth, and party for a month, we'd have a different conversation!)

My particular issue was "Oh, Brian, you poor boy. To base your whole life on a book written and edited by men must be a sad thing" Because you could have subsituted Tammy for Brian. I disagree it's sad, it is faith. And I PERSONALLY believe it was God inspired. I also believe in your right to disagree. And although I may think having no faith is sad, I would never, ever "attack" (in quotes, because that is really too strong of a word for what you did) you for that.

And, Wow, by didn't want to be a stalker, you CAN'T mean me, as I relish your stalking!

No, no, not you. Kink told me not to stalk him because of the conversation. We already hashed this out, lol.

I was about to cry if you didn't stalk me!

No cryin, I love ya!

Tam! re-enforcements! woot!

I was wondering where all the Christians were :)

Brian, I will say Kinko is a newsvine friend, and I've never heard him put down Christians in the past, so I'd have to see what inspired these comments. I know sometimes Christians, myself in the past included, have come off fire and brimstone instead of conveying the message of Christ's love for all, and that will draw fire. I dont know you did this, because I haven't read all the posts. I just know, in my experience, Kinko is respectful of all (except twits.)

You gotta lot of readin', but I hope you will find my comments to be kind and respectful.

Brian

I gotta say, I had the debate with Kink before. He was always respectful to me about it, but I was also respectful of him at the same time. He has his reasons, that is his area to share, not mine. I dont think as a christian, you should need help in your debate. Your faith should be what is leading, not the urge to win. True christians should not be worrying over winning the debate, but showing someone a hand of help on their quest.

I am a believer, but dont believe in organized religion as His house is everywhere.

Kink, I read what you said :) Nuff said :) I will chat with you about that. I'll hit ya with an email :)

Tam, I tried typing out on my tablet last night, but there was just too much, so let me reply to you first. Replacing your name with Brian's is a little different. You believe in the bible, but you also hear things outside of it... correct me if I'm wrong. Brian is a "true believer", or what I call a true blue bible thumper. There is not a thing that you can show about the bible to change his tunnel vision one iota. There are so many places in the bible that contradict itself, sometimes in the same book, and I truly believe if a higher power "wrote" this book as he believes... these mistakes would not be there. I understand that you have faith and I truly love someone that has faith because it is a beautiful thing to see. The faith between you and your god will never have me trying to separate you... not my style. In the same breath, the bible is an object that has been handled by man for centuries and as much as you and Brian would like to think otherwise... I BELIEVE it is tainted. If you like that your god had inspired its original writing, I won't argue with YOU on that point, but I will still suggest that the word is tainted, but not the sentiment. I don't think that book is a bad book... I never have. I think it is a great book to teach morals and lessons with. To take it as the words of a higher being speaking... as Brian does... I find... narrow-sighted. I hope you understand what I'm saying to you.

Now, Brian, as you've read above. You see that I consider you a "true believer". To me... that can be a dangerous thing. That makes you blind to a lot of things. You make excuses so things stay in that narrow tunnel. You see, for your 10th plague, you see god "saving" children for people who performed animal sacrifices and places the blood of the animal over there door, so that the god would not SLAY their CHILD. You are missing this little point, Brian. He was killing kids. If he is all powerful, he could have just freed them. They could have been moved without ANYONE dying, but you can't see this. Your god is "good" but doesn't act it. This is a story... NOT the word of god.

I'm going to make this real simple as to why I can't believe that your god is good... especially if I'm supposed to believe the bible is his word. In the bible, he has his followers go in and wipe out whole villages... down to the goat (except for the virgins), he burns down Sodom and Gomorra, and even goes so far as to kill EVERYONE in the whole world... except for 1 family. I know... the modern god is loving, but he allowed the Holocaust... the killing of his "chosen" people... then there is Africa. The amount of suffering there is epic. What about all of the children that have been brutally murdered as of late?

You see, Brian, you can write this all off as god testing us or his right to do, and if that is what you truly believe... well, that belief is all yours. If I were to ever bend a knee to anything, it would need to prove itself as a good being... not just say it is. I guess that is the difference between the 2 of us. I will not blindly follow anything.

Tam, I was as gentle as I could be in expressing my views. I am usually much more... focused, but you appear to want to put yourself in Brian's shoes... so I used a LOT of restraint this time around. Just for you! ;)

Good morning Kinko,
You have some really good points, and I understand your feelings. There have been times when I myself thought the same way you do.
So it sounds to me the one thing that is a stumbling block for you is reconciling God's goodness and love with his Holiness and lack of tolerance for sin.
The one edict God made from the very beginning is this. The wages of sin is death. In other words, if you mess up even once you must die. You might say this is a horribly callice God. Or you could say, that God is so pure and good and righteous that he cannot allow even near him one iota of imperfection. Without question, sin must be dealt with. He will not have lawlessness, disobedience, hate, rage, or enmity to exist. So who could stand before God? How can anyone make it? Who could ever be worthy to live in His presence for all eternity? Exactly. And this is the point of nearly all the difficult passages in the OT. Notice, there is an Old and a New. The Old one was so Holy that even Moses' face glowed when he brought the terms of the covenant down from the mountain to the people. Yet God himself found fault with it and made a new covenant with mankind for all eternity.
You find fault with God for killing even children, but you place Him on the same level as yourself. It would be wrong for you to kill children, but for him, He is the potter....He has every right to find fault and exercise judgement against those things he made. You want to judge Him and find fault with him, but humanity in their arrogance has this backward. People should realize this key statement. "You are God and I am not". That is the whole point of all of God's judgement and wrath. Remember when God had the Israelites destroy villages....They were acting on His command...so it was God that decided that they were too wicked to preserve. It was God that decided that Sodom and Gomora were to be destroyed, and it was He that wiped out the whole planet except for a single family.
But this doesn't please God, this wasn't why he made us. He didn't make us to destroy, and to punish, and to suffer. He made us to love and be in relationship with Him. He made us to be His own family to be his Sons and Daughters...for joy and happiness and life for all eternity.
So we owe God our very blood for not being God. There is only one God and none can stand before Him. The pride of Life fools people in to thinking that God owes you life and that his laws and rules for you are higher than He is. That He is subject to those laws. But everyone is guilty the moment they were created for not being God. It would be one thing if people could recognize this without this whole charade called life. This isn't heaven, and God allows all sorts of horrors to exist while we choose. We must recognize our place and recognize our need for God because we under our own power cannot be Holy and Good and Righteous. That if ever we are, it is soley because of Him. And if we ever get there that our road to Holiness was paved with his grace. So God decided to pay Himself. The law requires blood and God Himself came down to pay the debt. In this way, He remains Holy and intolerant of sin, but able to show us Love and Grace. None can stand before Him justified except through Him. He came down, lived a perfect life, and loved even the sinners who were crucifying Him. When his blood poured out, the forgiveness came with it, and water came out...the Holy spirit...which dwells inside us until we are made whole and join in the God family. The earth shook and the curtain separating us from the Most Holy Place was torn in two. We now have a perfect priest and a direct relationship with God without the need of being of a certain lineage or good enough.
So you see, God could not save even one Child without first dealing with their sin. God must remain Holy and cannot act until this issue is dealt with. As far as God was concerned (in the analogy), they were in slavery (slavery to sin) and were going to die in it. He swooped in, paid for their sin, then saved them from it. You say, He killed them....but in a sense people kill themselves. The law of sin is like the law of gravity. God stands there and people jump to their deaths and ask why God killed them. In the same way, people sin and are doomed.
As for incongruity in the Word of God. Most of it is not. It takes study and the Holy Spirit to understand what God was saying. It is beyond all of our comprehension to accept the word of God without His help.
And Kinko, thank you for using so much restraint. Remember, these are just words - They are just another humans' beliefs - I don't mock you for yours, I fail to see what is so shocking or offensive about my telling you my beliefs...Perhaps I do know something you don't, perhpas I don't. Perhaps I have had a close relationship with God and I understand Him and have seen miracles, and visions in dreams. Perhaps not.
Peace be with you,

Brian

*leans forward on elbows* I don't know how to explain it, Brian. I've been where you're at when I was a child. I did all that and drank all the koolaid. I guess I see you and see a little bit of myself. I see an intelligent man with his eyes closed, so wrapped up in the blanket of religion that there is nothing outside of it. I've studied so many other religions and have learned the histories of them. I've also read/ listened to the views of the zealots on the complete opposite side of you and their rhetoric. Some things just seem so plain to me and I just get so frustrated when someone won't take that step back and look at what they believe in objectively. It always seems to need to be something "striking" that happens. Something that has nothing to do with the church, but makes makes you suddenly look at it differently. It's like snapping out of a dream. The problem is that I come on here and see others at varying levels of awareness. The "hostile" christians are the ones that I tend to go after. They believe they know their own religion, but actually know nothing about it... and they definitely don't want to find out what I know about it, so they go into denial or leave.

Then there is you, Brian. The "true believers". Most of them are not as near as calm as you are. They quote from the bible left and right and plug their ears to anything said to them. You on the other hand are quite different. For that reason, I see you as drowning in blindness, and all I want to do is reach out and pull you up so that you can take a breath and see things as they are. I know... it is funny that we see each other the same way. I read thru everything you said and I hate to say that I've heard it all before. It was drilled into me in catholic school... it was drilled into me in CCD... it was drilled into me by my family. I know the rhetoric and the meaning behind it. I also know the built in contradiction... as was shown in your post above. First god is intolerant of sin so he kills children, but then he allows the horrors to happen.

I have some simple questions for you... if your god is truly good, why did he create evil at all? Why did he create anything "bad"? We could have free choice without the need of ever knowing what hatred was. Your god is "all knowing"... he knew/ knows about every bad thing that ever happened... why not make his "creations" so that he would need to destroy them at all?

All I ask is that you don't come at me with the ability to choose, because god didn't want you to have it. (Garden of Eden and the apple)

Kink

@Kink

It seems we are at the point of agreeing to disagree, the only difference is your hostility to my position, you are exuding all the things you hate about Christians. You call me a True Believer, that you were where I am when you were a child, that believing as I do is "drinking the koolaid". Then there's all the "Brian"s and the "leaning forward on elbows". And you say my eyes are closed, and I'm wrapped in a blanket of religion, and you refer it as zealotry, and in a dream, and we who believe we know our religion, know nothing. Our ears are plugged and drowning in blindness.

I'm beginning to wonder how much of that could be applied to yourself. It seems we are two people standing on the opposite side of the same floor looking through a hole at one another. We both exclaim, "you're caught in a hole!". Perhaps we both are, perhaps one of us isn't.

But I will answer your questions, as I'm sure you knew I would - but I'm not so sure you are really interested in the answers. For the goal of most of your questions isn't to learn something new, but to expose my profound stupidity. But I think it gets you very upset when the words I express in a calm manner are not rantings from a crazy person, but are actually founded on reason, one you reject, but still a reason.

God did not create Evil. Evil is an attribute of a thing, but not a thing in and of itself. Evil really isn't a noun, but an adjective. We often use it as such, but in actuality it is used to describe that which is not Good. Guns: Good or Bad. Neither. The use thereof is Good or Bad. Cars. A Hammer. A hammer is an excellent tool...many houses have been built. Many people have been bludgeoned to death. Fire. Good or Bad?

So Darkness is the absence of Light, and evil is opposite of that which is Good. You could say that Evil exists because Good does. But it's just a possibility. So in a sense the moment God created things less than himself, the possibility of Evil was created. If He wanted those things to be greater than just an object like a hammer, then that meant free will. At the end of the day, my conclusion is that the risk of Evil and hatred was worth the relationships and love he could have by going through this with us.

Remember God created Lucifer, "Light Bringer". I gather that he was the most powerful, brilliant, and glorified of all the Angels. Next to God Himself he was the highest. So you have a perfectly created being with a will...without the need to be Evil...and yet it was possible.

Your reference about not coming at you with the ability to choose is incorrect. You say he didn't want you to have it. Not true. He wanted them to choose correctly, wisely, rightly. But he did allow them the choice. He didn't want them to have the apple, but the choice was freely given to them. The apple of course being representative of rebellion against God in any form.

What it seems you want, is no rules at all. You want your cake and eat it too. You were created by God himself, but you don't want to recognize him as God. You want to make the rules and you act as if mankind is capable of this, while we all sit on a planet that is quaking with the consequences of mankind trying to rule himself. You say if God is soooo loving why does he allow all this to happen. And yet this abject failure of a world is staring you in the face as to what it means to reject God. So you blame Him for mankind's poor choices, but you give Him no credit for His existence. All he wants for you to do is look up, (and while you're at it you can stop looking down on me).

Matthew 18:3

And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

So when you call me a child; I say, you are right. And when you say you aren't, I say again, you are right.

Brian

Alright, Brian, it appears that we are coming to the end of our discussion. As it always happens when I end up dealing with one of you thumpers, you take EVERYTHING out of context. You should be ashamed of your first 2 paragraphs. I drank the koolaid... I snapped out of the dream... but if you feel this need to crawl up on a cross, so be it.

Since you don't want me addressing you by your name, I'll just call you by your deserved name... thumper. I only use "true believer" on people that I respect, but it appears that time has come to an end.

I asked those questions to see your side of things... not to learn or expose anything on your part. I simply wanted to know how you viewed things, but the way that you lashed at me for a couple simple questions spoke volumes to me. All your soft talk and measured behavior only hides your true self. We keep getting glimpses by you judging me... which is fine... I have nothing to hide, unlike you. Let's examine your questions, shall we?

God did not create evil... really? god is supposed to be all powerful. It created EVERYTHING as you thumpers love to drone on and on about, but suddenly he didn't create the bad things that make us human. Suddenly, evil is just an adjective. This adjective that needs an underworld named hell to hold people that have sinned. You say that I can't have my cake and eat it to... hey kettle... you're black. Your god either created EVERYTHING, or he created NOTHING... period. I am simply using your own black and white thinking here.

Then the apple... there was no choice. It put it there knowing that they would take it. Your god is all-knowing... right from you, thumper. There was no choice given. It put it there knowing that they would take it and then it would expell them out into the wastes. A truly sadistic god. There are no surprises. It knows all. It knows if people are going to prove themselves or not, yet it tortures them. It knows when his playthings are going to stray, yet it allows them so it can kill them. You see a choice when it comes to your god, thumper, but if you truly believe in it... there is no choice whatsoever. It knows everything that you are going to do and your path is selected. Nothing you do can change it. You have NO choice. Believe what you will, but it is a simple thread of logic that I spin.

Yes, I want my cake and I want to eat it. Everything that I do... I'm going to take credit for it. If I mess something up, I will take the blame for it. I believe there is only one person to blame for my actions... ME. I do not need to go to confession and have a jack in the box forgive me by making me pray. I will not give god credit for when I succeed, and I will not lay the blame at his feet also. I am simply not built that way. I understand that a thumper like you has no choice but to grasp on tight to something that will protect him and carry him along the beach. In that little poem... my footprints never leave the sand.

I'm thru with you putting words in my mouth and taking things out of context. If you wish to be a child of god, you can have it. Perhaps some day you will grow up to be a man.

Kink

I apologize if I took something out of context, I was responding to what I understood you saying. I'm starting to wonder if you were harmed at the hands of a so called Christian. If that is or was the case, remember some people who think they are standing on this side of the double sided floor are actually still on the wrong side. Some who call themselves Christians actually aren't. But you don't need to judge God based on the failures of people. You don't even need confession. There's no call for that in the Bible, you can go directly to Him without the need of a priest.

I can see your will is strong, but I think your heart hurts. Maybe one day you'll reconsider. May you go in peace.

Lord God,

I know Kink does not know you as I do, and I am sorry if I have misrepresented you in any way to him. May your grace and understanding fill this man and give him the peace and love you gave me. May he know the love you have for Him someday. May I see him raised up standing with you, next to me. Perhaps one day, he and I will look back on this and embrace.

In Jesus name,

Amen

Kinko, if we are going to speak of the Bible in the English (which is the language we both speak) context, I can't argue with much of what you say. For example, there are 7 (I think) words for sin in ancient Greek. I heard a great sermon on that once, and one excellent point was a word for sin in Greek that is the equivilant of "how far can I go before I'm actually sinning?"

Jesus was asked "what are the greatest commandments. He replied "Love the Lord our God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourelf." I figure, if I live like that way, I can't go wrong.

Kinda how I feel about it too, Tam.

Tam,

IMO, analyzing the words is irrelevant when trying to find conflict within the word of God because He only meant 1 thing. And we know because of the Holy Spirit as our counselor that He is able to communicate to us in other ways than just the printed Word.

As far as how far one can go before you are actually sinning, one needs to remember that sin begins in the heart and eventually manifests itself in actions and deeds. As far as how far you go with your deeds is actually beside the point, but as far as your heart is concerned, you either are or you aren't. This is why we are called to the law of "love" which is a higher standard than any rules or regulations could be made. There is a passage that says, "Whatever is in your heart, determines what you say", and another where it says that from the heart comes all sorts or wickedness. So even if you have taken absolutely no action, you can still sin before the Lord. There are other passages that back this up, "Create in me a clean heart, O Lord".

But your last statement is the best, those are the two guiding principles that the message of the Bible is conveying. If you love God with all your heart, he will help you love your neighbor as well. Only when we lose our sinful nature will we be able to do this perfectly. Until that time, we have to live by faith and in His grace.

Brian. I think you are missing what Tam and Kinko are trying to say.

God may have only meant one thing, but the point they are trying to make is that PEOPLE have touched, and therefore tainted, the Bible.

It is no longer what it was 2000 years ago. It has been translated, edited, and CHANGED BY MAN. Therefore, you cannot take every little word in the Bible as the complete divine word of God. Especially since I can pick up the two Bibles I have, turn to the same verse, and they will say different things.

I do believe the Bible is the Word of God. I do not believe, if taken in it's entirety, it contradicts its self. I don't feel this is the forum for which I should state my case though.

Again,Love the Lord your God, Love your neighbor. Every commandment is rooted in those two.

My friend once said the Bible tells us to DO more than it tells us THOU SHALL NOT. (Love your neighbor, take care of the widow and orphaned, etc, etc.) If we did all the do's we wouldn't have time to do the don't so we wouldn't because we couldn't. (He was trying to be funny, but he's right.)

I have 5 versions of the Bible I use. I don't think they are different in their message, only the wording. It's possible for 2 sentences to mean the same thing.

Could someone post me a contradiction? I'm curious, because everyone says there are, but no one quotes one.

Alrighty...

Should we kill?

• Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
• Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."

  vs.

• Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."
• I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
• I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."
• Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
• Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up."

Go here for translation discrepencies:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html

Try another topic:

Does God change his mind?

• Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not."
• Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent."
• Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent."
• James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."

  vs.

• Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."
• Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him."
• Jonah 3:10 ". . . and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."

  See also II Kings 20:1-7, Numbers 16:20-35, Numbers 16:44-50.

  See Genesis 18:23-33, where Abraham gets God to change his mind about the minimum number of righteous people in Sodom required to avoid destruction, bargaining down from fifty to ten. (An omniscient God must have known that he was playing with Abraham's hopes for mercy--he destroyed the city anyway.)

Didn't want to do this Kink, but consider it an open exchange of ideas instead of a debate.

"

oes God change his mind?

• Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not."
• Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent""

How is this contrictory? Malachi, he is God, In Numbers He is no a man to lie or a son of man that needs to repent. This supports he is GOD.

I have to look at context of rest, and we reviewed stitches in finger.

Ok, obviously I read too fast and you were not saying the were contridictory. However you misquoted (inadvertantly, I'm sure) Exodus 32:14 which reads "So the LORD relented from the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Not repented.

I quoted from the NEW King James Version. It is widely believed that the KJV is most corrupt because King James wanted to justify some of what he was doing. Additionally, on word in English has several in Greek and/or Hebrew.

Here is the NKJV of the same verse "

Genesis 6:6-7

New King James Version (NKJV)

⁶ And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. ⁷ So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them"

He was sorry, but not repentful. They were evil, and grieved Him.

In the interest of our friendship, I will stop there.

OK, I know I said the last post was my last post, but out of respect, I would like to give you the evidence of what I mean.

In Biblical Hebrew, the idea of repentance is represented by two verbs: שוב shuv (to return) and נחם nicham (to feel sorrow).

*kisses Tam on the cheek* Darlin', Brian asked for contradictions. I merely supplied them. I'm not adding commentary to it... I didn't want to. I knew that you and wowed would be reading it. *sits down facing Tam* There is no need to think I'm coming after you on this. I don't want to debate or argue with you on this. I know how close to home this hits you and I just don't want to take those shots... I like you WAY to much to do it. Look what you did above by me simply posting the contradictions he asked for. By the end of your 3rd post you were worried about our friendship... and I had never said a peep (very unlike me if I say myself). I want to say more, but I'm thinking I'm on the edge as it is... so I will leave you with this. I didn't show you to attack you but to educate as to how I see it. With that... I am off to the Lounge... once again.

Kinko, I have no doubt you were not, nor would you ever intend to attack meyou. And I hope I didn't come back on the attack, for I wasn't. I realize that we agree to disagree on this issue. I was just pointing out, from my perspective, these were not contridictions when looking at the original text. I need to read Brian's posts to see your perspective. I dislike "Christians are superior" far more than those who exercise free will to not believe.

NBC is the Ringleader. It's an agenda.

An agenda to make sure everyone is treated equally? I can support that.

The conservative estimate is 10%, but in reality the number of gay people is almost certainly a lot higher than that.

By who? Unfortunately no one who does the estimating is without a stake in the answer.

Then cite your souce for that 2% claim Eric.

Otherwsie, you're the pot calling the kettle black.

Eric

Kindly keep your prayers to your no-existant cloud riding magic man to yourself. I can make my own imaginary friends, thank you very much.

clotho: No. NBC's reporting and documntaries are presented as a classroom lesson. They take great care to present the interviewee as a victim, even if they don't know anything about them, talking to the them in the same manner they would a teenage rape victim. It's less about promoting civil rights and more about the drive to subtly coax people into feeling sorry for the gay population(which is the wrong thing to do because that automatically puts them in a lower class). That's my opinion, and sorry, you won't change it.

mt-512899

You clearly miss the point of a blog. It exist so we can all freely express our opinions without concern that others agree or disagree with it. If we all followed your suggestion blogs would be empty. Your opinion that the God I worship is imaginary is just that - your opinion and you are as entitled to it as I am to mine. BTW, I pray for all the non-believers including you.

Since all religions are unproven and thereby non-existent, there is nothing wrong with being homosexual. There is, however, something wrong with being a hateful person in a world full of people who are all different.

I've got this one for you Clotho

12.9% in Seattle!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003432940_gays16m.html

No one really knows and some say 1-3% overall, others 3-8%, others 1 in 5 persons...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/6961/what-percentage-population-gay.aspx

Wrap your little head around this Moral Weighs....

In August 2002*, Gallup asked Americans, in an open-ended format, to estimate the percentage of American men and the percentage of American women who are homosexual. The average estimates were that 21% of men are gay and 22% of women are lesbians. In fact, roughly a quarter of the public thinks more than 25% of men and 25% of women are homosexual.

Do me a favor and research how many people are strictly heterosexual.

Eric

You missed the point yourself. I don't much care if it's on a blog or not, I don't want you to waste valuable energy praying to a made up character in a fairy tale book.

Pray to whatever god/man/carpenter/god/man you want, just keep it to yourself.

I wasted many years of my life on the same "god" you are. Hopefully, you'll come around soon, too!

NY Mike

The 2010 census. 2% is an average between between both men and women with women slightly higher. If you include bisexuals then the number is slightly more than 4%, again women are higher than men.

Lemon twist

I at least agree in part - hate is a sin also. Unforunately, unproven doesn't mean non-existent. There are many things we believe in that are "non-proven". The whole field of science is dedicated to resolving the un-proven and some things are singularities and therefore can never be proven. Whether you believe in 'the big bang' or creation doesn't matter they both depend on a singularity.

2%

So, for a population of over 300 million Americans, assuming at least 100 million are old enough to serve in the military, that means over 2 million Americans can serve if they choose without having to cover up or lie about who they are or who they love.

I'd say that's significant.

mt-512899

I appreciate your concern for my time. Unfortunately, my God requires that I pray for you if I am to claim Him as my God. I worship Him and serve man.

Black Kettle: Here's a novelty idea! Let's just all be gay, then we can forget how many or what percent. In the future if a few people(God forbid) are found to be straight we can jump on them. Good idea?

@Eric:

The whole field of science is dedicated to resolving the un-proven

Science has proven many things, for instance the earth is not flat (I'll keep it simple for you). If it has not been proven, it is starts as a hypothetical theory, once many parts of that hypothetical theory can be reproduced, it becomes a theory, when all parts of the theory can be reproduced (proven), it becomes scientific law (like gravity).

@imnotlost - hate to break it to you but I am not gay or bisexual, just a run of the mill heterosexual (but why would I flaunt that) who does not have a problem with who another chooses to love. I do have a problem with blind ignorance such as what you convey.

Since all religions are unproven and thereby non-existent

That actually makes no sense whatsoever. What does that even mean? There's a vacuum cleaner 3 feet away from me, but I can't prove that to you, does that mean my vacuum cleaner doesn't exist???

Sorry, I meant "who does not have a problem with whom another chooses to love."

For clarification: I believe, and I believe that science has also proven that one is born gay...so when I say "choose," I mean a gay person should be allowed to love whomever they please and it makes sense that their attraction would be to one of the same sex.

I've read that at least 40% of American men have at least one homosexual experience in their lives. I'm sure that many gay men have at least one heterosexual experience. I hope we soon get over the issue of gay and straight, and start thinking in terms of "people having sex with people." It makes sense, and offers all of us twice the opportunity to love. Why, even the Bible in Mark 12:31 and Leviticus 19:18, tells us to love our neighbor; it doesn't say love only our male or female neighbor.

So funny how you condemn all the gays in the media,

Hope you also recognize that every model you lust after has been styled by gay men. All the women on the street you like has been accessorized by gay men in the fashion industry.

Yes, you are basically reacting to what gay men has created for you.

Eric-

So funny that so many of you religious bigots hide behind your religion and base it as the reason you dislike gay men and women. Bc a 2000 yr old book told you. Sounds like a pretty crappy reason. Why don't you get with the times and stop justifying your hate from that book and learn that the book's message is really about love.

JeffInVa

I never said I disliked homosexuals - I don't. I don't fear them and have friends and acquaintances that are. My issue is with sin regardless of the sin - homosexuality, fornication, bigotry, gluttony, laziness, lust, etc. We are all born with a desire for certain sin or sins - I have my issues and you have yours. The key is acknowledging you have an issue and then doing something about it. My sin is no better or worse than yours and God wants us all to come to Him for help. God loves us and God hates sin - we are to do the same.

They could be 2%, .00002%, or 99.9999992%, it doesn't matter. Equal means equal.

^Exactly! Well done, Toasty

All of the male traffic reporters on my local TV stations are gay. They are not as hot as the female weather reporters. They do however get equal airtime.

Eric .. I don't know where you're getting your statistics. The 2010 didn't have a question about one's sexuality.

It was repealed, not appealed.

Also, homosexuals have been serving in the military without wearing pink or shouting from the rooftops since the inception of the word military and the forming thereof, so I think everyone is safe from them forming the flaming pink brigade.

There seems to be a misconception that military installations around the country will randomly break out in Broadway musicals with the full repeal of DADT.

Is that some sort of badge or patch you get? How does one wear their sexual preferance on thier sleeve is that like those Hello my name is "" stickers?

It's going to be a total disaster for people to be openly gay in the military.

Don't you know how many soldiers are going to fail their rifle drills because they compulsively decided to instead sit down talk about Melrose Place and fashion trends and interior decorating. It will be an outrage!! An outrage I tell you!!

I don't know what will destroy America first--fire and brimstone from God or terrorists.

and yes, Poe's Law, I know...

In the military, nobody is allowed to wear their sexuality on their sleeves, regardless of sexual orientation. It is a professional fighting force, and all servicemembers are expected to respect an appropriately professional atmosphere. This isn't rocket surgery here, it's basic common knowledge.

Read the freaking article. This man has been celibate for 25 years. And your comment is childish. You might try growing up someday. I moved beyond middle school humor decades ago.

Caesar was such a flamer that he was popularly known as "The Queen of Bythnia"...

And, yes, the current image of homosexuality is of fairly recent vintage. Almost all the Greek city states encouraged homosexual liasons amongst their hoplite soldiery because they believed it increased unit cohesion. The Macedonians did likewise and Alexander the Great was notoriously bisexual, with strongly homosexual leanings. The Romans saw nothing wrong with homosexuality itself, tho' they were strongly prejudiced against being on "the receiving end", as it were.

Oddly, many fundamentalist Christians (being ignorant of the history of the Bible's numerous revisions) hold the King James version to be the definitive, "God-inspired" text, yet King James was a nasty buggerer with decidedly depraved tastes (not to mention allegedly bad personal hygiene, even for his day). The list of gay or bisexual popes would fill an encyclopedia - and that long before the days of the recent sexual abuse cases.

That said, however, there should only ever be one concern in any decision affecting the Military, and that is "what will its effect be on combat effectiveness?" I'm not sure that question got proper concern in this decision, which was made purely on political considerations. Please note that I am former military and I have no problem with it - however, I don't presume to speak for the Services or the men and women therein. I'd be a lot more comfortable with this decision if someone had taken the time to ask them about it, instead of simply paying off campaign promises.

this is one of the reasons that I dont like Caesar... he was a MONSTER... not cause he was bi... but because of everything else included...

and now the catholic church has taken all these horrible pagan pratices and brought them into christianity... turning it into a monster...

Just throw all that garbage away and follow Jesus...

He alone can change you...

Jesus is a good character, don't get me wrong. But he's hardly the ONLY thing that can change a person.

Jonathan-1728701 14.3 "He alone can change you..."

You mean none of the other 2000+ gods man has created could be of any help?

I bet believers in those other gods think the same about your precious jesus.

Oh, that's right. Everybody else is wrong. I forgot.

Oldefarte: The attitude of the troops was taken. Their commanders all the way up to generals and admirals were responsible, and they reported their findings before the final decision was made.

Sane, I know that all those other religions are wrong... that is why I am here... to try to remove the lie and insert the truth... I dont want them to remain ignorant and follow a bunch of garbage their whole life...

they need the Truth...

you probably think i am arrogant (sp?)

I say this... its Tight, but its Right...

Truth is narrow...

2+2 =4

it will never = 5 or 19 or 43 or whatever...

so there is only 1 right answer and an tons of wrong answers...

same with God and absolute truth...

I know that all those other religions are wrong

And by this very same reasoning they know that yours is wrong.

They know they are right because their religion tells them it is the only correct one, a belief they hold in their heart just as you hold your belief in yours.

Johnathan, in all likelihood you are Christian simply due to an accident of birth.

If you were instead born in India to Indian parents you would be Hindu, Thailand Buddhist, Israel Jewish, Indonesia Muslim. The list of possibilities goes on.

The Roman Empire began it's swift and destructive decline after Christianity was made the state religion. Within a 100 years, over a thousand years of cultural, scientific, technological and social progress was wiped out by a single religion that, at its declared supremacy, constituted less than 10% of the population.

What a moronic response. You ignore a number of issues such (e.g., polytheism vs. monotheism), just to support a single viewpoint. It should also be pointed out that there have also been a number of gay / bisexual Christians who were in power, but you don't mention them.

Jerry, Christianity was just a part of their downfall. There was also the issues of excessive taxation, building beyond their means, a decadent lifestyle, invaders knowing their battle strategies and the senate not agreeing with it's leader.

While Christianity did have its place in the downfall of the Roman empire, it was not the main reason. Just one of them.

You're right - we are Rome. But it's not because of gay people, it's because of christianity.

Religion is the bane of the USA. If there would be no free religious practice, there would be a lot less hatred.

Actually, Jerry's point (Msg. #15.1) happens to echo the conclusion of Gibbons in his "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", and nobody who has read Gibbons can accuse him of "leaving anything out".

mt-512899 15.5

Religion is the bane of ALL mankind, not just the US. But...

You can't/shouldn't attempt to ban religion. That won't work. All that is needed is education and time. Well, that and pointing out the stupidity and silliness of it all (humiliation).

"""if Thomas Jefferson were alive today and saw how gays, atheists, anarchists, and others hide behind the Constitution to push their agendas or policies he WOULD have addressed it in specificity I'm sure in the Constitution""""

You are seriously out of touch with what the Constitution stands for, perhaps you should study how the laws we have now that evolved over time due to supreme court rulings on issues the are based on issues that revolved around constitutional rights.

For someone that claims that they dont hate Gays you sure do have a lot of mean and hateful things to say about them. You might want to take a good look at that because there is a lot of anger and negativity coming from your end.

I suppose JP that science is not your strong point - most mammals are not monogamous and 1,500 species, including some of the smartest, such as dolphins and chimpanzees engage in homosexual and bisexual behavior (without the 'demise' of the species).

The most well-known homosexual animal is the dwarf chimpanzee, one of humanity's closes relatives. The entire species is bisexual.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

C'mon, JP... "Washington and most of the founding fathers who were very religions men would have probably put gays in the military before a firing squad." Really ?!?

Most of our Founding Fathers were Deists, believing in a Supreme Being, but rejecting Miracles, Divine Intervention, the Trinity, and Christian Dogma in general as being dangerous and detrimental to any Society. Yes... they were religious... but NOT in a way that the Bible-thumpers today seem to think. They realized that one's belief system is between the Individual and his conception of God. That's why we have Separation of Church and State today.

As for their sexual tastes... um... Ben Franklin was a randy old bugger. Even as an Elder Statesman, was well known to mess around with anything that didn't violently object to his desires. Jefferson sired several children with his slaves (who were, technically, considered non-human). And Washington (besides growing acres of Pot) appointed open gays to high station in the Continental Army.

Firstly, JP, are you aware that Thomas Jefferson didn't write the Constitution? Most of the rest of us do know that.

However, if Jefferson were alive today, he'd probably be pleased at how well the Constitution has worked, if slowly and imperfectly, to extend equal rights to everyone. Why? Because he and the other Founding Fathers were the radicals of their day. They were also among the most learned and intellectual people in the country. At one time, those qualities were admired. Today, they're looked at with suspicion.

I agree. However, it is going to put a new meaning to friendly fire and collateral damage. They got what they wanted but many are going to pay a high price for it. Wait for it, wait for it. They have shoved this down the throat of everyone in the military and those that have done so will make others pay the ultimate price for it. It is bound to happen. It has already happened before DADT. Imagine what will happen now.

What's the percentage of christianity in the US? Because that was one of the primary factors that brought Rome down. In fact, during the eras where sexual orientation was a non-issue, Rome thrived as the pinnacle of society in the ancient world.

Jerry-1903677:

So - your recommendation is for the government now to discriminate - that's unconstitutional, right? ( :-( }

Yes, my recommendation is for the government, in the case of military service, to discriminate. The military does it all the time and it's perfectly constitutionally legal. The military discriminates based upon physicallity and age as well as other factors deemed incompatible with ability and cohesivness. Secual orientation has been proven for decades not to be incompatible. However, beliefs against fellow soldiers regarding their race, orientation, etc., are incompatible because the belief-holders cannot be relied upon to defend their troop mates.

Just wait until you serve in Afghanistan and Iraq. You are going to be in for a big surprise. If I don't want to serve next to a gay, I should not have to. Gays knew from the get-go, they were not suppose to enlist and what the consequences were if they got caught. If they signed up, they forced themselves to live the cloistered lives they now say they "suffered". In other words, they did it to themselves. I don't have to be classified as a bigot to say I don't want to serve in an isolated area with a gay. That should be my right. And as gays are the minority in the military, guess who should get their wish? I don't care if people choose to be gays, that's fine, but that does not mean they have a right to shove their way of life in my face. And no, I'm not afraid of them, before you go that route, I just don't agree with the life style. But I'll be da^%$ if I'll have to be forced to worry about it fighting in a foxhole or mine ridden location in the middle of no where. I should definitely have a say-so there. And if you don't like it, guess what? This is one I agreed with the Marine Corps Commander with. No one likes something shoved in their face and I don't like this shoved in mine. Only time will tell how this one wrings out.

I should definitely have a say-so there.

The last I checked you do not have a say-so, you follow all lawful orders period, no exception for ones own personal insecurities. If your personal insecurities are so debilitating that you can not perform your assigned duties, then maybe you should not be serving in the first place.

Only time will tell how this one wrings out.

Time has already told and the scales of justice did not fall in your favor.

That's just silly. You seem to have a sixth sense about who you meet on the streets' proclivities. I doubt that you can... even in your Hometown. How is some Taliban kook gonna know the difference, in Wartime ??

Gays have served proudly in every Branch of the Service since the Revolution. All that's changed is that they don't have to lie or "cover it up" anymore.

And that is going to be "the" big difference. That is going to be the difference in behavior that has the potentiall to bring about conflict on bases. Just wait. This has only just begun. When that behavior becomes open, then the problems may arise. We just don't know yet. Wait for it, wait for it.

Exactly. Wait until they get taken as a POW in some place like Iran or the Taliban. I'll bet they don't recite it after their social security number there!

Wait for it, wait for it.

Why wait? We have plenty of examples to look at to accurately predict our outcome.

The Coast Guard is both. Windblown, you know nothing about how the military is structured. I highly doubt you actually served. The Coast Guard is normally under the Dept of Transportation. However, during war either elements or the entirity of the Coast Guard can be transferred to the US military. Part of the funding is from the US Navy's budget (just as the Marines get their funding from the Navy and do not have their own seperate funding mechanism). This explains why units of the Coast Guard have served in the Persian Gulf in both the Gulf and the Iraq wars.

Funny, you criticize a reporter and don't know squat. Ex-JAG here.