Anti-gays misreading Bible?

[LSU]

This guy says so...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070417/wl_canada_nm/canada_anglicans_homosexuality_col&printer=1;_ylt=AuAdKriTIbYMTHA.wdnaDP7xrGIF

Anglican head Williams says anti-gays misread Bible

By Tom Heneghan, Religion EditorTue Apr 17, 5:54 PM ET

The spiritual leader of the world's 77 million Anglicans has said conservative Christians who cite the Bible to condemn homosexuality are misreading a key passage written by Saint Paul almost 2,000 years ago.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, addressing theology students in Toronto, said an oft-quoted passage in Paul's Epistle to the Romans meant to warn Christians not to be self-righteous when they see others fall into sin.

His comments were an unusually open rebuff to conservative bishops, many of them from Africa, who have been citing the Bible to demand that pro-gay Anglican majorities in the United States and Canada be reined in or forced out of the Communion.

"Many current ways of reading miss the actual direction of the passage," Williams said on Monday, according to a text of his speech posted on the Anglican Church of Canada's Web site.

"Paul is making a primary point not about homosexuality but about the delusions of the supposedly law-abiding."

The worldwide Anglican Communion is near breaking point over homosexuality, with conservative clerics insisting the Bible forbids gay bishops or blessings for same-sex unions. Its U.S. branch, the Episcopal Church, named a gay bishop in 2003.

In fact, Williams also revealed on Tuesday that he had considered canceling the Anglicans' once-a-decade 2008 Lambeth Conference, which has the potential to become a flashpoint over homosexuality.

"Yes, we've already been considering that and the answer is no," he told the Anglican Church of Canada's Anglican Journal.

"We've been looking at whether the timing is right, but if we wait for the ideal time, we will wait more than just 18 months."

In the passage of Romans that Williams referred to in Monday's speech, Paul said people who forgot God's words fell into sin. "Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion," Paul wrote.

Williams said these lines were "for the majority of modern readers the most important single text in Scripture on the subject of homosexuality." But right after that passage, Paul warns readers not to condemn those who ignore God's word.

"At whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself," wrote Paul, the first-century apostle whose epistles, or letters, to early Christian communities elaborated many Church teachings.

NEITHER SIDE WINS

Williams said reinterpreting Paul's epistle as a warning against smug self-righteousness rather than homosexuality would favor neither side over the other in the bitter struggle that threatens to plunge the Anglican Communion into schism.

It would not help pro-gay liberals, he said, because Paul and his readers clearly agreed that homosexuality was "as obviously immoral as idol worship or disobedience to parents."

This reading would also upset anti-gay conservatives, who have been "up to this point happily identifying with Paul's castigation of someone else," and challenge them to ask whether they were right to judge others, he added.

"This does nothing to settle the exegetical questions fiercely debated at the moment," Williams said.

But he said a "strictly theological reading of Scripture" would not allow a Christian to denounce others and not ask whether he or she were also somehow at fault.

Williams warned of the danger of schism.

"The Communion has to face the fact that there is a division in our Church and it's getting deeper and more bitter," he said. "If the Anglican Church divides, everyone will lose."

[Ed Who?]

It'll be interesting to see if he perishes for his blasphemy, or if he repents before he dies. It's pretty clear from the perils of Sodom and Gomorrah that homosexuality is a sin. We all commit sin, that is true, but Christians not only identify the sin in their life, they try to root it out and abolish it from their psyches. The "homosexuality isn't a sin" crowd wants to rectify their behavior without consequence; this is of course silly because Judgment will certainly not be changed because of the convincing of a church body here on earth.

[Hotpapa666]

No shit people mis-read the bible. How do you NOT mis-read the Bible. That is one confusing book.

[Ed Who?]

How do you NOT mis-read the Bible.

If you have a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, and you ask the Holy Spirit to help you to understand the Word, more times than not you'll be given the wisdom to help you discern the apporpriate meaning to Scripture as it applies to your life.

[MTVike]

It'll be interesting to see if he perishes for his blasphemy, or if he repents before he dies. It's pretty clear from the perils of Sodom and Gomorrah that homosexuality is a sin. We all commit sin, that is true, but Christians not only identify the sin in their life, they try to root it out and abolish it from their psyches. The "homosexuality isn't a sin" crowd wants to rectify their behavior without consequence; this is of course silly because Judgment will certainly not be changed because of the convincing of a church body here on earth.

Cheap joke attempt here.

I agree, though. The popuar culture wants to change Church laws so they feel better about their behavior.

But danged if the old rules don't turn out to be the best ways to live.

[LSU]

Cheap joke attempt here.

I agree, though. The popuar culture wants to change Church laws so they feel better about their behavior.

But danged if the old rules don't turn out to be the best ways to live.


All old rules, or just certain ones that still carry certain stigmas?

[MTVike]

All old rules, or just certain ones that still carry certain stigmas?


The old rules I live by don't have any "stigmas" I know about.

[Ed Who?]

All old rules, or just certain ones that still carry certain stigmas?

If by "stigma" you mean "forcing God to burn your towns until they smolder like a furnace," then yes, homosexuality carries a stigma.

I guess it's about time for the animal fellaters to claim that we've been misinterpreting the Bible against them, too.

[LSU]

If by "stigma" you mean "forcing God to burn your towns until they smolder like a furnace," then yes, homosexuality carries a stigma.

I guess it's about time for the animal fellaters to claim that we've been misinterpreting the Bible against them, too.

Santorum?

[Hotpapa666]

If you have a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, and you ask the Holy Spirit to help you to understand the Word, more times than not you'll be given the wisdom to help you discern the apporpriate meaning to Scripture as it applies to your life.


Well, none of this is going to work for me so I guess the Bible will continue to be a strange, sometimes inconsistent, often brutal, incredibly confusing tome. I read it quite a bit in college and it doesn't hold together very well. A well written book about the Bible is "A History of God", it's a bit dry but it the Bible and western religion is interesting context. I believe the authour is a Christian, if that has any effect.

[IBC]

Santorum?

Yes, that brilliance is rearing its ugly head again.


And thanks for playing, horrid comparisons.

[pnkpanther]

It'll be interesting to see if he perishes for his blasphemy, or if he repents before he dies. It's pretty clear from the perils of Sodom and Gomorrah that homosexuality is a sin. We all commit sin, that is true, but Christians not only identify the sin in their life, they try to root it out and abolish it from their psyches. The "homosexuality isn't a sin" crowd wants to rectify their behavior without consequence; this is of course silly because Judgment will certainly not be changed because of the convincing of a church body here on earth.

it's also evident from the bible that women arent on equal rights, can be stoned if they cant prove their viriginity on their wedding night, and are the property of their husband

bible was written by Man with thier biases.

I know many homosexuals who are better pepole then self rightous christians.

[Ed Who?]

it's also evident from the bible that women arent on equal rights, can be stoned if they cant prove their viriginity on their wedding night, and are the property of their husband

bible was written by Man with thier biases.

I know many homosexuals who are better pepole then self rightous christians.

See, this is why I don't like labelling groups too much. God will judge each and every one of us. "Love the sinner, hate the sin" is what most churches try to embody, but there are difficult decisions when it comes to leadership.

Jesus has paid the price for us all, but we have to be willing to consider ourselves unworthy without that which Jesus went through. So someday we will see.

[IBC]

Jesus has paid the price for us all, but we have to be willing to consider ourselves unworthy without that which Jesus went through. So someday we will see.
I disagree with your entire post, but don't worry. I will be judged when the rapture comes. I don't want to be left behind!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[KinjaKahn]

I think this anglican idiot has no idea what inspires the anti-gay crowd. Paul did not write leviticus, and leviticus is where the sex laws are given. The anti-gay verse is...

Leviticus 20
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Paul is pretty irrelevant following this verse.

[swordfish]

Anglican head Williams hasn't got to that chapter of Leviticus yet.

[swordfish]

I know many gay people. My girlfriend's brother is gay in fact. One time I was joking about going home and getting some action. So I asked one of them if they were gonna go home and get some good old booty love on. The boyfriend acted upset and responded by saying "We do other things". So I say "Oh your going to give up a blowjob?" He then got offended and said "That is not all we do!" See the whole thing is laughable. He gets a good feeling from his friend and then is embarassed when he is called out on it. We both know hes gay and there was never any doubts. So I have to wonder why does he get upset whenever I mention something that he feels is perfectly OK. Am I making fun of him in some way by asking about the perverted things they do? I think he knows deep down it is wrong but he likes it.

[Ed Who?]

I know many gay people. My girlfriend's brother is gay in fact. One time I was joking about going home and getting some action. So I asked one of them if they were gonna go home and get some good old booty love on. The boyfriend acted upset and responded by saying "We do other things". So I say "Oh your going to give up a blowjob?" He then got offended and said "That is not all we do!" See the whole thing is laughable. He gets a good feeling from his friend and then is embarassed when he is called out on it. We both know hes gay and there was never any doubts. So I have to wonder why does he get upset whenever I mention something that he feels is perfectly OK. Am I making fun of him in some way by asking about the perverted things they do? I think he knows deep down it is wrong but he likes it.

There are many devout single people who probably would love to engage in hetero sex (i.e. they would like it), but the Bible teaches against it. It's not that it doesn't happen, but it's a sin...sex outside of marriage is sin, period. But we make mistakes, because the world is chock full of temptation.

Again, my biggest beef is the movement to pervert the Bible into saying that homosexuality isn't sin. Sounds a lot like what is warned of in Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." The more the world accepts this as a normal behavior, the more that it will be pushed from within the Church. It's happening.

[pnkpanther]

I think this anglican idiot has no idea what inspires the anti-gay crowd. Paul did not write leviticus, and leviticus is where the sex laws are given. The anti-gay verse is...



Paul is pretty irrelevant following this verse.

from the book of mark 10:11

Whoever divorces someone and marry's another is commiting adultrey


from Dueteromony 22:13-20

If a man marries a women and has sex with her and then turns on her and publicly accuses her, saying, "I married this woman, and when I had sex with her, I found no evidence of virginity, the girl's father and mother must take the evidence of her viginity and show it to the elders of the town, saying, "Here is the evidence of my daughter's virginity. The elders will then have the man arrested and flogged, and fine him 100 silver pieces, giving this money to the girl's father. The woman will remain the man's wife as long as he lives, and he may not divorce her.' 'But if the accusation is true and no evidence of the woman's virginity is shown, the woman must be taken to the door of her fathers house and stoned to death by the men of the town.'

i'd recommend reading on, gets interesting.....

Women have no rights in bible, and if you violate a woman, the only real pennace seems to be to pay the father of the girl violated...

[Tom Joad]

Women have no rights in bible, and if you violate a woman, the only real pennace seems to be to pay the father of the girl violated...

But, is it okay to enslave them? Because, the Bible is pretty pro-slavery and I just wanted to know if that extended to females.

[swordfish]

Yes which verse says "Go forth and enslave". Seems to me many of the stories in the bible were about people gaining freedom. It is possible that I am reading the wrong bible.

[IBC]

This Leviticus?

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

[ryr8828]

This Leviticus?

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I'd be interested in a link to this since it's fairly obvious to me that you didn't write it yourself.

[Tom Joad]

Yes which verse says "Go forth and enslave". Seems to me many of the stories in the bible were about people gaining freedom. It is possible that I am reading the wrong bible.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl.htm

[Ed Who?]

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl.htm

First of all, I'm still trying to find a liberal who understands the concept of timeframe.

Neither link cares to actually quote the Bible, although the first references verses.

I think the bottom line is that it doesn't come straight out and condemn slavery, but it does provide guidelines to help people deal with the situation they're in.

[pnkpanther]

First of all, I'm still trying to find a liberal who understands the concept of timeframe.

Neither link cares to actually quote the Bible, although the first references verses.

I think the bottom line is that it doesn't come straight out and condemn slavery, but it does provide guidelines to help people deal with the situation they're in.

so time is only relevant on certain issues, modernize parts of bible, but not others..ignore some rules, but let ones we find convient slide...who makes those decisions and why?

[Tom Joad]

so time is only relevant on certain issues, modernize parts of bible, but not others..ignore some rules, but let ones we find convient slide...who makes those decisions and why?

I'm waiting to find a conservative that doesn't talk about of both sides of his mouth.

[Vegas]

I'm waiting to find a conservative that doesn't talk about of both sides of his mouth.

There you go again with the insults. Tell me again what it is you don't like about Ann Coulter??

[Tom Joad]

There you go again with the insults. Tell me again what it is you don't like about Ann Coulter??

This was in response to Ed Who?. If conservatives are going to do it, I guess it's fair game, huh? That's what we've been reduced to, huh?

PS - I still didn't wish death on anyone.

[Hotpapa666]

This was in response to Ed Who?. If conservatives are going to do it, I guess it's fair game, huh? That's what we've been reduced to, huh?

PS - I still didn't wish death on anyone.

I am of the opinion that one sides use of lies and dirty tricks doesn't make it ok for the other side to use them. If your arguements are sound you will silence those who oppose them without the need for dirty tricks. If you sink to the level of Colture there are two people in the mud where there was only one before. Take the high road.

[Ed Who?]

so time is only relevant on certain issues, modernize parts of bible, but not others..ignore some rules, but let ones we find convient slide...who makes those decisions and why?

Again, the Bible doesn't endorse or condemn it. By context, we know it was happening at the time, and it gives instructions that slaves should not be mistreated. And actually, if you go to the first link, it lists this section of Scripture Deut 15:12-15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2015:12-15&version=31) which clearly sets a guideline that a slave should only be kept for 6 years, and after that the master should provide well for the slave to reenter the world.

Again, the books of law included in the Bible were rules for the nation of Israel over 2000 years ago, and are still a decent guideline for living. Some are antiquated, and I know the next question is, "Who gets to decide which are the outdated laws?" And I'd say it's your relationship with God that dictates what exactly you have to do to please Him. I know what my problems are, and one or two of them are not specifically mentioned in the Bible either. But God tells you through conviction of the heart that certain things are not pleasing to Him.

[pnkpanther]

Again, the Bible doesn't endorse or condemn it. By context, we know it was happening at the time, and it gives instructions that slaves should not be mistreated. And actually, if you go to the first link, it lists this section of Scripture Deut 15:12-15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2015:12-15&version=31) which clearly sets a guideline that a slave should only be kept for 6 years, and after that the master should provide well for the slave to reenter the world.

Again, the books of law included in the Bible were rules for the nation of Israel over 2000 years ago, and are still a decent guideline for living. Some are antiquated, and I know the next question is, "Who gets to decide which are the outdated laws?" And I'd say it's your relationship with God that dictates what exactly you have to do to please Him. I know what my problems are, and one or two of them are not specifically mentioned in the Bible either. But God tells you through conviction of the heart that certain things are not pleasing to Him.

i didnt even mention slavery

i was referring to book of mark where it says marrying a divorced women is adultrey and if i remember there is a special spot in hell for adulteror's.

conviction of who's heart?

should gay's be miserable? live a depressed life? commit suicide? Many do...is that the fate they should suffer, would that please God?

[Jiddy78]

It'll be interesting to see if he perishes for his blasphemy, or if he repents before he dies. It's pretty clear from the perils of Sodom and Gomorrah that homosexuality is a sin. We all commit sin, that is true, but Christians not only identify the sin in their life, they try to root it out and abolish it from their psyches. The "homosexuality isn't a sin" crowd wants to rectify their behavior without consequence; this is of course silly because Judgment will certainly not be changed because of the convincing of a church body here on earth.

I will pray for you that one day you repent for this type of action.

[pnkpanther]

Again, the Bible doesn't endorse or condemn it. By context, we know it was happening at the time, and it gives instructions that slaves should not be mistreated. And actually, if you go to the first link, it lists this section of Scripture Deut 15:12-15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2015:12-15&version=31) which clearly sets a guideline that a slave should only be kept for 6 years, and after that the master should provide well for the slave to reenter the world.

Again, the books of law included in the Bible were rules for the nation of Israel over 2000 years ago, and are still a decent guideline for living. Some are antiquated, and I know the next question is, "Who gets to decide which are the outdated laws?" And I'd say it's your relationship with God that dictates what exactly you have to do to please Him. I know what my problems are, and one or two of them are not specifically mentioned in the Bible either. But God tells you through conviction of the heart that certain things are not pleasing to Him.


only hebrew slaves should be ketp for time, foreign slaves are yours for their lives, as are their children, and you can will them to your heirs...

[Ed Who?]

I will pray for you that one day you repent for this type of action.

I did. It was a poor thing to say about anyone.

[Jiddy78]

I did. It was a poor thing to say about anyone.

My prayer is uber-powerful. It's true.

[Vegas]

This was in response to Ed Who?. If conservatives are going to do it, I guess it's fair game, huh? That's what we've been reduced to, huh?

PS - I still didn't wish death on anyone.

Neither did Ann Coulter. But you want to keep making a villain of her when you drop insults yourself. I specifically said "again" in reference to your insults. This was hardly the first time. How many times have you made negative blanket statements about conservatives on here?

[pnkpanther]

Neither did Ann Coulter. But you want to keep making a villain of her when you drop insults yourself. I specifically said "again" in reference to your insults. This was hardly the first time. How many times have you made negative blanket statements about conservatives on here?

i cant believe you're defending Ann Coulter

[Jiddy78]

i cant believe you're defending Ann Coulter

He's not defending Ann Coulter.

He IS Ann Coulter.

[Tom Joad]

Neither did Ann Coulter. But you want to keep making a villain of her when you drop insults yourself. I specifically said "again" in reference to your insults. This was hardly the first time. How many times have you made negative blanket statements about conservatives on here?

You're amazing. You turn a blind eye to everything that isn't dogma. I expected better of you.

[Vegas]

i cant believe you're defending Ann Coulter

I'm not defending Ann Coulter. I'm merely pointing out that people who start threads about how evil Ann Coulter is for the way she writes shouldn't write that way.

[Ed Who?]

I'm not defending Ann Coulter. I'm merely pointing out that people who start threads about how evil Ann Coulter is for the way she writes shouldn't write that way.

You forgot the "Liberals Are Allowed To Wish Death On People" Clause of the Constitution. I think the Warren Court established it.

[pnkpanther]

I'm not defending Ann Coulter. I'm merely pointing out that people who start threads about how evil Ann Coulter is for the way she writes shouldn't write that way.

so it's like when Ann Coulter writes that liberals only method of debate is by making personal attack and then proceeds to personally attack liberals, by saying all female democrats are ugly (which means must be a lot of ugly women as women are generally dem's) and calling other prominent dem's "bird brains", ugly, etc.....

also similar to when she's on news and bitching about how conservatives arent on the news.

although according to her Tom Delay really isnt that bad..

to her only thing that is being bad is being a liberal.

[pnkpanther]

You forgot the "Liberals Are Allowed To Wish Death On People" Clause of the Constitution. I think the Warren Court established it.

who do we wish death on?

[Tom Joad]

I'm not defending Ann Coulter. I'm merely pointing out that people who start threads about how evil Ann Coulter is for the way she writes shouldn't write that way.

Ann Coulter's writings are about how fat so and so's thighs are and how ugly so and so is. So, is she a pundit or a gossip columnist?

[IBC]

I'd be interested in a link to this since it's fairly obvious to me that you didn't write it yourself.

It is a from a letter that is oft cited on the internet as pointing out the ridiculousness of picking and choosing what parts of the bible to acknowledge and which to not acknowledge. Often as a letter to Dr. Laura Schlessinger, one helluva model parent I say.

[IBC]

Ann Coulter's writings are about how fat so and so's thighs are and how ugly so and so is. So, is she a pundit or a gossip columnist?
She is an idiot, plain and simple. A liar too.

[Tom Joad]

She is an idiot, plain and simple. A liar too.


Only conservatives are allowed to say something like that. Prepare for the wrath and the fury.

[Jiddy78]

I'm not defending Ann Coulter. I'm merely pointing out that people who start threads about how evil Ann Coulter is for the way she writes shouldn't write that way.

Ann, I think you've been putting on a few pounds....Ever think about tryin' the south beach diet?

[IBC]

Only conservatives are allowed to say something like that. Prepare for the wrath and the fury.

No, it is an opinion. I can cite why also, but no need to have a discussion about someone as worthless as Ann Coulter any more than we already have. Lets get back to where Americans have the freedom to avoid anyone of color if they want, that is a great point.

[Jiddy78]

No, it is an opinion. I can cite why also, but no need to have a discussion about someone as worthless as Ann Coulter any more than we already have. Lets get back to where Americans have the freedom to avoid anyone of color if they want, that is a great point.


I avoid everyone as a direct boycott of slavery.

[Tom Joad]

I avoid everyone as a direct boycott of slavery.

Now that's funny.

[hannitykillspuppies]

so it's like when Ann Coulter writes that liberals only method of debate is by making personal attack and then proceeds to personally attack liberals, by saying all female democrats are ugly (which means must be a lot of ugly women as women are generally dem's) and calling other prominent dem's "bird brains", ugly, etc.....

also similar to when she's on news and bitching about how conservatives arent on the news.

although according to her Tom Delay really isnt that bad..

to her only thing that is being bad is being a liberal.wait, ann coulter had the nerve to call a woman or group of women ugly?

[Ed Who?]

who do we wish death on?

Dick Cheney, for one.

[pnkpanther]

Dick Cheney, for one.

we do?

he is the primary reason i hope Dubya doesnt bite it, but thats not the same

[Tom Joad]

Dick Cheney, for one.

I have never, ever wished death on anyone.

The best I could hope for for Cheney would be impeachment.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Dick Cheney, for one.
burgess meredith is already dead sir.

[ryr8828]

It is a from a letter that is oft cited on the internet as pointing out the ridiculousness of picking and choosing what parts of the bible to acknowledge and which to not acknowledge. Often as a letter to Dr. Laura Schlessinger, one helluva model parent I say.

So it's drivel.

[Jiddy78]

So it's drivel.

You'd feel different if Dr. Laura was a Colossian. Oh yes you would.

[Vegas]

You'd feel different if Dr. Laura was a Colossian. Oh yes you would.

Do you really think ryr cares what Dr. Laura is??

[IBC]

So it's drivel.
One mans drivel is another mans clever satire meant to point out the sheer ridiculousness of the anti-homosexual crowd.

[Roy Munson]

If by "stigma" you mean "forcing God to burn your towns until they smolder like a furnace," then yes, homosexuality carries a stigma.

I guess it's about time for the animal fellaters to claim that we've been misinterpreting the Bible against them, too.

...

[Jiddy78]

Do you really think ryr cares what Dr. Laura is??

ryr is like an onion.

[KinjaKahn]

Does anyone here believe that people are born gay, ie: its in your genes?

[Jiddy78]

Does anyone here believe that people are born gay, ie: its in your genes?

No...but there's a small part of me that wishes that there's a God up there just having a hootanannie waving a magic wand saying "Let him be gay" at various times of a person's life....including some of us still in the womb.

That would be fantastically humorous.

If I was God, I would f*ck with us royally. It would be spectacular.

[IBC]

Does anyone here believe that people are born gay, ie: its in your genes?
Yes, and that is what science says too.

[KinjaKahn]

Yes, and that is what science says too.

Nonsense. One article written in 1993 by a gay researcher named Dr. Dean Hamer, whose work has yet to be replicated, holds no water.

I really hope it is proven one day. As it would offer hope to cure this defective gene or even the opportunity for parents to Abort the afflicted fetus if the currently fictional markers were to show up in DNA screenings.

[pnkpanther]

Nonsense. One article written in 1993 by a gay researcher named Dr. Dean Hamer, whose work has yet to be replicated, holds no water.

I really hope it is proven one day. As it would offer hope to cure this defective gene or even the opportunity for parents to Abort the afflicted fetus if the currently fictional markers were to show up in DNA screenings.



i'm without speech

[pnkpanther]

Does anyone here believe that people are born gay, ie: its in your genes?



do you actually believe it's a choice? there are countries that have made it illegal and they still have homosexuals

why would someone chose to be hated by so many?

[KinjaKahn]

Yes, and that is what science says too.

do you actually believe it's a choice? there are countries that have made it illegal and they still have homosexuals

why would someone chose to be hated by so many?

Is there a BDSM gene? How about a pedophile gene? Perhaps a beastiality gene? Then there's the "i wanna bone fatty's" gene

[pnkpanther]

Is there a BDSM gene? How about a pedophile gene? Perhaps a beastiality gene? Then there's the "i wanna bone fatty's" gene

what consenting adults do isnt same as abusing children or animals.

and i always say this

did you chose to like women?

[pnkpanther]

and yes, some pedophiles are probably genetically predisposed to liking children, it's a sickness


but abusing, preying on small children isnt in same relm as homosexuality.

[IBC]

Is there a BDSM gene? How about a pedophile gene? Perhaps a beastiality gene? Then there's the "i wanna bone fatty's" geneThanks for playing awful analogies yet again. Your whole abort gay babies thing, I think you lost any credibility with me pal.

[IBC]

Nonsense. One article written in 1993 by a gay researcher named Dr. Dean Hamer, whose work has yet to be replicated, holds no water.

I really hope it is proven one day. As it would offer hope to cure this defective gene or even the opportunity for parents to Abort the afflicted fetus if the currently fictional markers were to show up in DNA screenings.

Seriously, this is fuckin' sick.

[KinjaKahn]

Seriously, this is fuckin' sick.

Isn't all abortion sick? Or is it only sick to abort gay clumps of matter.

[IBC]

Isn't all abortion sick? Or is it only sick to abort gay clumps of matter.
Equating homosexuality to disease or disabilities, doesn't make you any more manly, it just makes you a fuckin' idiot. That is what I am saying. I am torn between wanting you to have a gay kid, and never wishing that on any kid.

[pnkpanther]

Isn't all abortion sick? Or is it only sick to abort gay clumps of matter.

i hear liberal lesbians want abortions solely cause they're jealous they cant have kids.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Nonsense. One article written in 1993 by a gay researcher named Dr. Dean Hamer, whose work has yet to be replicated, holds no water.

I really hope it is proven one day. As it would offer hope to cure this defective gene or even the opportunity for parents to Abort the afflicted fetus if the currently fictional markers were to show up in DNA screenings.
oh so you are for abortion, well at least we got that cleared away.

[hannitykillspuppies]

oh so you are for abortion, well at least we got that cleared away.

and you support genocide. have you considered living in darfur, it's real big there.

[IBC]

oh so you are for abortion, well at least we got that cleared away.
No he is against aborting any babies not gay, or with Downs, but he doesn't hate. No way, he doesn't hate.

[hannitykillspuppies]

No he is against aborting any babies not gay, or with Downs, but he doesn't hate. No way, he doesn't hate.

so he is the be all, end all of which abortions are or are not acceptable. excellent to know.

[IBC]

so he is the be all, end all of which abortions are or are not acceptable. excellent to know.

He is god.

[KinjaKahn]

He is god.
Blasphemy.

[IBC]

Blasphemy.
Says the guy who can judge people on what is blasphemous.

[Jiddy78]

Holy mother of Babylonia....


Can't we all just focus on the real enemy?

Real estate whores.

[IBC]

Holy mother of Babylonia....


Can't we all just focus on the real enemy?

Real estate whores.

No Jiddy, we can't. Unless you are talking about my ex-wife, then have at it.

[Jiddy78]

No Jiddy, we can't. Unless you are talking about my ex-wife, then have at it.


Ex-wife?

Looks like you won't be this year's sports-boards "rico suave" award winner.


Arre arrriba!

RICO!!!

Arre arrriba!

SUAVE!!!

[Vegas]

Holy mother of Babylonia....


Can't we all just focus on the real enemy?

Real estate whores.

Whoring politicians are worse than real estate whores.

[Tom Joad]

Holy mother of Babylonia....


Can't we all just focus on the real enemy?

Real estate whores.


I despise the people who buy buildings to let them remain empty and collect tax breaks for their depreciation. I wish that wasn't a loophole/tax trick.

[Jiddy78]

I despise the people who buy buildings to let them remain empty and collect tax breaks for their depreciation. I wish that wasn't a loophole/tax trick.


They call that the "investing in the future of our crackhouses" writeoff.

[Tom Joad]

They call that the "investing in the future of our crackhouses" writeoff.

Well, it seems to me those buildings could be re-developed or remodeled and something productive could go into them rather than letting them sit unoccupied.

[Roy Munson]

Clip from one of my favorite shows.

http://video.ocinema.org/video/5-zhNiGlogQ/think-homosexuality-is-quotwrongquot.html