Nov 17 2008
Gays Vs. Christians- The Gloves Are Off
Those warm fuzzy homosexuals are at it again only this time they are storming churches and extorting individuals. This writer can not help but wonder when criminal charges will be pressed against these vicious hate-filled individuals who have zero consideration for the rule of law. Why are their acts not considered hate crimes? Were these very events taking place against homosexuals roofs would be raised.
Enough is enough. The people have spoken on prop 8. The law is the law. Let the homosexuals take it up with the courts and in the meantime accept what is. There is nothing to be gained by storming churches, vandalizing churches, sending letters filled with white powders, extorting individuals, and harassing church goers with vulgarities and filth- especially in front of small children.
How much more are these christians willing to tolerate. Obviously the law is not going to protect them nor is the politician going to speak out on their behalf and demand these out of control homosexuals be called down, calmed down and order restored. It is up to the christians to once again band together to protect and defend each other, and their houses of worship, from these ferocious beasts who are trying to force them to their knees in subjection.
It is time to put aside your spiritual differences. Do not dare permit these callous individuals to defile your house of worship or that of your neighbor. If they dare enter the house of God for any reason other than to worship then escort them out then the “nicest” way. Remove them promptly from the premises. Call the police. Press charges. Do what you must and draw the line in the sand. End it. Today.
Gay and straight people are just ralling together for equal rights. How can you arrest someone for doing something wrong, when they are not even considered by “Christians” as people deserving of equality.
It is about time gays and straight people stand up to these so called “Christians” and say enough is enough, everyone deserves to be treated equally and not discriminated against.
You speak for “Christians” that discriminate, send hatred and so no respect for people that are not like them.
You need to read my post about what was said by a Mormon about taking away the rights of gays to marry. It was appalling and showed the hate against gays.
I wouls use the word “Christian” lightly when talking about people that discriminated in the frist place and encouraged their followers to risk proverty to give all their life savings to fighting against Prop 8.
Well said! I agree completely - good, gutsy post. I’m sure you’ll get plenty of hateful comments.
Blondie, I appreciate the fact your daughter is homosexual, however, the people have spoken. It was not just the 2% population of LDS in CA or the minute amount in AZ, AK or FL. Attacking the LDS church or private individuals is NOT going to change the views or the laws.
The majority of people LDS and non-LDS voted to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. Like it or not that is what constitutes marriage - male and female united.
Oh and let me add:
Sending envelopes of white powder is in fact a federal crime even if the substance proves to be harmless.
Intimidation and extortion are in fact crimes.
Harassment is a crime.
Assault and battery is a crime.
I love the way it is considered “hate” when you disagree. Nice try. I do not accept your definition of “hate” any more than I accept the DNC’s definition of “racist.”
You are saying because people voted it is now a fact. Well the constitutional rights of a person should never have been voted on in the first place.
My daughter being gay has nothing to do with how I feel about everyone having their equal rights. There are plenty of people who are not gay, have no gay relatives to speak, and still they want equality for everyone including gay persons.
Assualt and battery is a crime, so why do Palin and McCain think that there is no reason for a hate crime bill for crimes against gays?
You call it a crime when it is against “Christians” but it should be a mere slap on the hands when it is against gays?
Remember, you were for the republican party who felt that there is no need for a hate crime bill against gays.
Yes Blondie the people have spoken. Yes, these constitutional amendments should in fact be put to the people. Majority rules. Should we be rioting in the streets and sending envelopes of white powder, engaging in extortion and intimidation of those who voted for Obama in order to keep in out of office? No. The people have spoken.
As for equality, homosexuals have equal rights. They have the right marry. They just can not marry someone of the same sex.
As for Palin and McCain- I have no clue what the relevance is on this issue.
I do not believe in this so called “hate crime” legislation. It is a farce. Is not all violence, that is not in self-defense, based on hate? Is assault and battery of women not based on hate? Is assault and battery of young children not based on hate?
It does not matter if the victim of the crime is gay, straight, black, white, male or female. Assault and battery is criminal no matter who does it to whom.
So called “hate crimes” are nothing more than “thought crimes” that have no place in this society.
That being said, the peoples refusing homosexuals the right to marry does not- no matter how badly you attempt twist and distort- qualify as a “hate crime.”
A church that tells its followers to vote a certain way and donates money to certain causes isn’t a church — it’s a taxable cult.
Of course bill. I expect no less from you . It is certainly easy to attack an unpopular church making up 2% of California’s voters, as opposed to attacking the 52% that voted against prop 8. It is cowardly at best.
However, that does not dispel the fact that homosexuality defies the laws of nature and in life you don’t win a trophy just because you show up, and you certainly don’t destroy the fundamental makeup of society in order to make someone “feel better.”
If you think that homosexuality defies nature, then tell me how is it in the bible that people keep quoting, it said that god created Adam and Eve. Then they produced. Then their children produced together and so on. So what do you call that act of nature?
No one has been able to answer that one.
Blondie, you appear to believe you have a “gotcha” question so I must be misunderstanding. Certainly the answer can not be as simple as “when a boy and girl get together they create a baby.”
So, what are you asking?
Oh Virginia hon I hate disagreeing with you, but I have too many gay friends to sit silently on my hands on this one.
Blondie, the only time I ever was put out of the class in my entire school life was when I asked where the other people came from! At that time there was no outed gay community, it was an open question in a religious studies class. To this date, countless JW people have scurried away from my door when I’ve asked the same question. As I became older and less conditioned to follow the pack, I discovered the Bible was edited and that probably my answer lies in its out-takes which one day I might get around to reading. Saw a recent documentary about the variations in the Gospels that was very interesting …but that’s another issue! ROFL
Back to gay marriage, if it’s such a stink for the Christian community, then why isn’t it allowed as a civil law? Who wants to follow a religion that tells you who should be allowed to marry - but is happy enough with multiple wives, creating illigitiate children by granting annulments to married people who prefer to tarnish their children as conceived out of wedlock (if a marriage isn’t consummated, the children are illigitimate)rather than having themselves known as “divorced” - like God doesn’t know? Then there are all the clergy members who got away with decades of covered up child abuse but that was fine too - even sexual child abuse of boys by priests….wait doesn’t that sound as if…. Hmmm! Of course the Catholic church hasn’t equality for women never mind gay people so at least the Vatican is consistently intolerant on issues of gender!
God doesn’t dictate who we love, we do. I married a man I adore, and I’d of married him whether the church thought it was a good idea or not because at the end of the day, it’s not up to the church who I marry, it’s up to me and the person I love. I don’t expect someone to tell me that I should marry someone different because they don’t think it’s right that I marry my chosen partner. I expect my opinion of my chosen partner to be respected and therefore I respect the rights of others to do the same. By the same token I respect your right to disagree with me!
Katieanne! How are you on this fine morning.
I love it when you disagree with me. Like minds make for dull conversations.
As for your question, civil unions between homosexuals are in fact permitted in many states, including California. Homosexuals are permitted to adopt, be on each others health insurance, visit in the hospital, make treatment decisions, etc. The only difference between these civil unions and marriage is what it is called and who performs them.
To call the relationship a marriage will in fact set a the church and state on a collision course. In some place in the EU it already has. Here at home, in Boston, Catholic Charities have stopped providing adoption services because the state government wants to force them to place children in homes other than those with a mother and a father- which is in fact the ultimate environment to raise a child.
The LDS church has not practiced polygamy in over a century and when they did the children were not “illegitmate.” They were born within the bonds of marriage.
The child sexual abuse was horrendous. The cover up was beyond horrific. Child predators are known to infiltrate positions of trust and authority. Sadly the priesthood was one of the ones they infiltrated. That being said, the Catholic Church has gone far in cleaning it up and cleaning it out.
As for issues of equality. Why do you say this, because they do not permit female priests? That does not mean they are intolerant on issues of gender. It means they following biblical practice.
Churches are not run by the world court of opinion- at least they should not be- they are to be led by the laws of the Lord.
No religion has claimed perfection.
But what it boils down to is this, the majority in CA, AZ, AK, FL said “no” to gay marriage. CA is the most liberal state in this country. It is clear to see that even the far left do not want to see marriage redefined. That is that. Certainly a court in CA will come along and overrule the will the of the people- as they have before- but the people have spoken.
It’s actually the Catholic church I meant about nullifying marriages and so creating “illigitimite children. My great-uncle was a Catholic priest. He had an affair with a woman who was divorced and had two children. He left the priesthood for her. They appealed to the Vatican to have her first marriage annulled in order that they could get married in church (divorced woman couldn’t do so). Despite her having two children, her first marriage was annulled. Her children then, by definition, became illigimate because the marriage their mother had to their father was never consumated in the eyes of the church. If it hadn’t happened to someone I knew I’d swear it was a novel plot!
I think the ultimate environment to place a child is in a secure home with unconditional love. Both men, and women, can provide this and both men and women have been found guilty of child abuse. If a child is fostered to a home that offers them a safe place to grow, that encourages them, that protects and loves them, then that child is in a good place. It doesn’t matter if it’s a single dad, a single mom, a married couple, a pair of guys, a pair of girls, or an older couple - a good home is one that nurtures and encourages trust and mutual respect. I know personally of three people who went through the fostercare system to traditional families where they were sexually/physically abused by the foster parents. Being straight doesn’t make good parents any more than being gay makes for bad ones. Each foster application should be assessed on what kind of home the applicants can offer a child.
Yes, the people have spoken, but I wonder, how many gay people voted against it.
I have to disagree with both sides on this. First of all Virginia, call me a bad conservative, but I think this is sick. As you pointed out, the difference is who performs it and what it’s called. I think when we get to a point (and I don’t doubt that some “liberals” would like to see us get there) where the State is forcing certain religions to perform religious weddings for same sex couples, I will disagree with gay marriage.
On the other hand, I have to agree with you, and disagree with Blondie, on hate crimes. It’s not that it’s only a “crime” when it’s committed against churches or Christians. It is in fact, and I would venture to guess that both McCain and Palin would agree, a crime to light a fire at a gay bar, or to send a gay rights organization an envelope full of white powder. It’s not that it’s not “criminal.” It’s that the entire concept of “hate crimes” in fact reinforces the idea that minorities are somehow different. It says that gays and other minorities need special protection. If I shoot you, and it’s anything other than a) an accident, b) self defense, or c) the product of a severe mental disturbance, why should it matter if you’re gay, black, white, Martian, male, female, or a tranny? I still shot you. It’s still assault with a deadly weapon.
For people who defend minorities, the pro-gay people on the net don’t seem to be very fair or consistent. Just because the Catholic Church or the LDS Church supported Prop 8 doesn’t mean that everyone who belongs to those churches does. You are stereotyping a whole group of people. Furthermore, so far in blog discussions of this, I’ve seen the sex abuse scandal and polygamy brought up multiple times. Really? If we’re going to generalize and accuse people of supporting things they in fact condemned (in the case of the LDS over a hundred years ago) why have a philosophical debate about gay marriage?
After all, if all Mormons are polygamists and all Catholics molest children, all gay men are slutty, HIV infected hairdressers and all lesbians are hairy, butch, man-hating dykes, right? Why should these disgusting things be allowed to marry?
Now, I don’t believe anything from that last paragraph, but what makes gays so “holier than thou” (pun intended) that they can mock people’s religions, stereotype whole groups of people, blame 2% of the population for something 52% of voters approved, and generally cause fear, disruption, and harm to people?
What happened in California (and, in fact, several other states both in this and previous elections) is disgusting and shameful. It makes me wonder what America really stands for (then again, so does the bailout and electing a President who wants to socialize health insurance, but that’s a whole different topic). But, “You cannot fight darkness with darkness, only with light. You cannot fight hate with hate, only with love.” Or something to that effect.
Sending fake anthrax to people and damaging other people’s property is not the right way to respond. It’s the pot calling the kettle black. Maybe the expression should be “the gay calling the Christian intolerant.”
Virginia, I moved my other blog over to today.com. Check it out!
http://thezspot.today.com
http://gamingtips.today.com