“These self-promoting values hacks don’t speak for the American mainstream,” declared New York Times columnist Frank Rich about Tony Perkins, James Dobson (in photo), Gary Bauer and other leaders of the religious right. “They don’t speak for the Republican Party. They no longer speak for many evangelical ministers and their flocks. The emperors of morality have in fact had no clothes for some time. Should Rudy Giuliani end up doing a victory dance at the Republican convention, it will be on their graves.”
Rich cited a CBS News poll that found white evangelical voters care more about the war in Iraq and health care than about any other issues, while abortion and same-sex marriage are at the bottom of their list of election priorities. Yet, Rich noted, the recent Values Voters Summit “didn’t even think to list the war, health care or fighting poverty among the 12 hot-button options.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Jail consultants straining patience
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Health care reform would save state money
- XXX on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
159 Comments
And this is supposed to surprise who?? These groups have and do have some very valuable values that we as a country have had a tendency to forget or ignore – but – along with those values has to be an understanding of todays true political and ethical values. Between all of them, with a lot of hard work and compromise, a liveable solution can be reached. The real problem is that the extermists at both ends of the spectrum have no concept of the word compromise. They are blind to each other – - – other than to know that their opposites are truly the devil incarnate.
Extermists is an appropriate typo… The far ends of each, would prefer to exterminate the other… And, do it in the name of “religion” or “God” LOL The Right Wing fighting with the Right Wing… It is soooo refreshing!! The liberals can just sit back, make some popcorn, and Laugh!!
Dobson is a sick puppy.
I am making some popcorn and laughing! The problem is that, while these insane nutcases might be a minority of the Republican Party, they weld so much power because they are concentrated in states that the Republicans must win. Without the nutcase vote states like Ohio and Florida would be lost to the GOP.
“”"Between all of them, with a lot of hard work and compromise, a liveable solution can be reached. The real problem is that the extermists at both ends of the spectrum have no concept of the word compromise. They are blind to each other – - – other than to know that their opposites are truly the devil incarnate.”"”"
My compromise with the religious nutcases is very simple- keep your view of God to yourself and quit trying to use the government to force it on me and everybody else. Likewise, I will keep mine to myself and will not try to force you to attend church on Saturday with me. While I agree with you on some issues- for example I agree that many liberals have went overboard with things like the war on Christmas (and it is a CHRISTMAS tree and not a “holiday tree”)- you folks have given God a bad name with some of your antics and quite frankly the country has about had our fill of it.
As I’ve mentioned before, there are extremists in every type of association, including the various religious faiths.
The church I go to is very much apolitical and only deals with Church business, missions and programs for the needy. Politics stop at the door and no one discusses them.
Lot of older folks in my church who all support the military without question. They usually make up care packages and send them out to overseas locations.
There are no Christmas trees in our church, it keeps the occasion very traditional – manger scene, etc.
Halloween consists of having a trunk full of goodies with some church members standing by show the kids the way to the treats. It provides a safe place for them to go and there are some games and a carnival thing inside the recreation center.
What would Jesus think about these very wealthy, powerful, politically active people as his proxy?
I think he would trash the temple and read them the riot act, whatever that is.
THE EIGHT BEATITUDES OF JESUS
“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are they who mourn,
for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek,
for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they shall be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure of heart,
for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.
Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”Why is he telling us these strange things?
The meek shall inherit the earth? Uh,….WHAT?What he is actually doing is describing the “kingdom of heaven”.
That’s right, it’s a description of the people who inhabit His Kingdom.
That’s what His Kingdom is….people.
The people who actually lived as described above.
The Temptation of JesusJesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert,
where for forty days he was tempted by the devil.
He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.”Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone.”The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world.
And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me,
and I can give it to anyone I want to.
So if you worship me, it will all be yours.”Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.”The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple.
“If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. For it is written:
” ‘He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully;
they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.”Jesus answered, “It says: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
Once again, why is he telling us these strange things?
It’s a narrative account being given to his disciples. Why?
Because,….they imagine the Messiah as a wealthy military power coming to rescue them from the Roman occupation.Since his followers are unlikely to believe that salvation will come from loving your enemies and giving away your possessions, He’s speaking in metaphor.What he is actually doing is describing the Messiah.
That’s right, it’s a description of the “Son of Man”.
The true savior brings us out of our desires for wealth, power, and eternal life on earth.
The headline should read…with reality. As many of their followers are also. It is more than apparent on this board.
Those who like living in the dark will always hate those living in the light. They especially hate those that point out the difference. If they didn’t already know they were guilty they would listen or simply ignore, but they do know, and as a result…they hate.
“They no longer speak for many evangelical ministers and their flocks”
They have never spoken for me or my congregation. That they ever did is a misconception, of course promoted by the media, who can’t understand how a large group could be led by someone they can’t interview.
Now that is not to say that many of the positions that these men advocate are not popular among evangelicals. It’s just that they are reflecting opinions rather than making policy. They are finding that out.
Oh, and Frank Rich is a know nothing prejudiced weiner masquerading as a journalist.
The extremist on both ends of the spectrum are a small percentage. Let’s say 20% both ways added up. The problem is they are 70% of they MONEY! So basically both parts are controlled by their extremists, and regular America is abondoned!
But, the religious right is still strong in Kansas. Bet next repub gov canidate is RR. It is true that after the Bush mess is over the RR may not be strong on the national scene, but in Kansas the Dems will keep rolling.
Bull!
In order to win back control of the House, Democrats deliberately ran some prolife Democrat candidates.
When Dems listen to the NYT, they are in trouble.
Opinion polls, such as the one this thread is based upon, are virtually worthless.
It is the “increment” that matters.
Of those who care about —— (Fill in the Blank)as their top issue, what percent vote “liberal”Of those who care about ——as their top issue, what percent vote “conservative”??
It is the increment that counts.
Nationwide, on nearly every issue, the question can be phrased to give the Conservative view a clear plurality if not an outright majority.
Yes, I know, working means everything in polls.
However, the New York Times deludes itself, and a few of its more gullible (and declinining) readers, that a “New Day” is dawning.
The NYT has been predicting the death of Conservatism since LBJ defeated Goldwater.
It is a worthless rag.
wording means everything lol
“(and it is a CHRISTMAS tree and not a “holiday tree”)”
Kev, it’s actually a Yule tree, but we can save the debate until THAT holiday rolls around. :)
Happy Halloween to all!
“very valuable values”
Oh hell yeah.
Bigotry, theocracy, colonialism and rule by the rich are VERY valuable values.
If you are a wingnut.
The real truth is, these bigots do value their “valuables”.
Like cash, jewels, real estate, etc.
It’s all about the god of money and the elixer of power.
We’ve already seen the hatred that comes from drinking THAT cocktail.
Looks to me that in kansas, terry, joe and fred still rule the roost.
When you all oust kris the kobach, we’ll know you are serious.
Kansas, the last refuge for republcian wingnuts. Maybe we should set up an endangered species sanctuary for the leaders of god’s wingnuttia?
Naaaaa. We prefer a living lab in Kansas, where we can see them do their voodoo in public life…
The comment Terry Fox comparing evangelicals being like a snake in a box that can come out and bite you shows alot about Terry Fox’s thinking.
This is what I find wrong with fundamental Christians. For the most part, their leaders are self-righteous, pious, hypocritical, power hungry and will do anything for that last dime. I find they are mostly interested in how much money and how big can they build that church to draw in yet more gullible people to fill their coffers with yet more money.
In his one display of temper, Jesus ran the vendors out of the Temple. That pretty much sums up his feelings about making the Temple into a business.
I wonder what he would do in today’s fundamental Christian churches who are so tied up in the political scene and not really preaching His word?
Is it just me or does James Dobson look alot like Larry Craig?
heheheheheh. So these days.. when you think of “touch” and “republicans” and “evangelicals”….
What do YOU think of?
Doesnt look like they are “out” of many touches. They “touch” boys and pages and prostitutes and… well… you KNOW what I mean.
Ted Haggarty? I’m willing to bet he’s touching someone, somewhere…
Maybe he will become a catholic priest? Heheheheheheh!
Well I can’t say it’s news that fundies are out of touch with the rest of the country. At least it’s finally becoming news to the Republican party. It might have been a value to hate gays, minorities, Communists and immigrants back in the 50s but the rest of us have moved on to real issues.
I agree that many liberals have went overboard with things like the war on Christmas (and it is a CHRISTMAS tree and not a “holiday tree”)
Posted by: Kev
—
Every time I see this I can’t decide if I want to cringe or laugh. I used to live in Kansas so I know what people think of places they’ve never been to and people they’ve never met, but I moved to San Francisco ten years ago and I can tell you there is NO WAR ON CHRISTMAS. It was a made up thing to get the religious right in a political uproar. I can walk through any neighborhood in San Francisco in December and people will say “Merry Christmas,” and probably hear it more often here than in Wichita. We have Christmas trees and will say Happy Birthday Jesus if that makes you happy.
I had to the most liberal part of the country to learn that what conservatives say about liberals is simply made up nonsense. Don’t believe a word of it. Come here for yourself and see if we’re Christ-hating Castro-loving communist terrorist sympathizers. Geez!
And BTW, it was Bill O’Reiley — self proclaimed culture warrior and defender of Christmas — who was selling “Holiday Ornaments” for the “Holiday Tree” on the Fox News online store last year.
“It might have been a value to hate gays, minorities, Communists and immigrants back in the 50s but the rest of us have moved on to real issues.”
Uh… maybe you’ve moved on Doug, as you are clearly an intelligent being.
But as for the rest of Kansas? Heheheh. We’ll see how kinzer’s going to do in the legislature fighting the domestic partnership registy and the governor’s executive order protecting gays and lesbians in state employ.
If kinzer gets those two things reversed, will you still say that kansas has “moved on to other issues”?
Kansas, where we CONTINUALLY live into the past, not the future.
The religious right is usually neither. The louder the religious nutjob is, the more apt he is to be a child molester, adulterer, homosexual, or some other closeted undesireable. Religion does more damage and has killed more people than any other plague.
… and… right on cue…
Another closeted gay Republican is outed.
“Police report sheds new light on Curtis encounter
State Rep. Richard Curtis, R-La Center, admitted to having sex with a man he met at an adult video store in Spokane last week, according to a police report released Tuesday afternoon.
–snip–
The police report contains an account of how Curtis allegedly donned women’s clothing, red stockings and a black sequined lingerie top before engaging in a sex act at the store. He continued to wear them throughout the night under his clothing.
–snip–
Curtis, 48, is married and has two daughters. The two-term legislator and retired fire department captain was in Spokane last week for a retreat with other Republican lawmakers in preparation for the 2008 Legislature.
–snip–
The entire incident might have never come to light if Curtis hadn’t contacted Sgt. Roy Rhine of the Washington State Patrol. Rhine, who works out of the patrol’s Southwest Washington office, is a fellow Republican who has run for the state Legislature.
–snip–
http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/2007/10/1030200...
Well, if nothing else, we do know that the hatred of Christians continues. The funny thing is that those “right-wing fundies” are the ones supporting most of the charities in this country. Go ahead and hate…it won’t do anything to anyone except yourself.
“State Rep. Richard Curtis, R-La Center, admitted to having sex with a man he met at an adult video store in Spokane…”
Sex with a man? The pervert!
Maybe it’s an extreme form of lobbying?
We’ll see how kinzer’s going to do in the legislature fighting the domestic partnership registy and the governor’s executive order protecting gays and lesbians in state employ…If kinzer gets those two things reversed…Posted by: ksfarmgrrl | October 31, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Over. My. Dead. Body.
Mom of 5, the two biggest charity donors in this country, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, are hardly fundies. The idea that we should help the poor is generally derided as a liberal idea.
And we don’t hate you, we just get tired of you hating us and trying to force us into your belief system.
Yepper. We want to help the “poor” mom of 5. And we want to do it with your money. We’ll just call it children’s something or other and distribute your hard earned dollars up to three times the poverty level. You might think that is income redistribution and that we are more interested in helping ourselves than helping the “poor”.
But, really… well I can’t lie. You’d be right! HAHAHAHAHAH!
Tom, while a couple of very rich liberals do donate a lot of money, the right-wing Christian conservatives are the main support of charities. Liberals generally think their tax money is sufficient support.
And we don’t hate anyone…nor force our beliefs on anyone. The things that are most derided today were very normal as recently as 40 years ago. The forcing has all been from the liberal side…forced adoration of homosexual sex, forced silencing of Christian free speech, forced removal of decades-old monuments, etc. Eventually even the most peaceful Christian will get tired of having humanism shoved down his throat at every turn, tired of seeing his children ordered to adore sin, tired of seeing filth on every public media, tired of watching millions of unborn children murdered…and tired of being hated.
Mom of 5- Sounds like you have the topic selected for your next militia meeting. Enjoy!
Fred Phelps is the biggest fake republican in the world. He is a registered democrat that not only supported but fundraised for Mr. Go green and vote for me Al Gore. Yes, there are extremists on the right and yes, there are extremists on the left.
Since when did it become wrong to have values in this country? Are those select few republicans who have no values and are liars a reflection of the whole party. Sorry its not. Just like those select few democrats who have no values don’t reflect the entire democratic party.
Get over yourselves and quit thinking you are better than the next person and lets resolve some issues instead of deciding whos the better party.
Gosh… could it be.. rockl?
“the right-wing Christian conservatives are the main support of charities.”
Proof please? Or do you just want to lie? Jesus doesnt like lying, in case no one told you.
“The things that are most derided today were very normal as recently as 40 years ago.”
Yea, like separate but “equal” water fountains were NORMAL little more than 40 years ago. Thank god for progress. Wanna give us an address for the cave you live in?
“The forcing has all been from the liberal side…forced adoration of homosexual sex, forced silencing of Christian free speech, forced removal of decades-old monuments, etc.”
Proof please? I mean, FORCED ADORATION?
WTF?
Do your keepers know you’ve escaped the asylum?
And oh no. The hate amendment wasnt YOU forcing your beliefs on anyone. No. Huh uh. NO way.
Jesus WEPT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Count on more christian whining and platitudes in 3… 2…. 1…….!
“Well, if nothing else, we do know that the hatred of Christians continues.
Posted by: Mom_of_5 | October 31, 2007 at 12:34 PM”
Hatred of Christians has been around since Christians have been around. SFW?
“Since when did it become wrong to have values in this country?”
WTF? Since when were bigotry, hatred and theocracy AMERICAN values?
“Get over yourselves and quit thinking you are better than the next person”
OMG, THAT is funny coming from someone like you, who thinks YOUR marriage is better and more important than mine. Do you even READ the shit you post?]
Fine. You first. I’ll be waiting for the repeal of the hate amendment.
Until then? YOU and yours are fair game.
“”Well, if nothing else, we do know that the hatred of Christians continues.”
Awwwwwwwwwwww. Poor persecuted MAJORITY.
Cry me a goddam river…
Maybe we should call the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for this poor persecuted person.
Looks like you’ve got your freedom of hate speech intact. Your comments appear here unedited.
Mom-of-5 – I support charities, many associated with Christian churches. I have no reason to hate Christians. However, I DO dislike the false prophets who cloak themselves in the Cloth and proclaim that they are the only true religious leaders. You know, people like Haggard, Phelps, Fox …
Your paranoia shows you to be a member of that latter group.
Yea, like separate but “equal” water fountains were NORMAL little more than 40 years ago. Thank god for progress. Wanna give us an address for the cave you live in?
Posted by: ksfarmgrrl
Its funny that you thank god for progress!
Good try on comparing slavery and homosexuality. You are into proof, so give me proof that people are born gay. I’m pretty sure i can give you proof that people are born black. They can’t help that, but gays can help not putting their weiners in butts.
It is very useful for Chistians to believe that they are hated. In fact, it’s the only way to justify some of the things they do.
Imagine if they had to admit that most of us just don’t care what they believe and don’t want to be bothered with it, and all this push back is simply a result of them trying to force their religion on everyone else through schools and government. What would they do then?
onlooker, give me proof that people are conceived black. Prove the race of a blastocyst. Sexuality doesn’t develop at birth.
Here’s some circumstantial proof: Gays have been persecuted and even executed for their sexuality. Do you really think it is a “choice” given the consequences in conservative religious societies like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Kansas? If so, what do you think makes them choose it?
And then there’s the little issue that their being gay doesn’t hurt the rest of us even one little bit.
“They can’t help that, but gays can help not putting their weiners in butts.”
Well, thanks for that oh so christian perspective.
Are you really barak obama? I didnt know he posted here…
And as a practicing lesbian, how many weiners and butts do you think are allowed in MY bedroom?
What a maroon. And you wonder why we make fun of you christianists?
john_stone, yer still INSANE. And say hey to aaron, will ya?
Oh, and I was born gay. And then I chose to be gay.
Is that proof enough? Can you wrap your bigoted pea brain around that?Or do you have to call terry or joe or fred first to know what you think?
jesus must be so proud of you today…
How many folks do you think you brought to jesus with those posts?
(crickets chirping)
And dont worry, since I dont think you can change your sexual orientation…
….I’m not trying to bring anyone to “the gay”.
Recruiting is YOUR thing, not mine.
leftcoaster – I disagree. Most Christians feel no need to be hated. It is only the ChristISTS who have that need.
Just like most Muslims do not have that need but IslamISTS do have that need.
It is very useful for non-Christians to hate. In fact, it’s the only way to justify some of the things they do.
Imagine if they had to admit that most of us care for others and are looking out for other people besides ourselves, and all this push back is simply a result of them trying to force their atheism on everyone else through the media and movies. What would they do then?
heheheheheh
lame
is that all ya got?
Bring it.
Oh, and please answer the question.
How many folks are gonna answer your alter call after these posts?
(crickets chirping)
So… I’m responsible for “the media and the movies”?
And for that, I am denied equal protection under the law?
Damn, you sure know about misplaced punishment. And bigotry.
But then, we already knew that…
You dont suppose the little ayatollah posts here, do ya? I know his cheetos eating kid does. He said so.
Gee I see the light now. I’ll shut down my multi-billion dollar atheism ministry and recall our missionaries who are spreading disbelief around the world in the guise of charity. While I’m at it, I’ll remove “God is Dead” from our money and stop demanding that children recant their beliefs in school. And I’ll stop building atheist monuments in government buildings and stop claiming that atheism is the source of all law and justice in this country.
Oh wait, that’s not what atheists do, is it?
Ya know, when you are FORCED to ADORE those “media and movies”…
… you could always do what I do when I run across the all jesus all the time channels. (Of which there must be a hundred on my satellite.)
Turn the channel or turn it off.
Hehehhe. Turn it off. Just like you do with potential christians.
Mom of 5 = parkay??
rightcoaster – I commonly attend midnight mass on Christmas eve. Haven’t been arrested yet. Nor accosted by militant atheists.
BTW: Have you read Rude Pundit today?A Jim Hightower wth foul language. Clever, insightful and unafraid.
Maybe a little rabid, and that’s a good thing.
momof5,”The funny thing is that those “right-wing fundies” are the ones supporting most of the charities in this country.”
The “charities” the fudies support are either primarily prostelytizers (with a few groceries or something thrown in for bait) or political orgs.They won’t support groups that promote understanding or decency, such as Interfaith Ministries and Amnesty International, and they positively hate some that actually do some good in the world, like Planned Parenthood.
I love the Rude Pundit. And Jed!
“with a few groceries or something thrown in for bait”
hehehehehe. Good one. Like they use bait of a warm bed and shelter to make sure someone hears the “good word”.
Although if rockl, er, momwithoutbirthcontrol were preaching, I think the “word” would hardly be good….
“You are into proof, so give me proof that people are born gay. Posted by: onlooker | October 31, 2007 at 01:44 PM”
Well, the jury is still out on that one, but more and more often genetic underpinnings are being found.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2007/10/lesbian_nematodes.html“Lesbian nematodes” – October 26, 2007
rightcoaster,”Imagine if they had to admit that most of us care for others and are looking out for other people besides ourselves, and all this push back is simply a result of them trying to force their atheism on everyone else through the media and movies. What would they do then?”
How dare you try to claim that caring is an exclusively christian trait? I’m not a christian and I’ve dedicated most of my life to caring for others. Caring isn’t a christian thing, it’s a Human thing.I also have no interest in converting you or anyone else to my particular theology. I wouldn’t mind though if you gave up hatred and hypocrisy.
“And as a practicing lesbian, how many weiners and butts do you think are allowed in MY bedroom?Posted by: ksfarmgrrl | October 31, 2007 at 01:49 PM”
Really, I don’t see why the Fundies should have a problem with lesbians. The Bible says that a man should not lay with another man. Nothing is said about women.
In fact, there are Protestan Christian churches that take the stance that male homosexual behavior is prohibited, but female homosexual behavior is OK.
“How dare you try to claim that caring is an exclusively christian trait? I’m not a christian and I’ve dedicated most of my life to caring for others. Caring isn’t a christian thing, it’s a Human thing.Posted by: Jed | October 31, 2007 at 02:25 PM”
That is a common error made by Christians, especially Fundamentalists. They attribute their ‘good acts’ to God. Thus, they cannot grasp that people who are agnostic, atheist, Muslim, etc. can also do equally good acts, and even do them with the same level of altruism.
lesbian nematodes? Heheheheh. Now THAT’s funny. Brian, you crack me up.
Oh, and who could have predicted this?
“Defense motion accuses judge of bias in funeral protesters case”
(big eye roll)
Gee I see the light now. I’ll shut down my multi-billion dollar atheism ministry and recall our missionaries who are spreading disbelief around the world in the guise of charity. While I’m at it, I’ll remove “God is Dead” from our money and stop demanding that children recant their beliefs in school. And I’ll stop building atheist monuments in government buildings and stop claiming that atheism is the source of all law and justice in this country.
Oh wait, that’s not what atheists do, is it?
One word, Yes.
I don’t know if you know this but this country was founded because people were tired of being persecuted for their religious beliefs. If you don’t like how the country is and that this is One Nation Under God, by all means, go somewhere else. Otherwise stop spreading disbelief around the world in the guise of selfishness, stop trying to remove it from our money and Pledge of Allegiance and stop trying to tear down monuments that show what this country was founded on.
Geez kfg I think YOU are right.
That HAS to be rockl
Brian,Is it really altruism when you’re trying to use those “good acts” to pay for a ticket to heaven?
“While I’m at it, I’ll remove “God is Dead” from our money and stop demanding that children recant their beliefs in school. And I’ll stop building atheist monuments in government buildings and stop claiming that atheism is the source of all law and justice in this country.
Oh wait, that’s not what atheists do, is it?
One word, Yes.”
Link please? Or are you just talking out yer ass again?
Tighty Righty,Many years ago when I was in Boy Scouts, I stopped by to see one of my friends after a meeting. His grandfather met me at the door. He looked at my uniform and noted a cross on one of the badges, and while I waited for my friend, he told me about when he was a child, soldiers with flags bearing crosses came to his town in Russia and shot his father. They then force-marched him and his mother and sisters and all the other Jewish residents through the snow to the Polish border. His mother and sister died on the way.Every time he saw a cross, it filled his heart with great sadness for his family. He said I was always welcome in his house, but would I please leave the cross at home when I came to visit.
You good christians think of your symbols as signifying all that is good in the world. There are plenty of people who have very real reasons not to feel that way! Why do you feel the need to inflict such pain on them?
Let’s take away all churches’ and charities’ tax-deductible status (you know… the “Flat Tax?”) and see just how much the Religious Righteous give.
All of a sudden your “Love Gifts” and “tithes and offerings” will amount to *real* money.
Every non-profit — on the left and on the right — knows full well the value of tax-deductible status. But there are way more “religious”-based outfits sucking from the taxpayers thanks to the IRS.
This goes back to so-called “conservatives’” compartmentalized thinking. They’re all for a “Flat Tax,” until it comes to their mortgage deduction, and their deduction for dependents, and their deductions for “charitable” giving.
All the money sent to Jim and Tammy Bakker in the 80s was *tax deductible.* All the money that paid for Jerry Falwell’s Learjet was *tax deductible.* Every cent Terry Fox collects gets tax protection. All that money involves tax-payer subsidies of religion, a clearly unconstitutional process obvious to anyone who’s read the First Amendment.
I support my local non-profit animal shelter because they’re dedicated to a service that helps everyone, people and critters. The tax deduction I get every April is nice, but I’d support the animal shelter anyway. Just how much of that “…money contributed by ‘Christians’…” would continue if it didn’t involve a tax break? Ask your clergymen for *their* opinion.
I worship my kitty. (He insists.) And if my tax money contributes to a Nativity Scene on the courthouse square I insist (well, actually, my kitty insists) a separate-but-equal shrine to his feline godliness. Think any “Christians” might object to that?
RAMEN!
A while back my family and I ate at a west Wichita restaurant. Terry Fox and his family sat at the table next to us. Terry treated the young female server like a slave, and then went when the manager came by he growled at the manager about how long it was taking for his food. I guess maybe he did this because griping at the server about it did nothing except upset a teenage girl and make him feel powerful so he tried it again.
It was a weekend night and the restaurant was packed. Anyone walking into a packed chain restaurant on Maize Road on a weekend night would be delusional to expect quick seating and snappy delivery of food.
On the way home my spouse and I chuckled. Everything I read about Terry on this blog was right – he is very out of the mainstream…in fact he is swimming upstream in a dry riverbed.
There are the uniters, the dividers and then there are the Fundie leaders in Kansas who are their own special group. With Gene and Joe hanging-up their cloaks there are fewer Fundies still running lose. Maybe that is why Terry is so cranky these days.
KUDOS to the Wichita Eagle for recognizing the importance of free speech and allowing the common citizen like myself to complain about the elitist stupidity of their columnist, Phil Brownlee.
Not surprisingly, Phil is intellectually dishonest when he opines that evangelical Christian leaders like James Dobson are out of touch with their support base. Boownlee writes that evangelical Christians want candidates to talk more about Iraq & health care issues than about abortion or gay rights issues. Phil bases his logic on the New York Times editorial writer’s column which was based on a CBS poll of evangelical Christians. After all columnists are the NY Times or the Wichita Eagle (like Phil) must be important experts or the publishers would never have hired them.
When I finally mined down to the CBS poll, I learned that 74% of evangelical Christians were extremely concerned or very concerned about social issues like abortion and gay rights which contradicts Phil’s blog.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBSNews_poll_evan_101807.pdf
I wonder if Phil even bothered to read the CBS article if he is a wannabe elitist who believes every thing that is written by a New York Times editorial writer. Too bad Phil didn’t consider that evangelical Christians may be concerned about the lack of accountability & transparency in how the Iraq war has been conducted and how their federal health care dollars are spent.I not surprised about Phil’s lack of professionalism. When I checked Phil’s bio on the Eagle’s web, I really didn’t see any journalistic accomplishments except that he was a guest on Dave Goter’s local PBS show. As I recall Phil previously worked as an asst. sports information director for a small college before he came to the Eagle. I should cut Phil some slack for being influenced and impressed by the Lou Heldman-Bonnie Bing school of Eastborough elitist journalism which assumes that editors of the Eagle are as important as leaders of non-profit organizations and professional societies and corporations are really-really important.
Phillip Brownlee joined The Eagle’s editorial department in 1996 and became opinion editor in 2001. His responsibilities at The Eagle include leading editorial board meetings, writing and editing editorials, and editing opinion columns. He also writes a personal column and is a regular guest on “Kansas Week” on KPTS, Channel 8. Reach Phillip at (316) 268-6262 or at pbrownlee@wichitaeagle.com.
Unfortunately writers and editors like Phil are wannabee celebrities who ignore their professional & civic duties as journalists, but instead only want to promote themselves. I enclosed a link to Phil’s recent cutesy video on the Eagle’s website. We shouldn’t take Phil’s opinions too seriously, becasue he’s trying to hard to be a big name Wichita celebrity.http://www.kansas.com/static/video/brownback-girl/
I’ve been mocking the news reporters for the past year that they are cowards and are afraid to go over Lou’s head to the McLatchy Corp. to complain that they are not allowed to investigate the extensive corruption in the family law & juvenile courts, the SRS and affiliated non-profits that agencies.
Any investigative reproitng should be counterproductive to Lou’s viosioneering efforts to promote the positive image of Wichita and the leadership of its non-profit agencies & institutions: United Way, Kansas Health Foundation, Wichita Bar Association, KU Med School, Prairie View, Youthville. All f these institutions have intentionally refused to acknowledge the extent of the influencing peddling and profiteering in the Wichita juvenile health & social services business. I am not surprised that Marni Vliet, Renee Hanrahan, and Lou Heldman are all congratulating each other for their outstanding efforts to build healthy children and improve Wichita’s image as they each take early retirement to avoid the inevitable bad publicity.
As late as last week, reporters are the Eagle still refuse to accept documentation of illegal acts by Nola Foulston’s prosecutors, SRS employees and Sedgwick County judges. May be they do not want to expose the corruption in the Wichita courts because it would reflect poorly on Richard Hite who is the law partner of Bonnie Bing’s husband, Dick Honeyman. Hite chairs the committee to select 3 nominations for openingson the the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. I wonder if Hite & Woodward are like the judges on the TV show “Dancing with the Stars” who choose finalists based on their tap dancing performances in the annual WBA talent show.
http://www.kscourts.org/Kansas-Courts/General-information/news-releases.asp#101607
The following submitted applications by the Monday deadline set by the Nominating Commission: Rick E. Bailey, Wichita; Terry E. Beck, Topeka; Terri L. Bezek, Baldwin City; District Court Judge David E. Bruns, Topeka; Douglas M. Crotty III, Garden City; Ward E. Loyd, Garden City; Suzanne Carey McAllister, Lawrence; Administrative Law Judge Bruce E. Moore, Salina; Timothy J. Moore, Wichita; Steven J. Obermeier, Olathe; Nancy A. Ogle, Wichita; Thomas A. Sheehan, Prairie Village; Steven P. Smith, Wichita; and Melissa Taylor Standridge, Overland Park.Members of the Nominating Commission include Richard C. Hite, Chairman, Wichita; Kerry E. McQueen, Liberal; Janet A. Juhnke, Salina; Patricia E. Riley and Dale E. Cushinberry, both of Topeka; Thomas J. Bath Jr., Overland Park; Vivien B. Jennings, Fairway; and Lee H. Woodard and David N. Farnsworth, both of Wichita.
I hope that Hite’s committee will choose at least one finalist from Wichita so that the Wichita Eagle can learn after the fact about the importance of investigative journalism.
Bill McKean (316) 293-6079 kiakahahaha@yahoo.com
“Maybe that is why Terry is so cranky these days.”
Naaaaaaw. I think he realizes he cant be a tax evader forever…
Great post Lonnie.
Monkeyhawk,Your Cat would not accept a separate-but-equal shrine. The Temple of the Feline God and Godess must reign above all others! After all, we humans were only created to have opposable thumbs to run can openers.
“When I finally mined down to the CBS poll, I learned that 74% of evangelical Christians were extremely concerned or very concerned about social issues like abortion and gay rights which contradicts Phil’s blog.”
Well gee, thanks for reinforcing that you christianist wingnut really ARE as bigoted as we think.
And say, Bill. Are you Mr. Kia when you are sober and AmeriDAD when you are drunk?
Maybe if you paid your child support, you wouldnt be facing big bad Nola?
I think we should call the waaaaaaaaaaambulance for Mr. Kia. I wondered where he went.
And Mr. Nutcase? When he writes here, Phillip is an OPINION writer, not a news reporter, but I know such fine distinctions dont bother you…
Apparently it is just easier to label Christians as “fundies”, “bigots”, “wingnuts” and “haters” than it is to conduct an intelligent discussion of their beliefs and their role in American politics. Why are you so afraid of Christians voicing their opinions, as is their Constitutional Right?
KenS – my only issue is when they want to enforce a sort of ‘Sharia’ law on the rest of us.
Actually Ben, I couldn’t agree with you more. I would submit that most of the “Moral Majority” or “Religious Right” are nothing more than lazy Christians. Rather than directing their energies and talents to spurring on “the Church” to do what God has called it to do here on earth, they find it easier to simply try to pass laws to mandate obedience, as if this satisfies God’s purpose. God doesn’t need the US Government to bring people to Him. He just wants Christians to follow the example of Jesus. Christians can only change the failings of this world by working to change hearts, not passing laws.
In that case KenS; we stand largely in agreement.
Careful…the majority of Christians are not fundamentalists. Personally, I am not afraid of Christians, I am afraid of Fundies because from the millions of people they murdered in the historical Crusades to the modern day political Crusades in which they entangle their sometimes twisted beliefs which includes murder, terrorism and deceit…I am very much afraid of groups which fund and promote hate and intolerance.
Fundies and others are encouraged to engage in Constitutional Rights. What I don’t like is their intolerance of my legal & Constitutional Rights.
Do I hate Fundies – naw, but they scare the holy heck out of me.
KenS, it having an intelligent discussion about religious beliefs and their role in politics is very difficult if not impossible. It would be better if we discuss politics in real terms that exist in this world. As soon as someone endorses a political course of action because “It pleases God” the possibility of intelligent discussion goes right out the window.
I know it makes it more of a challenge if people have to actually prove the harm caused by monogamous gay relationships, but it also levels the playing field. I have to support my political positions with real world facts, so should everyone else.
Leftcoaster – Amen and a Hallelujah to that.
“God doesn’t need the US Government to bring people to Him.”
hehehehe. Of course not, when the wingnuts here are doing SUCH a good job.
Sarcasm off.
LonnieYou do not understand what “fundamentalist” means.
The Crusades were largely justified. The Moslems were not terribly kind to the Christians in the “Holy Land.”
However, Catholics are NOT “Fundamentalists” in that Catholics do NOT believe that the Bible is the sole source of religious truth.
After all, Catholics CREATED The Bible, out of several different “Books”.
Fundamentalists believe that the Bible is the ONLY source of “Truth”.
Catholics, as well as other “Non-Fundamentalists” understand that the Author/Publisher of the Book is probably more of an authority than the Book.
I don’t expect all Christians to agree with my explanation.
However, “Fundamentalist” can NOT be applied to “Catholic” if you are using the traditional meanings of the words.
There are Conservative Catholics.
There are no “Fundamentalists Catholics”.
The Church, itself, would call that idolatry of the Bible and, therefore, NOT Catholic.
LonnieYou do not understand what “fundamentalist” means.
The Crusades were largely justified. The Moslems were not terribly kind to the Christians in the “Holy Land.”
However, Catholics are NOT “Fundamentalists” in that Catholics do NOT believe that the Bible is the sole source of religious truth.
After all, Catholics CREATED The Bible, out of several different “Books”.
Fundamentalists believe that the Bible is the ONLY source of “Truth”.
Catholics, as well as other “Non-Fundamentalists” understand that the Author/Publisher of the Book is probably more of an authority than the Book.
I don’t expect all Christians to agree with my explanation.
However, “Fundamentalist” can NOT be applied to “Catholic” if you are using the traditional meanings of the words.
There are Conservative Catholics.
There are no “Fundamentalist Catholics”.
The Church, itself, would call that idolatry of the Bible and, therefore, NOT Catholic.
…and what do they call the idolitry of the pope?
Are they popeaholics? Popeophiles? Popepushers?
Enquiring minds want to know…
but I bet one thing’s for sure.
They are touching SOMEBODY, somewhere.
Econ101,Good post. I think you are accurate in your distinction between Catholics and Fundamentalists.
And, like Lonnie, I do not worry about most Catholics (which is good because I am one) or most Protestants. It is the Fundamentalists that seem to stir the pot the most. Their reliance on the Bible as the ultimate truth is the new snake-oil.
Essentially, they ‘interpret’ the truth to fit whatever their personal agenda and/or bias is. That is where we run into trouble.
farmgirl
With all honesty and kindness I can muster, and no ill will at all, do you realize how hateful and bigoted YOU sound?
I will not give you the “some of my best friends are gay” line.
Let me say, instead, that I know gays who would call me in a heartbeat if they needed help with something. They have done so, repeatedly, in the past.
However, you call me, and others like me “bigots,” because we don’t agree with your political take on the “gay issue”.
I do not think less of you as a person for being Gay.
I have my sins, too. We all do. I am not to judge anyone, outside of what is necessary to protect msyself or others. You are no threat to me, therefore I am not allowed to judge you.
Why must YOU bring up the Priest/molestation issue?
Most of those priests were GAY priests, and most of the “boys” were in puberty, not young children.
Less than 1% of the Catholic Priesthood has been involved in molestation cases.
It is a horrible tragedy, and the Church was very slow to understand or to react.
The slowness of the Church, however, had much to do with the forgiving nature of the Church, and its belief in redemption and the power of people to change.
Me?
I wish the Church had been more like the Boy Scouts.
I would rather get sued for not allowing Gay leaders, like the Scouts, than for allowing Gay leaders who abuse teenage boys, which is what happened to the Church.
The Catholic Church has, historically, been VERY sympathetic towards Gay men who tried hard to be celebate.
It is the kindness of the Church that got it into trouble with 1% of its Priesthood.
Back to you, and the “gay rights” movement:
Radical gays tell me NAMBLA, which advocates for legal pedophilla, does NOT represent all gays, yet very few Gays every try to silence NAMBLA or distance themselves from NAMBLA.
Radical gays try to make the case that homosexuality and pedophelia have NOTHING to do with each other.
How, then, do you explain the fact that nearly ALL of the Priests, who got in trouble with teenage boys, were GAY? Hardly any priests got in trouble with teenage girls.
And how do YOU advance the cause of “gay rights” by bringing up such an issue as the Church sex abuse problem? To me, the Church sex abuse problems HURT your cause.
And where do you get off making fun of religion at all?
I think you have been making fun of Mormons quite a bit, too.
What are YOUR standards, KFG?
I try hard to respect you as a person, to respect your views and beliefs, to argue with facts and not insults.
Your views arent much different from some of my best friends. Your politics give me no reason to be angry with you.
In return, from you, I get crude religious jokes, bigotry and hatred.
Practice what you preach, ok?
If “Tolerance” is what you want, practice a little tolerance, and a little respect.
You think I hate churches and am bigoted about religion?
Yer right. I learned veeeeerry well in 2005.
I guess it was the Hill City catholic church that pushed me over the edge. You know the one.
The one that passed around a petition, during the service, about the hate amendment. It was to be sent to the legislature.
Not only did it offend the 501(c)3 laws, it offended me and many of their members.
Sorry. An eye for an eye and all that. Churches will never again get pass from me. Ever.
And one more thing…
Those child molesting priests were not gay. They were pedophiles. Big difference.
Do try to keep up.
And did I mention that the Catholic Church, through one of it’s groups that you belong to, was the BIGGEST funder of the hate amendment campaign in Kansas in 2005.
Thank the Knights of Columbus everytime I post something that makes you wince.
I wonder what ever happened to the Social Gospel guys? You know, those who were intersted in helping folks, improving their general welfare, health and education, instead of aligning themselves with the power brokers…. The Sermon on the Mount guys rather than the damnation guys. Anyone seen them around lately?
They’re around! They don’t need people to know about them, see them or hear them. They’re very busy, and very happy.
lindainks55 I know they’ve BEEN around, they started hospitals (now profit centres) schools ( now springboards for politicians), fostered humane prison reform (now lost to a huge commercial sector). I’m afraid whatever they’re doing now is being test marketed by some go getter capitialist on Wall Street.
I suspect, but have neither the resources nor time to investigate it, that “NAMBLA” is a creation of someone like Karl Rove or other Republic Party / “Christian Fundamentalists. It’s just not logical that pederasts would go public with such an outrageous agenda. If there’s any activity one would try to keep under wraps, it’s one’s pedophilia, right, “Econ101?”
To imagine such people have an organization, and dues, and a newsletter, and conventions… it defies rational thought.
Far more logical is that a bunch of Republic Party interns dreamed up NAMBLA as a straw-man whipping boy (those Republic Party interns are into that sort of thing), and drag it out as part of their agenda of fear and hate. (Even as their agenda of self-fear and self-hate seemed to gain votes during the 90s and early 2000s.)
Problem Catholic priests preyed upon males and females alike. There’s a common thread in all of them: they betrayed their vow of celibacy. As with all sexual predators, gender of the victim meant less that power of the victimizer.
Everyone on the planet who’s not tainted by your religionist myopia, “Econ101,” knows that rape is not a sex crime, but a crime of power. Even statutory rape; especially statutory rape.
Traditionally, second- or third-born sons were attracted to the Roman Catholic priesthood because it was their only track toward power; the oldest son inherited all the family’s wealth and property.
Things have evolved. And the specifics have changed, but anyone who enters the clergy — regardless of denomination — chooses that career and life path encouraged by the power instilled on such positions by faith.
For better or worse, the Catholic Church’s expectation of celibacy added some higher level of committment to their clergy. I know a lot of good Catholics. I know a few men and women who’ve entered the priesthood or sisterhood of the Catholic Church after raising families. In some perverse logic, the Church rationalizes those people’s committment, regardless of sexuality.
Celibacy has most certainly become an idea whose time is gone.
In fact, *any* issue involving sexuality between consenting adults is — or should be — a non-issue in any and every matter of civil law.
Yeah, that puts me on the wrong side of the issue of Legalized Prostitution. But it’s “The Oldest Profession” for a reason. Nobody, from the vice cops on South Broadway to the undercover cop in the Minneapolis airport has ever come close to preventing it.
If you’re against wanton sexualtity, preach your gospel and convert the heathens. Civil law — in the United States of America, anyway, according to the Constitution — doesn’t give you the right to have the power of law envoke your theology. Them’s the breaks.
If your inspired truth of God really exists, “Econ101,” you shouldn’t have to resort to a show of hands by part-time legislators or a majority of congressmen. “The Truth shall make you free,” as Jesus said.
He didn’t say, “A veto-proof plurality in the Senate shall make you free.” He didn’t say, “A well-organized, well-financed propaganda machine shall make you free.” In fact, He didn’t say word one about same-gender relationships. (He did say quite a bit, come to think about it, about concepts such as divorce.)
He was pretty specific about addressing the needs of “…the least of these my bretheren…,” concepts so-called “Christians” seem to reject these days in their quest for Republic Party power.
That Jesus! He was trying to ruin it for all of us.
That Jesus! He walked around saying stuff like he was God’s gift to mankind!
MonkeyPlease don’t make a fool of yourself.NAMBLA is a real organization.They have floats in most New York and California “Gay Rights” parades.They are what they are, a faction of the Gay Rights movement.As a matter of fact, the “Stonewall Riots” were a major, historical event in Gay Rights. The founders of Nambla were very involved in “Stonewall”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAMBLA
Farmgirl
You are completely wrong about 501(c)3 Free Speech rights.
Any Church is free to advocate for or against any policy or legislative issue they want to be involved with.
PERIOD!
There is NO IRS violation when a Church states a policy position.
The Church simply can not endorse or promote or finance individual candidates or political parties.
Monkey
“Subsidiarity” is Catholic doctrine, accepted by many other faiths.
It simply means that the State is not to appropriate powers to itself that are best left to lower authorites:
The individualThe familyThe extended familyThe churchThe local governmentThe State governmentThe National government.
It is ENTIRELY moral to argue that the government’s involvement in areas best left to lower levels of authority is immoral.
Jesus never gave the government permission to hold a gun to my head and force me to pay for someone else’s needs.
Charity, by the way, is something that you do on your own, voluntarily.
One of the reasons it is wrong for government to try and do everything, is that it denies the rest of us the opportunity to give, voluntarily.
Certainly even you, “Econ101,” know that Wikipedia is a source that lacks credibility. There’s plenty of good stuff there, I grant you, but anyone… *ANYONE* can contribute to Wikipedia entries.
I can submit to Wikipedia how “Econ101″ is puppy-fuc#er and kitty-torturer and Wikipedia will publish it and ask for documentation.
Whether it started out as an ironic joke, or (far less likely) there really was or is an active organization called “the North American Man/Boy Love Association,” the people who’ve kept it alive are members of the Republic Party. They *need* the straw man threat of a “NAMBLA,” and have spent far more time, money, and effort keeping the idea of it alive.
One of these days, when I’m really bored and have nothing better to do, I’ll create a Wikipedia entry for K.R.A.P — the Kitten-Raping-American-Patriots, an organization founded by blogger “Econ101″ which advocates raping kitties as an act of civil disobedience against traditional Republic Party values — and we’ll see how valuable you consider Wikipedia as a credible source for argument.
KRAP!
I love it!
At least they’re not for raping puppies!
(Although I’m not so sure about “Max.”)
Lol I’ll help ya write it.
Voluntarily??? Perhaps… However, Econ, Do not forget that the REASON for giving charitably, as all are able, is because of the gratitude we feel to God, for granting Grace and Forgiveness to ALL regardless of their sin… Grace = UNmerited Favor…. Peace = A Cessation of Againstness…. THOSE are the reasons why Christians are to feel obligation to give to those who are the brothers and sisters of the Christ.
Long Time AND Monkey
GET REAL would you please?
NAMBLA has been sued in Court. The Court recognizes that the organization exists.
I believe the ACLU filed a brief in the case, so they recognize the organization as well.
And if it is a “fake” group, designed to discredit the Gay Rights cause, why do the Gay Rights folks allow them in their parades?
Wikipedia?
Simply click on the links provided in that piece, or simply type the names that Wiki article references, and see that the story is factual and sound.
NAMBLA was founded by some of the folks who started the Gay Rights movement.
Not all Gays support NAMBLA.
However, you won’t see the Catholic Church promoting pedophilia in an Church parades.
You will see Gays doing just that, in many US cities.
If it is a “Right Wing Karl Rove Plot” why on Earth do the event organizers allow the NAMBLA float?
ChasAgain, the command to give is NOT related to government.I can deny government authority, at the ballot box, all I want.I can resist any government program that I want to resist, and NOT run against true Christian teaching.Charity is individual.Charity can NOT be commanded by government or it is not charity.
Anybody get blank phone calls from “Unknown Name/Unknown Number” that NEVER talk, or play a recording… they just hang up when you holler at them???
I never said it was a government program, Econ!! What is your paranoia based on??
Oh, BTW, if the policy being decided is on a BALLOT, it is the same as if it was a candidate on a Ballot… You still cannot encourage people in a Church Service to VOTE for a policy, or against a policy… It still violates the 501(C)3
It IS permissable however, to hold an open “town” meeting, using a church facility, to have OPEN discussions about a Policy appearing on a BALLOT…. That is because it is not in a Worship Service, and not being advocated by the Congregation/Denomination
It cannot be urged by the Congregation/Denomination that those attending the open town meeting, that they vote in any specified manner…
It IS permissable however, to hold an open “town” meeting, using a church facility, to have OPEN discussions about a Policy appearing on a BALLOT…. That is because it is not in a Worship Service, and not being advocated by the Congregation/Denomination
It cannot be urged by the Congregation/Denomination that those attending the open town meeting, that they vote in any specified manner…
Darn, it froze on me, and double posted!! Drat!!
“Eventually even the most peaceful Christian will get tired of having humanism shoved down his throat at every turn…”
I can see how this could be very tiresome, after all humanism is such a vile thing.
Why, just read here to see how absolutely obscene the humanism ideas are:
http://www.americanhumanist.org/3/HumandItsAspirations.htm
Steven,
Thank you!
Chas – my local Parish has hosted many candidate forums. All done COMPLETELY even-handed. ALL candidates for local offices including Libertarian. That, IMO, is as it should be.
THOSE are the reasons why Christians are to feel obligation to give to those who are the brothers and sisters of the Christ.
Posted by: Chas. | October 31, 2007 at 07:28 PM
Feeling the obligation to give to those who are the brothers and sisters of the Christ would not include JR and Farmie because they say they are not. I want the freedom to give to those I feel are needy and deserving. I don’t want the government taking my money to give to those who I feel are not deserving.
Who are you to say someone should give or who should be given to.
Churchs might be risking their tax-exempt status when following the advice of Paul Rosell, to wit:
“While there are no fail-safe ways to guarantee that a church or religious organization can be both involved in legilative process and remain tax-exempt, one risk adverse approach might be for a church to report pending legislation to church members, without proposing, supporting or opposing any legislation. Of course, nothing prohibits the IRS from scrutinizing even such activity.”
From: http://www.rutherford.org/PDF/rightsofchurches.pdf
So, churchs may expose their tax exempt status to risk by listening to the ramblings of one Paul F. Rosell. Maybe not a good idea. But, thinking persons/churchs already knew this…
sorry, “churchs” should be “churhes”
“Feeling the obligation to give to those who are the brothers and sisters of the Christ would not include JR and Farmie because they say they are not. Posted by: ^^ | October 31, 2007 at 08:38 PM ”
If you were a Christian you would believe that even those people who profess not to be “the brothers and sisters of the Christ” are indeed so. You would have extra compassion and charity towards them.
That is the catch-22 of being a true Christian that puts the sincerity of many who claim to be Christian in question.
Christian are commanded to love their fellow peoples. That is all peoples. Regardless of what the others believe, do, or say. The ultimate message of Jesus was love. He ministered to the social outcasts, the minorities, the lepers, the pariahs, the hated, the downtrodden and the poor.
As humans, it is difficult to have love and compassion for those whose views are different from our own or whose actions we despise. However as Christians, we are called to do just that; put aside our prejudices and seek the ability to love the most unlovable amoung us.
Always fun when they catch themselves in their own hypocritical trap aint it brian?
My view?
Being Christ ian need not necessarily require religion.
See how I broke the term
Christ ian
Meaning one who acts or thinks in a way suggestive of Christ.
I find most of the philosophy and teaching of the likely real person Jesus Christ quite healthy and constructive. It does not mean I have to make him a demi god to be similarly thinking or acting.
Definitely fun, but a little sad too.The actions and words of a misguided and incorrect minority negatively affect the image of all Christians.
For example, if it were not for the unChristian actions of people at the Hill City Church, ksfarmgrrl might have a different view of churches.
similarly thinking or acting.
Posted by: J R | October 31, 2007 at 09:19 PM
Let me know when you multiply computers like JC did fish JR.
You can give your borrowed one back.
description of the “Son of Man”.
The true savior brings us out of our desires for wealth, power, and eternal life on earth.
Posted by: TRACY | October 31, 2007 at 06:37 AM
Tracy, what exactly do you mean by “Son of Man”, and can you provide me a reference for that phrase?
Also, I think you got that last part wrong. God wants us to PROSPER and live a MORE than abundant life.
That business of christians being whimpy poor people who LOVE being poor and whimpy is an old Archie Bunker rumor.
Be ALL YOU CAN BE BABY!!!
Not borrowed Pat.
It was a gift. From a friend.
Look up gift and friend. Probably not things you are familiar with.
What you use to try and belittle me is actually something of which I am very proud.
That’s two threads where you tried to make me the topic. And my charitable response.
To keep my attentions, you will have to be more inventive?
“”"The religious right is usually neither. The louder the religious nutjob is, the more apt he is to be a child molester, adulterer, homosexual, or some other closeted undesireable. Religion does more damage and has killed more people than any other plague.”"”
Nutcases often use religion to hide their own biases and hates in and this is true of conservatives more than anybody else. They worship the God of the Old Testament and they ignore what Jesus really taught us to be. Jesus would not be seen in many a church in this country if he came back. Jesus was about loving others and doing good things. He clearly warned his followers not to be quick to judge others’ sins lest they see their own sins. I am a sinner and I know this and Jesus knows this and my sins are no worse or better than the sins of others. But to the Southern Baptist and other nutcases their sins are not as bad as another’s sins. They curse, smoke and beat their wife and hate minorities and gays but this is somehow more justified than homosexuality to them.
Well Kev, reading what you just posted, if I were a southern Baptist, I sure wouldn’t get a warm fuzzy for your democrat party.
What you have done is sealed them against you, by your constant berating and belittling them.
It’s so easy to tear down, but a little more difficult to build up and reach out.
Not ALL Christians are about the Religious Right. But you sure put us all in the same pot.
And when I look at your pot, I think I’m better off outside them both.
“”"The forcing has all been from the liberal side…forced adoration of homosexual sex, forced silencing of Christian free speech, forced removal of decades-old monuments, etc. Eventually even the most peaceful Christian will get tired of having humanism shoved down his throat at every turn, tired of seeing his children ordered to adore sin, tired of seeing filth on every public media, tired of watching millions of unborn children murdered…and tired of being hated.”"”
You are overstating the situation. The official policy of the government should be secularism. But nobody is shoving values down your throat. You are free to worship whichever God you choose when you wish.
“”"OMG, THAT is funny coming from someone like you, who thinks YOUR marriage is better and more important than mine. Do you even READ the shit you post?]
Fine. You first. I’ll be waiting for the repeal of the hate amendment.
Until then? YOU and yours are fair game.”"”
I am for you. Your love for another and their love for you is between you and them. It should neither be questioned nor judged by me or anybody else. That doesn’t mean I “endorse” homosexuality or that I think it is “normal” human behaviour. I just choose not to judge those who practice it. It seems like, if you are not bashing gays, the Republicans have no use for you.
“”"Its funny that you thank god for progress!
Good try on comparing slavery and homosexuality. You are into proof, so give me proof that people are born gay. I’m pretty sure i can give you proof that people are born black. They can’t help that, but gays can help not putting their weiners in butts.”"”
It is OBVIOUS that gays are born gay. None of us who are sexually normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose girls over boys to date”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people gay but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for homosexuality. But until that day arrives we all must accept the gays as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.
You should know Kev, that the Southern Baptists are of different camps and not all are like the ones described here.
If you are interested, you can read more about the split and basic doctrines at the URLs posted here.
http://www.adherents.com/largecom/baptist_SBC_schism.html
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/sbaptists.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Faith_and_Message
“Lefty” –
I think you’ve chosen to ignore that the far-right evangelicals have co-opted the term “Christian.”
Listen to their radio stations, watch their television programs, read their so-called “Christian” Yello Pages. They’re not talking about Episcopalians or Mormons or Presbyterians or Jehovah’s Witnesses… when the Religious Wrong says “Christian,” it’s a code word for twice-born, roll on the floor, say thank’ya JEEEEEEzus fundamentalist cranks.
Mainstream demoniations must suffer the consequences of allowing anti-evolution, anti-women’s rights, anti-sexual-orientation right… and all the other offenses against rationalism that fundamentalists have highjacked in their quest for political power.
Of course, “Lefty,” as you posted, “Not ALL Christians are about the Religious Right.” But all those other “Christians” sat back and let the fundies take over the so-called “Christian” agenda. You even go so far as to opt for being inside “the pot” with the Evangelical Right’s theology of hate.
I don’t want the government taking my money to give to those who I feel are not deserving.
Who are you to say someone should give or who should be given to.
Posted by: ^^ | October 31, 2007 at 08:38 PM
===========================
IF you can actually read, you will note that I never said ONE word about government in what I said… Only about why Christians are obligated to give…
And, BTW, Jesus would say that you give to ALL people… even non-believers… They are God’s People the same as you!!
Of course, “Lefty,” as you posted, “Not ALL Christians are about the Religious Right.” But all those other “Christians” sat back and let the fundies take over the so-called “Christian” agenda. You even go so far as to opt for being inside “the pot” with the Evangelical Right’s theology of hate.
Posted by: MonkeyHawk | October 31, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Yeah Okay.
Then one can make the same analogy about the Left and secularism.
That every secular movement that occurs on the Left represents all of those on the left.
If they object to any of it, they should have done something about it, since the Leftist seculars are on the inside.
Also, I think you got that last part wrong. God wants us to PROSPER and live a MORE than abundant life.
That business of christians being whimpy poor people who LOVE being poor and whimpy is an old Archie Bunker rumor.
Be ALL YOU CAN BE BABY!!!
Posted by: Reverend | October 31, 2007 at 09:45 PM
Whatever makes you feel better about your greed. It’s funny that the fundies always take the bible literally, except when it is inconvenient for them….such as in money and mega rich churches.
Al Franken wrote about folks like the puppet nic “reverend”
The book is “Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them” The chapter is “supply side Jesus”.
Yes, he did J R and a very good book it is, too!!
I believe Kansas actually admitted to being “banned” over on Open Thread… Did you book mark that one J R??? We might need it later on!! ;-)
Kansas did Phil really get rid of you?
Posted by: awinters | October 31, 2007 at 11:56 PM=====================
Yeah, for about 4 hours. The pain was unbearable. (chortles)
Posted by: Kansas | October 31, 2007 at 11:59 PM
===========================
But, Kansas made a threat against the Blog, to destroy it… Isnt that a threat to do injury to property?? Sort of like a cyber terrorist threat??
Chas,
Perhaps the WE Blog does not really want to get rid of Kansas, whose Typekey profile = “Republikhan” ?
He is very useful as a “Kansas values” idiot, with his totally bogus climate science posts, etc.
Well, you have a good point there, Cosmos!! :-)
Consider this Posted by: Kev | October 31, 2007 at 10:29 PM:
>> It is OBVIOUS that gays are born gay. None of us who are sexually normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose girls over boys to date”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people gay but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for homosexuality. But until that day arrives we all must accept the gays as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.> It is obvious that thieves are born thieves. [And I add here, that many of us have a natural desire to take what doesn't belong to us, including me as a child.] None of us who are normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose thievery”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people thieves, but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for stealing. But until that day arrives, we all must accept the thieves as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.<<
Now I do not think homosexuality can be reduced to these overly simplistic terms. But if those of us who think that the healthiest, most beneficial and “moral” expression of human sexuality is found in the context of a man and woman married to each other for the duration of their lives—and point to empirical evidence proving such—are not allowed to reduce gay issues something this simplistic, then certainly those who promote the gay agenda cannot be allowed to lower themselves to such a silly argument either. We are, after all, not “animals” as was stated in the post. We are moral creatures who have a responsibility to each other, and to our Creator to behave in morally right and beneficial ways. Further, we have a responsibility to curb, restrain and deny our individual natural tendencies that are immoral, including sexual acting out, stealing, hating, lying… and a long list that everyone can add to. I owe you that myself, as you owe me the same.
The issue of same-sex attraction is as complex as it is “natural” to those who experience it. Likewise, heterosexual attraction is complex and natural to those who experience. Regardless of attraction, we still have standards, laws and morals in place that regulate the expression of those natural tendencies so that individuals, society, and culture find the greatest health, happiness and fulfillment. Likening people to animals who lack self-control in order to make a point in a debate or exchange is beneath the writer, and insults those he seeks to defend.
The level of debate and understanding must rise, though this forum lends itself not to serious debate, but cheap arguments from less than serious-minded people. The hate, hurt, insult and intolerance displayed in some of these posts contributes little or nothing to the greater debate, but does reveal the hate, hurt, brokenness and sub-civility of the writers. Though issues of sexuality and desires have the strongest of emotions tied to them, unreasoned arguments made by unreasonable people are not helpful.
In focusing specifically on those who have same-sex attraction whether they desire it or not, there is hope for those who want to change their behavior and desires based on moral convictions. The complex issues of sexuality are indeed beginning to be unlocked, and people who do not desire to live a gay life are finding help on the road to sexual wholeness. Here are some sites that are offering real help, including one in here in Wichita:
http://www.freedomatlast.org
http://www.lovewonout.com
http://www.exodus.to/
Science may not have found a cure, as KEV alluded to, but Love has found a way to help those who want to change.
Please forgive the “half post” above… I spell-checked my typing in WORD, and evidently only got part of it copied before I re-pasted it here. I’ve discovered it’s good to use the “Preview” button. :-) Here’s the entire post:
Consider this Posted by: Kev | October 31, 2007 at 10:29 PM:
>> It is OBVIOUS that gays are born gay. None of us who are sexually normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose girls over boys to date”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people gay but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for homosexuality. But until that day arrives we all must accept the gays as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.<<
Almost all Americans acknowledge that sexual activity has at least some degree of morality inherent in it. And most of that group would acknowledge that it obviously has a *strong* moral content to it and would therefore demand responsible and accountable actions in regard to sexual activity. That is why is virtually all of the population (with the exception of the NAMBLA people) strongly support laws that protect children from sexual acting out and abuse by predators. We have codified into law the obvious that, though individuals may have a natural bent to pedophilia, it is immoral, hurtful and unhealthy, and rips at the fabric of our society.
We have moral laws governing other “natural” desires, too. Jeffrey Dahmer desired to cut people up. We legislate the obvious: you cannot murder because it is detrimental to our society–and to the murderer, who becomes sub-civilized—an animal, if you will. If you take the argument presented by KEV, that, because folk have a natural desire to do something or behave in a certain way, we should give them full acceptance under the law, we will be utterly destroyed in short order. Natural desires must conform to moral restraint if we are to survive.
Change KEV’s words and use the same argument for a different desire:
“It is obvious that thieves are born thieves. [And I add here, that many of us have a natural desire to take what doesn't belong to us, including me as a child.] None of us who are normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose thievery”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people thieves, but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for stealing. But until that day arrives, we all must accept the thieves as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.”
Now I do not think homosexuality can be reduced to these overly simplistic terms. But if those of us who think that the healthiest, most beneficial and “moral” expression of human sexuality is found in the context of a man and woman married to each other for the duration of their lives—and point to empirical evidence proving such—are not allowed to reduce gay issues something this simplistic, then certainly those who promote the gay agenda cannot be allowed to lower themselves to such a silly argument either. We are, after all, not “animals” as was stated in the post. We are moral creatures who have a responsibility to each other, and to our Creator to behave in morally right and beneficial ways. Further, we have a responsibility to curb, restrain and deny our individual natural tendencies that are immoral, including sexual acting out, stealing, hating, lying… and a long list that everyone can add to. I owe you that myself, as you owe me the same.
The issue of same-sex attraction is as complex as it is “natural” to those who experience it. Likewise, heterosexual attraction is complex and natural to those who experience. Regardless of attraction, we still have standards, laws and morals in place that regulate the expression of those natural tendencies so that individuals, society, and culture find the greatest health, happiness and fulfillment. Likening people to animals who lack self-control in order to make a point in a debate or exchange is beneath the writer, and insults those he seeks to defend.
The level of debate and understanding must rise, though this forum lends itself not to serious debate, but cheap arguments from less than serious-minded people. The hate, hurt, insult and intolerance displayed in some of these posts contributes little or nothing to the greater debate, but does reveal the hate, hurt, brokenness and sub-civility of the writers. Though issues of sexuality and desires have the strongest of emotions tied to them, unreasoned arguments made by unreasonable people are not helpful.
In focusing specifically on those who have same-sex attraction whether they desire it or not, there is hope for those who want to change their behavior and desires based on moral convictions. The complex issues of sexuality are indeed beginning to be unlocked, and people who do not desire to live a gay life are finding help on the road to sexual wholeness. Here are some sites that are offering real help, including one in here in Wichita:
http://www.freedomatlast.org
http://www.lovewonout.com
http://www.exodus.to/
Science may not have found a cure, as KEV alluded to, but Love has found a way to help those who want to change.
Please forgive the “half post” above… I spell-checked my typing in WORD, and evidently only got part of it copied before I re-pasted it here. I’ve discovered it’s good to use the “Preview” button. :-) Here’s the entire post:
Consider this Posted by: Kev | October 31, 2007 at 10:29 PM:
>> It is OBVIOUS that gays are born gay. None of us who are sexually normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose girls over boys to date”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people gay but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for homosexuality. But until that day arrives we all must accept the gays as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.<<
Almost all Americans acknowledge that sexual activity has at least some degree of morality inherent in it. And most of that group would acknowledge that it obviously has a *strong* moral content to it and would therefore demand responsible and accountable actions in regard to sexual activity. That is why is virtually all of the population (with the exception of the NAMBLA people) strongly support laws that protect children from sexual acting out and abuse by predators. We have codified into law the obvious that, though individuals may have a natural bent to pedophilia, it is immoral, hurtful and unhealthy, and rips at the fabric of our society.
We have moral laws governing other “natural” desires, too. Jeffrey Dahmer desired to cut people up. We legislate the obvious: you cannot murder because it is detrimental to our society–and to the murderer, who becomes sub-civilized—an animal, if you will. If you take the argument presented by KEV, that, because folk have a natural desire to do something or behave in a certain way, we should give them full acceptance under the law, we will be utterly destroyed in short order. Natural desires must conform to moral restraint if we are to survive.
Change KEV’s words and use the same argument for a different desire:
“It is obvious that thieves are born thieves. [And I add here, that many of us have a natural desire to take what doesn't belong to us, including me as a child.] None of us who are normal ever decided at any age “I think I will choose thievery”. It just came natural to us as it does to any animal. We do not know what makes people thieves, but if they are, they are. Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for stealing. But until that day arrives, we all must accept the thieves as they are and love them as fellow human beings. And yes, give them all the rights that we as a free people enjoy.”
Now I do not think homosexuality can be reduced to these overly simplistic terms. But if those of us who think that the healthiest, most beneficial and “moral” expression of human sexuality is found in the context of a man and woman married to each other for the duration of their lives—and point to empirical evidence proving such—are not allowed to reduce gay issues something this simplistic, then certainly those who promote the gay agenda cannot be allowed to lower themselves to such a silly argument either. We are, after all, not “animals” as was stated in the post. We are moral creatures who have a responsibility to each other, and to our Creator to behave in morally right and beneficial ways. Further, we have a responsibility to curb, restrain and deny our individual natural tendencies that are immoral, including sexual acting out, stealing, hating, lying… and a long list that everyone can add to. I owe you that myself, as you owe me the same.
The issue of same-sex attraction is as complex as it is “natural” to those who experience it. Likewise, heterosexual attraction is complex and natural to those who experience. Regardless of attraction, we still have standards, laws and morals in place that regulate the expression of those natural tendencies so that individuals, society, and culture find the greatest health, happiness and fulfillment. Likening people to animals who lack self-control in order to make a point in a debate or exchange is beneath the writer, and insults those he seeks to defend.
The level of debate and understanding must rise, though this forum lends itself not to serious debate, but cheap arguments from less than serious-minded people. The hate, hurt, insult and intolerance displayed in some of these posts contributes little or nothing to the greater debate, but does reveal the hate, hurt, brokenness and sub-civility of the writers. Though issues of sexuality and desires have the strongest of emotions tied to them, unreasoned arguments made by unreasonable people are not helpful.
In focusing specifically on those who have same-sex attraction whether they desire it or not, there is hope for those who want to change their behavior and desires based on moral convictions. The complex issues of sexuality are indeed beginning to be unlocked, and people who do not desire to live a gay life are finding help on the road to sexual wholeness. Here are some sites that are offering real help, including one in here in Wichita:
http://www.freedomatlast.org
http://www.lovewonout.com
http://www.exodus.to/
Science may not have found a cure, as KEV alluded to, but Love has found a way to help those who want to change.
STILL STILL sounds like Donnie McCloset.
Obama much?
Bigotry is as bigotry does…
I guess I dont get it because I’m a HAPPY gay. And ya know, Donnie McCloset wont mess with us…
>Maybe someday science will have answers and maybe even a “cure” for homosexuality. But until that day arrives we all must accept the gays as they are and love them as fellow human beings.<
IMHO, gay folks are not looking for a “cure”, they are only looking to be accepted “where they are”. Is that not what Jesus promised, to accept you just where you are, and then to mold you into the person that He wants you to be?
Who are we to come between anyone and the love of Christ. If Christ does not want them to be gay then does He not have the power to overcome whatever it is that makes them gay? Of course He does. Christians bring judgement upon themselves by trying to do the work of the Holy Spirit. Our job is only to lift Christ up so that others will be drawn unto Him, not to decide who is worthy, or what they need to change. That is between them and their God.
Thank you Sam. As always, you do a great job of representing Christ.
And for the record, I dont give a damn about being accepted.
I want equal protection under the law.
That’s all.
farmgrrlthat’s acceptable! :)
Kansassam, I hope you were not trying to leave the impression that I stated all gays wanted to change. If you were, please don’t be careless either in reading what I wrote, or misrepresent it. I would encourage you to re-read my post, and pay attention to where I was quoting someone else, or accurately representing what someone else implied. Concerning your thoughts that gay folk only want to be accepted “where they are”, that is true of many people in the gay community. Possibly even the majority, as ksfarmfrrl has testified about herself, but you apparently have a limited experience in, and/or exposure to the gay community. There are, indeed, many who want to accepted “where they are” *and,* at the same time, helped to get “where they want to be.” Please don’t rob those people of the hope and opportunity to do that based on your limited understanding of the reality of gay life and a social engineering agenda.
WTF?
David….
I didn’t even read your post, so don’t get so defensive. I was expanding on Kev’s post. And, don’t pretend that you know me or anything about me… it’s obvious you don’t.
I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know much about social engineering.. and truthfully, I don’t give a rat’s hiney about that. I DO care about people and Christ’s love. I don’t believe I robbed anyone of any hope or opportunity.
Ah, my apologies, kansassam, for assuming you were misquoting me. You were actually responding to a previous post, which I had also cited.
DA,Why is it so important for you to find a cure for something that isn’t a disease?
Ps, I know people who got tossed into exodus, and from what they tell me, it’s a program of systematically abusing a person until they say what you want them to. It’s cruel, pointless and smacks of a cult, and it doesn’t work.
I also knew a psychologist who built an entire practice around reassembling ex-exodusters back into self-respecting gay people. She made a fortune, and that at low rates.
Yes, Jed, we all “know someone who…” or “heard about someone that…” *wink* Somehow I’m doubtful that Exodus is water-boarding those folk who, by their choice, have come out of the gay lifestyle, driven by their own moral convictions and helped by the testimony and counsel of others. You used the phrased “tossed into Exodus.” Profound change is rarely gained at the insistance of someone else. It must be a personal choice and often requires help. Many have struggled, and many have won. Check out the websites, which were included in my post:
http://www.freedomatlast.org
http://www.lovewonout.com
http://www.exodus.to/
And now, not at the risk of assuming something inaccurate (as I did earlier), since you clearly referenced me and what I wrote, please go back and read carefully what I wrote. Try not to read through a preconceived, monolithic agenda-driven narrative about the gay community. The gay community is… well, diverse. There are many who don’t desire same-sex attraction and want to move in a different direction. A careful reading will demonstrate that I did not refer to homosexuality as a disease that needed to be cured, but was quoting–indeed, in a way, challenging–someone else. If you would like to respond to what I actually wrote, I’d be interested in your comments.
DA,Both of the people I know got chucked into exodus by their fundie parents. They didn’t get a say in what happened. And while neither of them reported being waterboarded, they were both subjected to isolation, verbal abuse and electric shocks. These were reports I heard first hand, and they jibed with much of what I heard from other sources. Neither were cured of being gay, but they were certainly cured of being christian!
Jed,
I feel like I’m trying to get Hillary Clinton to give a direct answer to a question. Again, your response had little to do with what I initially wrote. I never mentioned anything about being a Christian (though Christian ministries were referenced). Nor did I ever posit as my position that homosexuality needed to be “cured.” That word was used by an earlier writer, whose comment I was quoting… and then by you. I offer again that if you would like to respond to something I actually wrote, perhaps someone might gain something helpful.
Concerning the two friends you say were forced into an ex-gay treatment program, if they (and you) have accurately recounted their experience it sounds abusive. You must acknowledge, though, that since they were forced into some sort of program against their wills, their recollection of what and how things happened is possibly skewed by their mind set. I’m not eschewing their story of abuse, but in light of the hundreds of very different, hopeful and positive experiences and testimonies documented on any of the websites mentioned earlier, it seems that the weight of evidence and experience is other than you or they suggested.
Further, if your friends were forced to endure non-therapeutic electric shock, a criminal investigation should be launched. It should be noted, though, that there are still some smoking and alcohol treatment programs that use aversion therapy in the form of a mild electric stimulus. Those reading should know that the amount of voltage used in smoking cessation programs is somewhat equivalent to touching a 9v battery. It isn’t particularly painful, but provides a mild, uncomfortable, stimulus to create a subconscious negative feeling when taking a drag on a cigarette or taking a drink. This type of therapy began falling out of favor 30 to 40 years ago, and was long ago condemned by Exodus. Electric shock aversion treatment for sexual issues, though once standard practice, was abandoned decades ago by almost all reputable people who practiced it. When were your friends subjected to this? Since Exodus condemns rather than practices electric shock aversion therapy, and since Exodus doesn’t take people forced into their programs, perhaps your friends were actually in some disreputable organization, which is truly a tragedy. But accuracy in recounting facts is important, and Exodus truly provides excellent help for those who desire to, and are motivated to depart homosexuality.
DA,Both the people I talked to were in exodus in the last ten years. As I said, their experiences jibed with descriptions I heard from others enough to assume it was standard treatment there. And yes, they were specifically stating that it was exodus ministries they were forced into. Forgive me if I assumed your glowing descriptions of such programs meant that you approved of their abuse.