I wouldn’t judge the pro-gay lobby groups on just a few comments of their followers. But I would judge them for how they react to these comments. See ‘Gay’ threats target Christians over same-sex ‘marriage’ ban. Where are the proponents of hate speech laws now? What could be more hateful and likely to incite violence against someone for their beliefs?
Of course if the opposite of this happened then the mainstream media would be all over it. I’ll be watching to see how they cover – or don’t cover – these threats.
Decisions by voters in Florida, Arizona and California to join residents of 27 other states with constitutional protections for traditional marriage have prompted threats of violence against Christians and their churches.
“Burn their f—ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers,” wrote “World O Jeff” on the JoeMyGod blogspot today within hours of California officials declaring Proposition 8 had been approved by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent. Confirmation on voter approval of amendments in Florida and Arizona came earlier.
On a blog website, “Tread” wrote, “I hope the No on 8 people have a long list and long knives.”
Another contributor to the JoeMyGod website said, “While financially I supported the Vote No, and was vocal to everyone and anyone who would listen, I have never considered being a violent radical extremist for our equal rights. But now I think maybe I should consider becoming one. Perhaps that is the only thing that will affect the change we so desperately need and deserve.”
A contributor identifying himself as “Joe” said, “I swear, I’d murder people with my bare hands this morning.”
“This is not just a matter of some people blowing off steam because they’re not happy with a political outcome. This is criminal activity,” he said. “The homosexual lobby is always calling for ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ and playing the role of victim. They claim to deplore violence and ‘hate.’ Here we have homosexuals inciting, and directly threatening, violence against Christians.”
On the “Queerty” website, “Stenar” asked, “Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT.”
“I’m going to give them something to be f—ing scared of. … I’m a radical who is now on a mission to make them all pay for what they’ve done,” wrote “Jonathan.”
Liberty Counsel’s Barber said, “This is not free speech; these are ‘hate crimes’ under the existing definition. Imagine if Christian websites were advocating such violence against homosexuals. There’d be outrage, and rightfully so. It’d be national front-page news. Federal authorities should immediately investigate these threats and prosecute the perpetrators to the fullest extent of the law.”
On yet another site, “Americablog,” “scottinsf” wrote, “Trust me. I’ve got a big list of names of mormons and catholics that were big supporters of Prop 8. … As far as mormons and catholics … I warn them to watch their backs.”
“I hope they all rot in hell, those servants of a lying, corrupt devil! BAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM,” wrote Angelo.
One contributor went so far as to threaten to take out his frustrations on his own family.
“You want me to come back to Idaho for Christmas? Oh wait, my partner and I can’t share the same bed? We can’t show any affection or any outward sign of our love for each other? Well sorry family … no Uncle Adam and all his expensive gifts and delicious cooking for you. Your childrens’ presents will now be donations in their name to the equal rights organization of my choosing. As will their and your birthday presents, wedding presents, graduation presents, and everything else I give going forward.”
The writer continued, “Remember, I’m angry. And I’m strong from my years at the gym and really am ready to take my frustration out on someone or something.”
Barber said the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and “other leaders within the homosexual lobby” should call immediately for an end to such threats.
There were suggestions of a different type of violence, too.
“Hope the gay waiters at their hotel p—ed in all the drinks they served these cretins,” “Jake” wrote about protectors of traditional marriage.
“If you’re planning a heterosexual wedding in California … be prepared for picketers. Designate someone to watch the parking lot … You’re going to have lots of unexpected expenses. Add $500 to your budget for security. … Be prepared for the flowers not lasting to the reception or the tuxedos showing up two sizes too small or the music at the reception being a way too loud or the cake tasting a little funny,” stated another threat. “Be afraid. Be very afraid. We are everywhere.”
Another even listed addresses of Mormon facilities. Mormon, Catholic and other religious groups were active in supporting the marriage definition.
“I do not openly advocate firebombing or vandalism. What you do with the information is your own choice,” wrote Jeremy.
Filed under: Politics | Tagged: gay, GLBT, hate crimes, hate speech, Politics, proposition 8, religion
Still more proof that the media is incredibly biased. If Prop 8 had been defeated and these threats were the other way… there would be thorough investigation and potentially arrests… not to mention the threats would be ALL over the news.
The irony, it BURNS! Every day of every year gay people are murdered, beaten, harassed, and insulted by “God’s Loving People.” It’s outrageous that the VERY SAME PEOPLE who work day and night to thwart the institution of hate crimes laws are now calling for those VERY SAME LAWS to be used against the victims of their hate. Just go to Free Republic, where thousands of self-proclaimed Christians openly boast of their desire/plan to murder and beat gay people. And now, when there is a trickle of well-place outrage from our side, you Christers threaten to call the feds. Like all bullies, you are pathetic and weak and you will always, always lose.
Joe, it is equally detestable for Christians plotting physical violence to anyone. I’m sure people have notified authorities of those types of threats.
But to threaten to bomb our churches? And you consider that “well-placed outraged?”
Yes, it’s time to bring the Feds in!
Hi Joe,
I know a couple Christians, and not one of them has ever advocated violence against gays. Gay people can be saved just like all sorts of other sinners can. But if we really have your long term best interests at heart we won’t affirm or encourage sinful behavior like many false teachers do.
If someone calls themself a Christian and does or says such things, then they are sinning. But please don’t judge Christianity based on that. You don’t judge an ideology based on those who violate its tenets.
I’m just sitting back and waiting for the gay lobby and the MSM to condemn these hateful words, just as Christians denounce people like Fred Phelps.
Just re-read my opening lines: ” wouldn’t judge the pro-gay lobby groups on just a few comments of their followers. But I would judge them for how they react to these comments.”
So far, you’ve failed. We’ll see how the rest of the lobby does.
Carlotta, any gay person that commits a violent crime against a church should obviously be prosecuted. However, to my knowledge, this has never happened. Please cite any historical example and prove me wrong.
However, as stated above. Christians routinely, every day of every year, violently assault and murder gay people in the name of their god. And thanks to the relentless evil of “the church”, many of those crimes will never qualify as “hate crimes.” And I’m not even going to get into the thousands of gay youth who commit suicide every year because your detestable cult convinces them that they are worthless humans.
Personally, I think you people are deluded and brainwashed, but I couldn’t care less what you do on your own property. It’s a pity your feverish hate for us clouds your mind to fact that we are owed the same constitutionally protected right.
Separation of church and state is at its breaking point, but the one good thing borne of the Prop 8 fight is that the general public and the government are finally realizing what gays have always known – that religion MUST be repelled from any interference in public life.
The Mormons, in particular, are just seeing the tip of the iceberg this week as massive state and federal lawsuits are being filed challenging their tax-exempt status.
I’ll close with some pertinent quotes from the Founding Fathers.
-”Lighthouses are more useful than churches.” -Benjamin Franklin
-”The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion”- George Washington.
-”This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it.” -John Adams
Why do you hate America?
Joe, you don’t understand the church/state thing at all. We don’t need religious arguments to argue against SSM. Gay couples can never provide a mother and a father to a child. Never. And by nature and design they don’t produce the next generation. They can get married all they like. But the gov’t has no need to recognize or confer benefits on those unions.
None of those arguments are religious.
Now if you want to know what Jesus has to say, I’ll be glad to share that with you.
Neil, do you seriously think the “gay lobby” would ever acknowledge a few semi-anonymous commenters on personal blogs? I’ve NEVER seen a single Christian leader denounce the vitriol and open threats to shoot gay men and “rape the lesbians into loving men” that you can find on any of dozens of so-called Christian sites.
Again, I point you to Free Republic where commenters gleefully post graphics of firearms and ammunition in any post that mentions gays.
You outnumber us by 300 million in this country, but rather than focusing on your supposed missions of charity, you spend your billions of tax-exempt dollars working day and night to make even more miserable the lives of the same adult gay people that you so successfully tortured during their formative years.
Joe, you ask why do I hate America?
We have over 40 states that recognize marriage being between a man and a woman.
No, the question remains why do YOU hate America?
I’m about as interested in what Jesus has to say as I am in that other famous magical and fictional figure, Harry Potter.
And for what’s it’s worth, today I appeared on national satellite radio (SiriusXM) to denounce those that call for physical violence against the church. You can probably find my interview archived on their site by now. My full name is Joe Jervis.
I have some Founding Fathers quotes of my own…
“Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited. . . . What a Eutopia – what a Paradise would this region be!” -John Adams
“Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company: I mean hell.” -John Adams
“You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.” -George Washington
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and His religion as He left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see.” -Ben Franklin
I purposely chose the same FF’s as you did, and I can go all day. Your “separation of church and state” is backwards. The reason the FF’s included the First Amendment was to ensure that the government couldn’t influence religion. They most certainly did NOT mean it the other way around… they most certainly DID want religion to influence the government. Read more about the “separation of church and state” here: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=123
Carlotta, all 40 of those states have those laws because CHRISTIANS overstepped the bounds of church and state and interfered in secular government. Not one of those anti-gay amendments were funded outside of the evangelical movement. You people want to subvert the intent of the founders and create a theocracy, the very thing this country was founded in opposition to. Again, irony.
I feel I should say that I personally have no interest in marriage, an institution that (despite what Christians say today) was created in order to bind women to men as their property. The “sanctity of marriage” hasn’t worked too well for you people and I feel no need to ape a failed hetersexual model. However, some of my people DO, perplexingly, want to be married and since that right is obviously guaranteed in the constitution (as three state Supreme Courts and soon, the US, have recognized), I will support them.
Thanks Joe for denouncing violence against Christians on national radio. We assure you, we’d do the same if we come across any professing Christian daring to cause violence to any GLBT person.
Neil is right that you don’t understand the church/state thing. And Chad listed some quotes from our founding fathers and their opinions of Jesus Christ.
But I’m curious. Why do you reject Jesus Christ?
Here is another quote for you Joe…
In 1782, the United States Congress voted this resolution: “The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.”
If our government was so secular, why would the Congress determine that the Bible should be used in all schools? The answer… our government was formed by Christians with Christian values.
Patrick Henry, the man famous for “Give me liberty or give me death.” also wrote “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here.”
I reject Jesus because I’m a thinking, rational human with a mind sharp enough to resist the brainwashing of my youth. I recognize that there is no god or gods or supernatural being of any manifestation and that nothing awaits us at the end of our physical lives.
And if, in my lifetime, the few remaining goals of the LGBT movement are realized (and I have a sense that they will be, sometime in the next decade), then I will devote the remainder of my life to my anti-theism activism – namely, the complete and utter removal of any influence or mention of religion from public life. If you folks want to rattle your beads and kiss snakes and fake-babble in made up languages, go crazy with that. But not on the public dime, not int the public space, and NEVER in a way that infringes on MY RIGHT of freedom FROM religion.
In your atheistic worldview all your ramblings make no sense. We’re just bags of chemicals doing what comes naturally. Your moral claims are baseless – that is, if your worldview is true. It isn’t. There is a God, and those who participate in gay marriage mock him daily (see Romans 1, where after God points out that only by suppressing the truth in unrighteousness can we deny him he uses homosexual behavior as exhibit A of an upside-down world).
Again, your church / state thing is a complete straw man. We don’t need religious arguments to argue against oxymoronic “same sex marriage.”
And even if we used them, there is nothing wrong with that. The First Amendment protects religion from gov’t intrustion. It in no way says we shouldn’t let our religious views inform our political views.
What do you want us to do, vote the opposite of our religious views? That would make be pro-stealing and murdering of atheists. It would make me pro-gay bashing.
Also, do you go to liberal Christian blogs and whale on them for their church / state instrusion? They support “gay marriage” and abortion, and insist that it is nice and biblical (they are wildly confused at best and non-Christian at worst, but that’s another story). So do you give them a pass since they support your views, or are you consistent in denouncing them as well?
I’m going to be off line for a bit so you’ll be going on moderation. Tone it down a bit and I’ll be glad to let you comment. But I have a short fuse with anti-religious bigotry and hatred of any kind, which you express in buckets.
I encourage you to consider how irreconcilable your worldview is with virtually everything you’ve expressed thus far.
Lol!
Why do I laugh? Because I TOO want to get rid of any public display of snake kissing, fake-babble and bead rattling! All that does is make God look crazy and He’s already warned us of that type of public display in the church:
“Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 1 Corinthians 14:23
For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:33
The apostle Paul wrote that chapter to Christians who were getting out of hand with spiritual gifts.
The point of sharing that is to let you know that as foolish as you think we are, many of us do believe that coming to God should be with intelligence – using our minds as well as our hearts.
You have the ‘mind’ part downpack, but your heart is cold, ungrateful to the God who created you.
Well, if you ever wanted intelligent discussion with religious fanatics, Neil’s place here is a great place to start!
Joe:
Wow! Pretty detestable. To justify or excuse the actions of a “few semi-anonymous commenters on personal blogs” because those that disagree with you , whether its on the Free Republic or elsewhere make similar threats is a rather pathetic line of reasoning. My three year old may employ that logic; but my 6, 9, and 10 year old would be too embarrased to do so. (okay, on second thought, my 6 year old would give it a try, but you get my point.)
In my humble opinion gays were on their strongest ground when they said that what they did was nobody else’s business. By asserting a right to other people’s approval, vis a vis marriage, is entirely different.
None of us has a right to other people’s approval.
Respectfully,
Joseph
(LOL, I can see the fun twists ahead in this thread with Joseph debating Joe!)
Oh, that was directed to Joe.
Uh, religious fanatics…I was speaking of myself and the rest of us Neil!
Wow…Joe is especially rabid and vicious…isn’t he? Should change his screen name to “Joe is his own idol.” That’s more honest and descriptive.
Little does he realize that he is just a sinner in need of the Savior – Jesus Christ. Just like every one of us.
Joseph,
I think I just read the same Sowell piece you did. Am I right?
Joe Jervis,
I think you overplay the homosexual as victim card. “Everyday”? I don’t think so. As much as the average Christian deplores the behavior, we have lives and don’t waste them looking to bust ass on anyone. And as to teen suicides, I’d say there’s more going on than just a homosexual teen feeling put upon by society. It’s more likely that his homosexuality is a manifestation of a mental condition which led to depression and suicide.
I find it rather comical that you rant on about God being fantasy, yet you seem to wallow in the fantasy that the homosexual community seeks to force down the throats of the other 98% of the population. And hatred? You’d be better off dealing with your own, my friend. It makes you see hatred behind every tree. That’s unhealthy.
Hopefully, people on both sides of the fence will denounce the violence against the other side (including the homosexual community).
Btw, you have very long spam comment in the thread below:
http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/who-can-you-marry-an-exhaustive-list-of-biblical-rules/
Marshall Art:
You are indeed correct and Ishould have properly cited the article. (I in fact did in my original version, but that doesn’t count as it was not submitted that way.) Mea Culpa!
Best,
Joseph
@Joseph:
You wrote: “In my humble opinion gays were on their strongest ground when they said that what they did was nobody else’s business. By asserting a right to other people’s approval, vis a vis marriage, is entirely different. None of us has a right to other people’s approval.”
Well, I’m not gay, but it seems to me that this was about legal standing for surviorship rights of people who are life partners, in my opinion, strategically, if that is what gays want, they should go for civil unions recognized by the law.
I do think that perhaps some gays do want theri life style to be accepted by the general public as “normal” for lack of a better word, I do believe they have a right to be treated with respect and dignity as any other human or citizen of our nation.
DJBA:
First let me again apologize – profusely – for using Thomas Sowell’s words as my own. (He articulates my opinion far better than I am able to articulate my own.) No excuse, mea culpa!
I am not an attorney, but from my limited exposure in the health care field, I have been under the impression that one is able to legally designate their heirs, power of attorney, etc.
I believe, as you, that gays are to be treated with respect and dignity as any other human or citizen of our nation. I do not believe that changing the definition of marriage – one man, one woman – is a means to do so.
Best,
Joseph
[...] on his blog wrote an article with excerpts from WorldNetDaily.com that talk about the anger rising with many Gays who are [...]
Joseph,
Ditto to everything you said…
@Joseph:
You write:
“I do not believe that changing the definition of marriage – one man, one woman”
Why do you feel, outside of a tehological context, that this is how marriage should be defined?
DJBA:
Congrats, you stumped the band! The basis of my opinion is biblically based and I truly have a difficult time divesting my faith from my reasoning. Can a flame burn without oxygen?
Best,
Joseph
Personally, I don’t think one needs to appeal to theology or Christian theology in particular to note the unique composition of a heterosexual monogamous relationship. A man and a woman are, quite obviously, anatomically complementary, and their conjugal relationship is uniquely procreative: no other combination of human beings can naturally result in children.
What is far more difficult is the position that is being made by those who want to alter the definition to include gay couples but no other arrangements.
How is that position justified? Proponents will readily dismiss as absurd the notion that their position paves the way to polygamy, but what would they actually say to a polygamist who thinks that monogamy is discriminatory?
If extending the defintion from “one man, one woman” to “two of either sex”, why limit it to two? Why can’t a confirmed bachelor “marry” himself and get all the tax benefits from doing so?
Heck, why even limit ourselves to real, living 3-D humans? Just last week, over a thousand Japanese signed a government petition to allow people to marry — legally marry — comic-book characters.
On what possible basis would would people like DJ Black Adam object?
–
The fact is, words mean things, and marriage is what it is.
marriage = husband + wife
husband = male half of a marriage
wife = femail half of a marriage
There are other terms that aren’t currently quite as controversial, whose definitions are also clear.
mayonnaise = egg + oil
You could have just eggs and call it “mayo”, but it’s still just eggs. You could have just oil, and it’s still just oil.
Just as mayonnaise definitionally requires both eggs and oil, a marriage definitionally requires both a husband and a wife.
@Joseph:
My question was only to suggest, that the Bible, which is authoritative or should be to Christians, is not the authority for non-Christians. That being said, why should our theological position weigh any more or any less than anyone else’s in a SECULAR society?
FYI, reference for the news story on Japan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/3283463/Japanese-launch-campaign-to-marry-comic-book-characters.html
Correct me if I am wrong, but are not the underpinnings of our Constitution and many of our laws based upon theological positions without us being a theocracy? Should we abandon our laws and edicts at the urging of an increasingly vocal secular society?
I apologize in advance for answering a question with questions.
Best,
Joseph
I rarely bother with any religious blogs. You “invited” me here with your link. And for the record, I find “liberal Christians” as nonsensical as any others.
Joseph, I did not “justify them” In fact, as noted above, today I went on national radio to denounce them. I pointed the actions of the other side to point out that NO Christian leader, to my knowledge, has even made the feeble attempt that I made today. And I don’t happen to own a network of several hundred radio and television stations, unlike the Christians.
@Joseph:
Our laws in the United States are predicated on English common law, Obviously the Biblical influences throughout precedent can be seen throughout the centuries.
Our constitution does call for no state religion, so no religion within our freedom of to practice the religion of our choice can have undue influence in government and by that oppress other religious practices.
In a secular society there can be no religion that holds greater sway than any other religion, as contrary to popular belief this country is not ruled by majority rule. Minority rights are protected, because as Madison said, “Majority Rule is tyranny.” It can’t be any simpler than that. It cannot be a Biblical argument because this country is not governed by the Bible, Quran, Talmud or any other religious document.
A few responses…
@ Joseph – “None of us has a right to other people’s approval.” Agreed. And I don’t want your approval. Or your acceptance, or tolerance, or love, or friendship. I want and expect absolutely zero from the Christian world except for their compliance with the concept of the “wall of separation” of church and state as explained by Thomas Jefferson and as first stipulated by SCOTUS in 1878.
@Marshall – “Everyday? I don’t think so.” According to the just-released report from the FBI, there were 1265 violent hate crimes committed against LGBT people in 2007, including murder, assault and rape. Keep in mind that these are only the reported cases AND only the cases that qualified as hate crimes according to local hate crimes statues, which exist in less than half of the Unites States. The Gay & Lesbian Anti-Violence Project estimates that the actual number of violent hate crimes committed may be as much as 50 times higher. I’d say that more than 50,000 violent attacks annually qualifies as “every day.” Almost universally, the perpetrators cite their religious instruction that homosexuality is “against God” or “against the Bible” as the reason for their attack. We’re still standing by for the first major evangelical leader to publicly denounce these attacks and call for their end. (Personally, I’m not holding my breath.) Please consider that most gay people know first hand a victim of Christian violence. I know several. And please provide a single instance of a Christian victim of violent crime by a gay person who objected to their faith. I know of none, and I am *very* close to this issue in my work.
-@chadabshier “Still more proof that the media is incredibly biased.” Perhaps. But consider that the overwhelming majority of people who work in the media must report (especially in local news) on ugly crimes every day. Possibly more than any of us, these people see anti-gay violent crimes daily and hear the religious defense of the perpetrators. It would be a rare person whose opinions would not be skewed when faced with such a repetitive pattern.
@Neil “Gay couples can never provide a mother and a father to a child. Never. And by nature and design they don’t produce the next generation.” OK. I’ll be returning for your support in my coming campaign to remove the tens of millions of America children currently living in single-parent homes. How many can you take? Similarly, I hope you’ll contribute to my ballot measure outlawing the infertile, the post-menopausal, and the elderly from marrying. I’m thinking a pre-marriage medical proof of fertility from both parents, plus a dissolution of said marriage if no children are produced should work nicely. I’m not sure about how long we should give them to procreate, however. Two years? Three? Suggestions?
@Bubba “The fact is, words mean things, and marriage is what it is.” Agreed. I don’t happen to think the government should be in the marriage business at all. Marriages should take place in churches (for those that choose to do so.) The *legal* contract that binds two persons should be a strictly civil bit of paperwork. Unfortunately, the federal government is (pardon the expression) wedded to the word “marriage”, meaning that gay couples that are civil-unioned or legally married (in the few states that allow them) are not eligible for the approximately 1100 federal rights, responsibilities and benefits granted to those that are “married.” Those rights include filing joint tax returns, access to health care, parenting and immigration rights, social security, veterans and survivor benefits, and transfer of property—and that doesn’t include at least several hundred state and local laws. (FreedomToMarry.org has an exhaustive PDF that lists each of these.)
As for the Mormon church, I find it appalling that they felt the need to donate almost $30M to undo the marriages of 18,000 Californians. How much did the Mormons donate to the estimated 5 *million* left homeless by the 2004 tsunami? Less than $20M. Sort of shows you where their priorities are. So much for “Christian charity.” And doubly ironic for a religion that is best known for their historic and by-doctrine exclusion of blacks, not to mention the fact that tens of thousands of Mormons from various sects live today outside the “traditional marriage” model.
It’s almost comical (almost) that the evangelical world so brazenly trumpets their moral high ground on these issues when so many (most?) of their leaders have been brought down in humiliating sexual scandals or imprisoned for committing fraud against their own. Just for fun, let’s list a few: Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, Oral Roberts, Robert Tilton, Paul Barnes, Lonnie Latham, Tony Alamo, Todd Bentley, Joe Barron. Who’s next? My money’s on Pat Robertson.
The problem is that you don’t understand the 1st Amendment at all. Religious people are in the church and the State. They get to vote. The 1st Amendment protects religious freedoms. It does not restrict them.
And there are plenty of arguments against oxymoronic “same sex marriage” without invoking religion. No one is stopping you from getting married. Go get married today in the apostate Episcopal church if you like. But there is no reason for the gov’t to encourage or affirm unions that by nature and design can never provide a mother and a father to children.
You are just trying to stifle free speech because some religious people disagree with you. I haven’t noticed you try to silence the “Christians” (mostly apostate) who agree with you.
Cute, but illogical, and you know it. We’re talking about the ideal and what the gov’t should encourage. And your infertile, etc. argument is a straw man because that didn’t fit my example. You are so reflexive with your propoganda that you didn’t even realize that. Slow down, Joe. You are just pasting in your sound bites and that is less than productive.
You won’t find any theological defenses of Mormons here, but I find it ironic, though not surprising, that an atheist can’t go two sentences without making moral claims. Remember, in your worldview we’re just bags of chemicals who evolved to this state after the universe came into existence from nothing and life arose from non-life. All religions arose through Darwinian evolution, so we can’t help ourselves. Any thoughts of morality are just your brain being illogical (please ignore the question begging in my hypothetical that assumes we can be logical). In a purely materialistic universe there is no difference morally between gay-bashing and your views.
Of course, as a Christian I don’t believe that. I believe that gay bashing is a sin. But I also believe that homosexual behavior is a sin. My views can be reconciled by my worldview, yours don’t even come close. You have no foundation to make these endless moral claims on anyone. Why are you so judgmental?
In your hatred and bias you lump us with those people. We follow Jesus, not them, and have been criticizing them long before you did. You really should seek to understand what you are trying to criticize better before going off on your rages. You repeatedly exhibit the prejudiced and stereotypical behavior you claim to oppose.
The gay lobby uses the logical fallacy of the ad hominem argument (attacking the person, not the message) as one of their core weapons.
They don’t just call out hate where they see it, as we do (e.g., Christians roundly denounce Fred Phelps). They lead with the hate argument to intimidate.
And as this post and your rationalizations demonstrate, they don’t seem to realize how much real hatred pours out of their mouths.
@Joe.my.god:
O.K., I was beginning to see your point, but then you come out with this: “It’s almost comical (almost) that the evangelical world so brazenly trumpets their moral high ground on these issues when so many (most?) ”
O.K., it is clear that the people you listed are in no ways most or even many of the pastors in the evangeclical community who are kind, caring and compassionate and HONEST people. I am sure you don’t want to be generalized, why generalize them?
Joseph:
I did see that you denounced those who were advocating violence. I applaud you for that. Hopefully you will also appreciate that you are a faster composer than I. The mention of you on the radio was, and several other repsonses were not posted when I had started and finished my post.
DJBA, I believe that we have crossed or wires as I am confused, and may have confused you with my responses. I will try to address later.
Best,
Joe
@Neil “They don’t just call out hate where they see it, as we do (e.g., Christians roundly denounce Fred Phelps). They lead with the hate argument to intimidate.”
Actually, I believe that Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church are one of the best things that has even happened to the LGBT movement. Phelps and clan put a real and vivid face on the hate that most Christians feel for gays. In the Phelps, we see the behind the gentle treacly mask of evangelicals. I’m sure the Phelps shame some Christians, and that’s a good thing, but I’m also very confident that many of you privately cheer them on. Fortunately, others in the LGBT movement agree with me – in the fight against Florida’s Amendment 2, the gay side *invited* the Phelps to come debate the Christian side of the issue, and to my joy, they accepted.
Joe, you are right about it Phelps being a boon to the pro-glbtq lobby. That is one of the other reasons I take issue with him. He sets the movement back the same way that radicals who bomb abortion clinics hurt the pro-life movement.
But your conclusion that he says what the rest of us really think it ridiculous. Of course, you might be saying that because you agree with all the hateful comments I quoted above and you just assume that other people are as hateful as you.
The truth is that many of us say what we really think and back it up with our actions. I wish the best for gays and know many of them and get along splendidly.
But I also speak the truth about the deceptions of the glbtq lobby regarding public policy, and you call that hate. Separately, I speak the truth about what God says about homosexual behavior, and you call that hate. The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.
Bubba, great points and great to hear from you!
It is ironic that some of the ‘tolerant’ folks in the ‘gay’ and ‘pro-gay’ crowd are calling for violence against others, just for their beliefs.
It was majority blacks who voted against gay marriage. Ironic? I don’t really think so. I’m not black, but I think it might be offensive to them to equate their civil rights to gays. You cannot hide, change or have any control over what your race is. But it’s still unclear whether sexuality is nature or nurture, or both.
‘Gay’ marriage could be a slippery slope to allowing others to demand the same ‘rights’. They could argue it’s okay to marry multiple people, close relatives, etc. If marriage is just about love, then it technically could be for all those things. Why stop at just allowing it for gays?
Homosexuals should be satisfied just having civil unions. That’s already a lot more than they used to have.
Neil, the bottom line is that I believe I have the constitutional right to live completely free from the influence of religion. You believe that I don’t. It’s really as simple as that.
Neil said: Yes, that is your bottom line. But your application of your view is that religious people can’t vote on issues that their religious views might influence, and that is not only ridiculous but it is just in direct contradiction to the Constitution.
In addition, you continue to ignore that many “religious” people favor your views and I have yet to hear you denounce them and their voting rights.
P.S. As I requested separately, please remove your URL from future comments if you are interested in them appearing.
@Andrea “It is ironic that some of the ‘tolerant’ folks in the ‘gay’ and ‘pro-gay’ crowd are calling for violence against others, just for their beliefs.”
Calls for violence against Christians are wrong. Actual violent crimes against Christians have also never happened, as I evidenced above. It’s a pity that we can’t say the same for Christians, who commit an estimated 50,000 violent crimes against LGBT Americans every year, as evidenced by the stats provided by the FBI and other groups, also provided above. These statistics are available to anybody with a Google Machine.
Neil said: That is the problem with labels. A vast majority of people check the “Christian” box but are nothing of the sort, either in actions or beliefs. If you want to critique Christianity, the real question is what does Christianity teach?
@Joe
Did I really read that correctly way up in this thread that you said Jesus was fictional? That establishes your credibility among people of intelligence [Christian and secular] about as much as Ahmedinajad does when he denies the holocaust. If you spout such a ridiculous position, it makes people not want to listen to anything else you say.
I will however bother to ask you the first question I always ask atheists [even though a lot of the time I don't get an answer. I think some atheists are smart enough to see where it's going. If you're afraid to believe in God, you don't dare take a chance on being convinced of His existence] . I presume you believe that all phenomena in the universe has a scientific explanation? i.e. any question can be answered by a scientific, reproducible experiment?
Andrea said “it might be offensive to them to equate their civil rights to gays”
I agree completely. I’m not black, but when my company created benefits for same-sex partners, I told my manager (who was a black female) that I objected. I held the morning newspaper in front of her and said if I was a minority, I’d be offended.