On Thursday night’s Anderson Cooper 360, CNN used most of a half-hour replaying large chunks of Larry King’s interview with Ted Haggard, the evangelical preacher who lost his ministry after he used a male prostitute. He’s the subject of a new HBO documentary by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of liberal House speaker Nancy Pelosi. This is no mystery, just synergy: CNN and HBO are both Time Warner properties. But Cooper brought on TV psychologist Paul Dobransky and felt Haggard’s pain: "It also seems sad because his belief system, I mean there are plenty of gay Christians who are happily gay and happily Christian and have fulfilling lives. They're not mutually exclusive."
Cooper also mocked reparative therapy (to convert people from gay to straight) as a failure in every case: "every one of them basically admits that they still are attracted to a member of the same sex, they're just forcing themselves to repress those feelings....That can't be a healthy thing." Dobransky claimed homosexuality cannot be chosen, and then used pet metaphors: "Imagine a metaphor of what you were a cat born in a dog kennel. It might feel dangerous, it might feel threatening, and you might pretend you're not a cat, but you're still a cat."
No one who disagreed with this exposition of the gay ideological talking-points manual was included, and the use of the TV therapist to diagnose Haggard from afar raises the political question: If liberals thought it was absurd for physician Sen. Bill Frist to diagnose Terri Schiavo from the Senate floor, how do therapists get to diagnose Ted Haggard from a CNN studio? Apparently, psychologists never have to say they're sorry:
COOPER: He said one therapist called him heterosexual with homosexual attachments and then another one said he's heterosexual with complications.
DOBRANSKY: Yes, I think the bottom line is the conflict that this guy is in is that he has a belief system that he needs to maintain for his constituents, his fans, and certainly for his own spiritual beliefs. He needs to keep that part up. But when we talk about gender identity and sexual identity and sexual orientation, we're talking about something that's biological, not something that you choose. There's plenty of research about that.
COOPER: It also seems sad because his belief system, I mean there are plenty of gay Christians --
DOBRANSKY: Yes.
COOPER: -- who are happily gay and happily Christian and have fulfilling lives. They're not mutually exclusive?
DOBRANSKY: Absolutely, absolutely. We are, in this country, entitled to our opinions, we're entitled to voice them. And at the same time, we all have an animal nature inside. We have an unconscious; we have a sexual identity inside. And it's OK to have both.
COOPER: Every -- we have had a number of people on the show who say they have been cured of homosexuality, that they went through, whatever, reversion therapy or -- but every one of them basically admits that they still are attracted to a member of the same sex, they're just forcing themselves to repress those feelings.
DOBRANSKY: Yes.
COOPER: That can't be a healthy thing.
DOBRANSKY: Yes. I mean, if you would imagine, maybe a Buddhist monk on a mountain being an ascetic and depriving themselves of earthly pleasures, or imagine a metaphor of what you were a cat born in a dog kennel. It might feel dangerous, it might feel threatening, and you might pretend you're not a cat, but you're still a cat. You might pretend you're a dog. It's that kind of forcing one's self to portray an identity that's different than what you are.
By the way, Dr. Dobransky's "personal statement" on his Web site for women's happiness declares his taste for Jon Stewart and the Almighty Obama:
I’m an "everyman" kind of guy – a young Tom Hanks, Greg Kinnear, Dr Drew amalgam – with a taste for Jon Stewart’s humor and Barack Obama’s visionary, tolerant, inclusive message appealing to both genders and all generations. I’m confident but not arrogant and most comfortable as a team-player, not a prima donna. (I am reluctant to directly compare myself to any of those luminaries, especially the new president.)
Cooper also claimed Haggard "preached against gays and lesbians" and "gained a reputation as a fierce opponent of gay rights" -- which doesn't mesh with what Alexandra Pelosi found, as she said to Entertaintment Weekly:
He didn’t give really anti-gay sermons. I’m telling you this because I made a movie about evangelical Christians, and I had to sit through the sermons. The most anti-gay things that I found [Haggard said] were basically jokes. He makes jokes about gays. But he’s not Pat Robertson saying, 'The gays caused 9/11.'"
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I suppose it's just
January 30, 2009 - 14:44 ET by HelenSI suppose it's just incidental that he also committed adultry. How does that jive with the whole 10-Commandments thing? Or are those optional as well for "Christians"?
Me - "The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil."
Relativists
January 30, 2009 - 15:01 ET by BlueCat57The problem is really with the basic philosophy prevalent in our society today: relativism.
Relativism is how Democrats be caught with money in their freezer and serve out their term in Congress, but a Republican who is merely accused in the press of wrong doing must resign.
Unfortunately many Christians are relativists and don't even know it.
Until we start taking control of the debate and defining words from an absolutist philosophy the liberals, Democrats and the media will continue to make Christians look like fools.
What I find most
January 30, 2009 - 15:08 ET by motherbeltWhat I find most problematic is the idea that not acting on a personal desire or attraction "can't be healthy."
Does that also count if a man desires another man's wife?
I have this desire...
January 31, 2009 - 01:36 ET by Cortillaen... to punch people who say stupid things. Since it "can't be
healthy" to repress my desires, I'm fully justified in beating the
living daylights out of idiots like Cooper and must be held blameless for acting on my impulses. Right?
www.daybydaycartoon.... Proving that conservative comedy is very real.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And
you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near
to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
HellenS...it's the "smorgasbord" "christain" thing again...
January 30, 2009 - 15:05 ET by vrwc13In the Bible, God said what He meant, and , meant what He said....otherwise He would not be GOD!
The world likes to pick and chose as it likes from scripture to support their own agenda. God has His own agenda and it does not include misusing His Word!
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
Amen! Because, in the end,
January 30, 2009 - 15:08 ET by HelenSAmen! Because, in the end, isn't it more important how we feel about something than how God feels? Or so they'd have us believe.
Me - "The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil."
Spot on HelenS...
January 30, 2009 - 15:21 ET by vrwc13in the end, isn't it more important how we feel about something than how God feels?
Yeah, and as a Newsboys fan, we are reminded of that:
Have you forgotten who you are?
Did you forget whose trip you're on?
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
LOL, Anderson Cooper is proof of that !
January 30, 2009 - 15:09 ET by jazbo"Independent news media have reported that Cooper is gay,[note 1] and in May 2007, Out magazine ranked him second behind David Geffen in their list of the fifty "Most Powerful Gay Men and Women in America." From Wiki.
Come on out Coop!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_Cooper
Those who believe in nothing will believe anything.
Can't 'choose' to be gay??
January 31, 2009 - 22:44 ET by bpjamTwo words:
Anne Heche.
Or two other words: Bull Sh!t.
Apparently, Anderson Cooper has spent a lot of time with guys who used to be gay but were brought to a semblence of sanity via some religious program. But none of the ones he spoke to were successful. Shocking! And none of the liberal I've ever spoken to dislike socialism so it must be true that all liberals are actually socialists. Same logic, same level of credibility. Less hair gel.
Is there something you're trying to tell us Anderson?
January 30, 2009 - 14:56 ET by mizflame98COOPER: It also seems sad because his belief system, I mean there are plenty of gay Christians --
DOBRANSKY: Yes.
COOPER: -- who are happily gay and happily Christian and have fulfilling lives. They're not mutually exclusive?
I guess he's speaking from experience.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
I guess he's speaking from experience.
January 30, 2009 - 15:15 ET by vrwc13Only Anderson knows and he's not talking?
If he is gay, it kinda takes the obejectiveness out of his position doesn't it?
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
sorry to but in again...
January 30, 2009 - 16:56 ET by Ashleebut there are two sides to this sword, you seem to only like to view the one side.
A homosexual man claiming that one can be a Christian and also gay is no less objective than a straight person saying homosexuality is a 'disease' or 'cureable.'
The people should not fear their Government,
The Government should fear the people.
Ashlee, if I only view one side it may be that there's only one.
January 30, 2009 - 17:27 ET by vrwc13If you are a "Bible believing Christian" then being a "Christain" and "gay" are at odds with each other. Not because I say so but God does. And God doesn't change His mind.
Homosexuality, abortion, adultery, fornication, etc. are all choices. God says they are wrong choices. But God also fogives those who repent and turn form their wicked ways. Again, not because I say so but God does.
v
thank you, v!!
January 30, 2009 - 17:30 ET by clinging to my guns and my religioni think ashlee should just mosey back on over to the huffpo, don't you? she's gotten us all educated and liberated from our antique ideals, and now her work here is done!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
All in a days work for the "real" Boss...
January 30, 2009 - 17:37 ET by vrwc13You know if people really want to know what God really thinks, they ought to read His book!
v
well, the sad thing is...
January 30, 2009 - 17:55 ET by clinging to my guns and my religion...that waaaaay too many liberals try to tell us how God thinks and feels when in truth, they have never made any attempt to know God and anything about His Word. i'm sick of them trying to shove it down my throat that God doesn't care about our wrong-doings! He cares!! He doesn't hate us because of our sins, but He cares! the bottom line: sins are sins are sins, and no amount of a liberal telling me that a just god (lower case intended) doesn't care will make me believe it. my God is just, and He does care!!!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
You're discounting human's capacity for denial
January 30, 2009 - 17:35 ET by nwahsI think a human being's capacity for denial can resolve the Christian/gay thing. It had no problem resolving the Crusades or witch burnings, and lord knows there's that looming thing called death.
That's what cracks me up with TV psychologists. "How can you be in such denial?"
Er, its instinctive, doc.
and lord knows there's that looming thing called death
January 30, 2009 - 17:47 ET by vrwc13and lord knows there's that looming thing called death
"Death has been swallowed up in victory."[g]
55"Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?"[h] 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
58Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain. 1 Cor 15
...you see Shawn, Jesus triumphed over death, and you can too!
v
Two sides
January 30, 2009 - 17:38 ET by sherylsimsThere are two sides to each argument, and you have decided to view one side whereas Christians will take the other side.
You posted all that propaganda about how people might be born homosexual as if we haven't heard all that before. I have heard all that before. That doesn't make it true. And the fact that I don't buy it doesn't make me more narrow minded than you are.
......at least that's
January 30, 2009 - 15:00 ET by slickwillie2001......at least that's Cooper's experience.
Repression
January 30, 2009 - 15:00 ET by KC MulvilleRepression has a bad reputation. Somewhere along the line, Americans have gotten the message that all feelings, no matter what they are, must be indugled thoroughly. If you have a feeling, you must be entitled to express it and enjoy it, unencumbered by any thoughts to the contrary.
OK, then, let me ask:
Repression isn't always a bad thing.
"Repression isn't always a bad thing."
January 30, 2009 - 16:08 ET by clinging to my guns and my religionoh my! are you an unwilling citizen of the new hedonistic society, kc? the msn and their little errand boys telling us that what was wrong is now right is just not enough for me, either!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
Not so much apples to oranges..
January 30, 2009 - 17:09 ET by AshleeBut you're pretty much comparing apples to pears. They may be similar in case, but overall different. Ask society to be celibate, they'd bug the eff out. If God decreed that sex should be held only for procreation, (didn't he actually say that? nevermind the semantics I suppose...) then society would bug out.
The reason it is *so* easy for heterosexuals who feel religiously tied to opposing homosexual relationships is the same reason they shouldn't care in the first place, because it *doesn't* affect them. Comparing the right to find and share love with someone to adultery is also comparing apples to pears, and while I know this post will not sway any of your views to those who have made it clear they oppose homosexual relationships, but I am still going to keep coming back with that inconvenient truth that people seem to think God is ok with sweeping under the rug for the sake of making a point.
Point being, this is not about adultery, or lust, sure many homosexuals engage in that life, but so do heterosexuals, where's the equal outrage at that? And I'm getting tired of the whole 'we don't hate homosexuals, just their lifestyle...'
Lets try an exercise to show you just how stupid that sounds...
'Billy doesn't hate Christians, he just hates Christianity. So long as a Christian keeps their faith completely internal and does not participate in worship, then there is no problem.'
It makes zero sense. Hating Christianity *is* more or less, hating Christians. You all seem to be horridly mislead into thinking that we're all wired the same, or that those wired differently are inheirently 'wrong.' Sure, some people get bored, are abused, or oversexualized and sway to gay sex life for kicks and the thrill, but what about the many MANY poor boys who, since 12-14, can remember wanting to hold a boy's hand as a girl does because he likes and feels inate attraction to men? What of the little girl who's always liked other girls a lil *too* much, and is heartbroken at Prom when she realizes her date is madly in love with her, but all she can do on the dance floor is gaze over at her friend at the punch bowl whom she's had a crush on since 3rd grade?
Oh that's right, never mind them, just tell them to become 'reducated' and pretend to like men, or the gay boys to pretend to like women. That's what I think everyone wants, to get married to a 'reformed homosexual' who doesn't love them and only stays with them to please the others.
And again, I say, for people who are not affected by this unless they MAKE it their business, you all seem QUITE vested in your interest of stopping them. And BTW, as for 'reforming' a homosexual, good luck. That's like painting a white man in black face and making him watch roots for 4 straight days to make him a 'reformed white man,' now a true blue african american.
Face it, homosexuality, in all liklihood, is inborn. And good LORDY I wish I could be next to each one of you when they prove it. I'll make sure to pick up your jaw and give you a tissue.
The people should not fear their Government,
The Government should fear the people.
GROAN
January 30, 2009 - 17:36 ET by choselife3xSomeone take that big metal key out of her back and LOSE it!!
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
"Face it, homosexuality, in all liklihood, is inborn." ashlee
January 30, 2009 - 17:41 ET by vrwc13Huh? How do you know?
More importantly though, inborn or not it is still wrong. Not because I say so but God does. Try reading His book sometime.
v
Homosexuality is inborn?
January 30, 2009 - 17:47 ET by sherylsimsSin is inborn too. We are all born with a sin nature and need Jesus to wash us clean. That is our only hope.
Please don't get her started
January 30, 2009 - 17:53 ET by choselife3xSeriously. She goes on *and* on about what the *Bible* does or *does not* say, when it is *very* clear that *she* has never read *it*. Also, she puts *these* symbols throughout her *posts* in a most *annoying* fashion.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
cl3x, just add *her*...
January 30, 2009 - 18:04 ET by vrwc13...to your prayer list if you can. And encourage *her* to read/study the Word a bit more.
v
Sadly you think this all makes sense
January 30, 2009 - 17:45 ET by exLibGrowing up in a liberal Christian church where all things were "Ok" I left that all behind for "the World".
I also bought the cannard that it was Christians who were somehow brainwashed. Back then, we got a pretty down-the-middle education. Pictures of Jimmy Carter were side by side with pictures of Reagan and I don't remember anyone wearing Carter t-shirts, or Reagan T-shirts for that matter, that said "Not my President" and everyone had a pretty good understanding of what right and wrong was, even if we didn't do it.
You could also have a sane, level-headed, conversation with someone on religion or sexual preference and at the time the sane approach prevailded.
In the 80's, the brainwashing began and we were lied to and told Aids was a heterosexual disease and we all needed to contribute money to it, but it got worse. We were also told homosexuality was a Choice. Well, that didn't go over too well, so the party-line had to change.
In comes the wholly-owned subsidiary of the DNC, the teacher's union to bring in a teaching agenda to actually brainwash a group of kids. Realize of course that you would never get a majority of people in their right minds to agree that homosexuality was anything more than a bad choice, it had to biological or no one would go along. It also had to be taught at younger and younger ages so that the youth of america would become disengaged from their parents and worse yet the clear Biblical teachings.
However, it got worse, somehow the church became infected with the disease and now have become worse than any unbeliever.
There are plenty of ex-homosexuals living great lives and NOT pining for the "good old days". This is just another lie that the media and the public school system will beat, like the drums mentioned above, until they have cowed those without convictions into Bill O'Reilly type commentary.
The Church I now attend preaches against ALL sin and we are concerned about adultery and sexual immorality, to the point that if someone wishes to become a Christian or repent and be restored they must move out and not live with their current
Fear of being called a "homophobe" or "racists" has already swayed far too many people and a good chunk of them call themselves Christians.
Anyone that calls me a
January 30, 2009 - 17:50 ET by bassndudeAnyone that calls me a homophobe, better be wearing a smile, otherwise.....
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
You're not going to get a serious discussion.
January 30, 2009 - 17:53 ET by nwahsYou are not going to get a serious discussion about sexuality here. You're going to get a bunch of dogs pissing on the same shrub. Seriously, its a pee party here.
I never chose to be heterosexual. Never thought about it, never changed my mind, never had to work at it. That's not to say its totally genetic. It can be a combination of factors. One thing IS certain. I am not responsible for my sexual orientation. I didn't create it, and anyone claiming to have created theirs are either lying or repressing what was bestowed on them.
So we're all dogs, huh?
January 30, 2009 - 17:59 ET by choselife3xOops! I'm sorry, was that your leg? :-O
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Well the vain answer..
January 30, 2009 - 18:01 ET by nwahsWell the vain answer would be "no" :)
I'm still perfecting my aim...
January 30, 2009 - 18:06 ET by choselife3xIt's harder for a girl....ooh, squirrel!
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Whoa, Ashlee
January 30, 2009 - 21:30 ET by KC MulvilleYour understandable sensitivity about the issue is no excuse for retaliating against slights that haven't been made. Let me explain. Here's the psychologist in the original piece. Follow what he says ...
Let's remember now that you're talking to someone who once had a vow of chastity. I understand what it's like to have a sexual identity, while at the same time abstaining from sex. It's not "living a lie." It's acknowledging one's identity, whatever it is, but your identity is more than your feelings. Most normal, healthy people have a host of conflicting feelings, while still retaining a transcendent freedom over them.
Whether you're homosexual or not, what matters is whether you're a slave to those feelings, or whether you're the master of them.
So, in a way, you're right. I am discussing apples and pears. On the one hand, when you run away from your feelings because they own you, repression is bad. But when you refuse to indulge a feeling out of your own free choice, it's healthy. It's an exercise of free will.
TV psychologist?
January 30, 2009 - 15:00 ET by Trix RabbitThere is something acutely disturbing about an expression of contentment on Dobransky's face. In my psychoanalysis, it seems to suggest that he knows something the rest of us don't...like where to find sausage links at $1.15 a pound.
One more for the awestruck toady Obamatron team!
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
yawn
January 30, 2009 - 15:13 ET by candanceI know a lot of other "happy Christians" who have cheated on their spouses, gotten drunk at parties, defrauded neighbors out of money and provoked their children to wrath.
You know what they all had in common? They all went merrily along with their lives convinced that God was pleased with them.
And then the world wonders why Christians don't turn to them for advice.
Dissent is the truest voice of patriotism, except when it hinders a Democrat.
So let me get this straight
January 30, 2009 - 15:23 ET by MrSnugglesSo let me get this straight (no pun intended), gays are "born that way" but at no point is a person "born" male or female, we all have the "choice" to become a man or a woman at any point in our lives? The left is insane.
no, you are correct...
January 30, 2009 - 17:14 ET by AshleeThere are peoplec whom are born male or female. Some are physically incomplete and fall on the line, but only one 'set of plumbing' is functional. In the case of transexuals, you have it a bit twisted, which is fine; good and scientific information is sparse out there in internet land and most is propaganda from either side. What you confuse is, that brain gender is also a developmental factor. Just as a body can be 'stuck on the fence,' resulting in hermaphroditic birth, the same can occur where the brain is matured and developing and due to many theories, most prevalent being the hormonal wash, the brain begins to develop into the opposite gender of its physical sex during in utero.
The surgery, that is the choice. The feelings of disconnect and awful case of someone being physically the wrong gender according to their brain, that is not a choice, that is merely the VERY VERY harsh reality a select few are born with and must deal with all their lives.
The people should not fear their Government,
The Government should fear the people.
Oh gawd help us
January 30, 2009 - 17:29 ET by choselife3xPlease don't get 'The Rambler' started on gender issues, you guys. She has enough of her own to deal with.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Cheap shot, eh? fine by me
February 2, 2009 - 00:58 ET by AshleeIt was quite a cheap shot, but by no surprise by this point I suppose. As for 'gender' issues, I'm not the one with 'gender issues' persay, its others, and mind you, a very select few as most are kind, who are the ones with issues about *my* gender.
You can hand out cute lil derogatory nicknames and take shots at sensitive parts of our lives but I'm still going to talk about the other angle of certain situations. Especially those where only one point of view is espoused and therefore passed off as the *only* possible answer in these situations. And yes, I do feel a slight vested interest in these issues as they do hit close to home, being that I know of their realities first hand.
I hate the Huff Po for the record and can't stand much for liberal mouthpieces, but there are some things that just seem devoid of common sense to me, and denial and refusal to review proven facts and potential theories because they may explain something like homosexuality being inborn, thats one of them. Like I said, I'm not meaning to start anything here, but there are two sides to this nd both deserve independent and honest analysis. I'm not saying I'm somehow enlightened, obviously I'm inclined to believe one side because I experience it personally. I'm just providing the 'other side' to bring some balance to the issue. It's never healthy in my opinion when only one side is given the time of day because a solution is assumed before looked at objectively.
The people should not fear their Government,
The Government should fear the people.
I have always found it best
January 30, 2009 - 15:34 ET by ConservativeRexI have always found it best to speak where the Bible speaks, and remain silent where the Bible remains silent.
Why we are doomed.
January 30, 2009 - 15:41 ET by Hack CaffertyThis article is an example of why our party is going to fail. What is conservative about hating on gays? What about small government means you should spout your opinion about people's lives? Voters my age don't want to associate with a party that hates on gays.
Lets drop the social conservatives for a more liberatarian streak, the voters will follow.
That includes this website, ditch Mr. Graham.
Hack
January 30, 2009 - 15:49 ET by choselife3xYou can think something is wrong without 'hating' those who do wrong things.
And by the way, this country was founded and built by social conservatives that would make US look like flaming lefties by comparison.
So stuff it, you Hack.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Leon is like a cat...
January 30, 2009 - 16:11 ET by vrwc13...and has many lives!
So Hack Cafferty and oddjob both appear today with "leon-like" qualities. Leon is it you? We sure have missed you.
Anyway, Hack (good choice of name by the way), "hating on gays?" ...naw, just pointing out the truth of God's Word in regards to the choice of that lifestyle.
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
Typical leftie hack tactic
January 30, 2009 - 16:20 ET by choselife3xIf someone disagrees with you, it's because they 'hate' or they're 'afraid'. Demonise your opponent so you don't have to debate the actual issue.
Intellectual 5 year olds.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
cl3x
January 30, 2009 - 16:24 ET by sherylsims"Hatin' the sin, lovin' the sinner..."
(Just wanted to show you that whatever I did must have worked, cuz I'm BACK!!!)
Hey girl!!
January 30, 2009 - 16:36 ET by choselife3xDon't be such a stranger!
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:
January 30, 2009 - 16:29 ET by vrwc13Demonise your opponent so you don't have to debate the actual issue.
He is just following orders:
Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
Did I say anything about
January 30, 2009 - 16:15 ET by Hack CaffertyDid I say anything about abortion? Im against abortion, but not because the bible told me, but because its disgusting baby murder.
You didnt answer how someone can be for small government and personal freedom unless the person is gay.
What? Please preview your
January 30, 2009 - 16:18 ET by expatriotWhat? Please preview your posts. If this looks cogent then go back to high school. On second thought find a good private tutor.
um
January 30, 2009 - 16:19 ET by candanceThat line about abortion is her signature.
Dissent is the truest voice of patriotism, except when it hinders a Democrat.
hold on: so "January 30,
January 30, 2009 - 16:46 ET by SickofLibshold on: so "January 30, 2009 - 16:19 ET" is what - the date/time or something?
?
January 30, 2009 - 16:24 ET by choselife3xCare to re-phrase that in the form of a question?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
The sheeples are all aflutter
January 30, 2009 - 16:26 ET by nwahsYou did well. The sheeples are all aflutter :)
There's nothing like the wrath of a fanboyz scorned!
Shawn
January 30, 2009 - 16:31 ET by choselife3xSo the best screen name you could come up with was to scramble your own name? Sad.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Dang, the jig is up
January 30, 2009 - 16:36 ET by nwahsYou've found me out!
Seriously, I'm not going to go over it again :)
cl3x, maybe...
January 30, 2009 - 16:42 ET by vrwc13Shawn has not only turned his name around, but maybe his life too!
Come on Shawn/nwahs are you "born-again?"
v
Obama raises hand, lifts nation or… the man in the Whitehouse raises hand, sifts nation
Nope, still working on it
January 30, 2009 - 16:55 ET by nwahsI think its a life long journey.
Shawn...
January 30, 2009 - 17:16 ET by vrwc13...I think its a life long journey.
The decision is a point in time...the follow-up is a life long journey.
The decision also determines eternal outcomes.
v
a quick lesson for Hack
January 30, 2009 - 16:09 ET by candanceLet's break down a little Newsbusters 101 for you...
This site is built to show bias in the media. This particular entry shows how CNN treats religious beliefs - an "objective" news anchor offers an opinion about Christianity that defies the mainstream teaching of Christianity itself.
Regardless of how Cooper feels about gay people, it's not his job to lecture his audience on theology. And that goes for any religion. If Cooper was sitting there making assertions about Wicca or Baha'i I would be equally annoyed. If you're not an educated member of a faith you don't need to offer personal opinions, and even if you are, the anchor's desk at CNN is neither the time nor the place.
What about small government means you should spout your opinion about people's lives?
I can only assume that this is in reference to gay marriage. Try reading up a little before you flap your gums. Conservatives have no problem with gays living together, paying taxes together, having all legal rights together. That's the point of a civil union - it is a marriage from the legal standpoint.
Gays don't want that. They want to move beyond the legal definition and force churches to expand marriage as a religious concept. In states where gay folks are permitted to marry, they sue churches and ministers who refuse to do ceremonies. They sued eHarmony into building a website for gay services.
It's akin to a meat eater forcing a vegan restaurant to offer steak under the pretense of equal service.
Voters my age don't want to associate with a party that hates on gays.
Here's you a newsflash sweetie: most voters your age don't want small government, low taxes, or capitalism on Wall Street. Maybe we should ditch those things too and then see how many voters we get back.
Dissent is the truest voice of patriotism, except when it hinders a Democrat.
"Try reading up a little
January 30, 2009 - 16:24 ET by Hack Cafferty"Try reading up a little before you flap your gums."
Lady i've written two research papers on why the conservative party should drop the whole gays as second class citizensthing, I think i've done the reading. You can say what ever you want but the facts are voter base is shirnking for Republicans because of this insistance of gays choose to be gay.
I appreciate all the grass roots work the social conservatives have done, but the electorate is changing. We dont need to be moderate, just small government conservatives.
and??
January 30, 2009 - 16:30 ET by candanceSo you've written two research papers. Do you want a medal for doing that? I notice you didn't address my actual points, by the way, you just made a snarky remark about having "done the reading" and then moved on.
Yes our voter base is shrinking. You say it's because of conservative ideals. So *that* explains why so many states voted in gay marriage bans. Maybe our voter base is shrinking because more young folks like the promise of getting a "stimulus" check every year and want the government to take over healthcare.
In other words, the argument for small government is losing, not the argument for social conservatives.
Dissent is the truest voice of patriotism, except when it hinders a Democrat.
OR...
January 30, 2009 - 16:34 ET by sherylsimsMaybe our voter base is shrinking because people no longer can see any difference between the two parties, as so many republicans have abandoned the principles this country was founded upon.
Bingo
January 30, 2009 - 18:46 ET by exLibThis is the true point.
Conservatism succeeds by the same rules as Christianity, probably why they are so inextricably linked.
Kids need rules, consequences and parents who are consistent, even if not entirely consistent.
Reagan was successful because he wasn't ashamed to vocalize what he stood for despite the usual media/liberal out-cry, name-calling etcetta.
Bush was NOT successful, not for the myriad of reasons the left cried and whined about for 8 long years but because Bush consistently caved in to liberal/media/PC pressure and alienated those who were with him from the start and believed he was a true conservative top to bottom.
The problem with the world today is even Fox news is liberal and is considered this horribly evil conservative news channel.
I still think there are millions of people who are yearning for true conservative political leadership, look Obama was treated like Jesus by the media for over 2 years and still only won by 6-7 million votes to one of the worst canidates to come around.
Standing up for conservative principles in a largely liberal dominated world (media and education) calls for a lower level of courage than it takes to be a Christian but still takes some courage to go out on national TV and say your for lower taxes (you hate the poor), anti-abortion (you hate women), etc..
Unfortunately, my fear is the brainwashing will continue on the tv and in the schools until we are living in the land of Idiocracy or 1984.
You did not preview!
January 30, 2009 - 16:31 ET by expatriotLady i've written two research papers on why the conservative party should drop the whole gays as second class citizens thing. I think I've done the reading. You can say whatever you want, but the facts are the voter base is shirnking for Republicans. The base is shrinking because of the insistence that gays choose to be gay.
There, fixed it for you and didn't even need spell or grammar check.
Once again, preview, preview, preview.
Back to school Mr. Two Research Papers. 1300 words each?
shirnking? expatriot?
January 30, 2009 - 16:34 ET by vrwc13Spellcheking is good too! :)
v
I used ebonics to form expatriot
January 30, 2009 - 16:36 ET by expatriotExpatriate is too mainstream. Expatriot gets a little more attention. What does he really mean? But maybe that is too deep. er deap.
kinda lame
February 2, 2009 - 01:07 ET by AshleeGoing there are we? Really going to ignore the point of their post and go after spelling errors? People type sometimes in a way that flows as their conversation does, so they may misspell a word here and there but the point and words are understood. Going after the spelling speaks to a lack of desire to debate the actual topic, and rather, turn it to the fact that they type fast and don't preview their posts. Trust me, I've seen my fair share of 'loosers' and other lovely cases of misspelling, but I'd rather debate the issues, not the spelling of words.
The people should not fear their Government,
The Government should fear the people.
No the voter base is
January 30, 2009 - 16:35 ET by taterNo the voter base is shrinking because Republicans are getting away from what made them successful in the first place.
Turning into democrat-lite will not increase numbers.
www.theholyrosary.org
"There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we can not resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary." -Sister Lucia
'research papers'
January 30, 2009 - 16:40 ET by SickofLibsor book reports?
so we should abandon our principles for votes?!?
January 30, 2009 - 16:34 ET by clinging to my guns and my religionif we did that, they'd have to call us democrats!!!
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Edmund Burke
Sucking up
January 30, 2009 - 16:41 ET by choselife3xTo a socialist 'progressive' prof isn't 'research'.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Oh gfy
January 30, 2009 - 16:50 ET by Hack CaffertyI dont suck up to anyone, especially progressives. Once again, my position on gays doesn't come from some progressive/liberal thinking, it is about personal freedom!
*laughing*
January 30, 2009 - 17:11 ET by choselife3xGfy?!
Touched a nerve, did I? What's the matter, did you have an unreciprocated crush?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
How do you write research
January 30, 2009 - 16:46 ET by bassndudeHow do you write research papers without doing research?? Anyone that thinks the voter base is shrinking is nuts. The only thing shrinking is the pool of conservitives willing to run for a national office.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Stop repressing your feelings
January 30, 2009 - 16:14 ET by expatriotCome on out. Don't be unhealthy and continue to suppress. We will welcome you. There are no haters here. Only in your little world are there haters on this site. Expand your horizons.
First time counseling is free. Next time........
Ever listen to Rush?
Lets be clear Hack!
January 30, 2009 - 16:14 ET by mizflame98I don't give a flying hoot about a gay's lifestyle. I do give a big flying hoot when they try to force their lifestyle upon me and force me to "deal" with it.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
Here's the reason for all
January 30, 2009 - 16:33 ET by taterHere's the reason for all the "hating" (which it's not)...to be conservative you stay true to conservative values from the beginning, which for many have deeply rooted religious reasons. The conservative viewpoint is that marriage is for a man and woman because that's how it was all the way in the beginning. The minute you go away from those values you turn moderate then liberal.
www.theholyrosary.org
"There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we can not resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary." -Sister Lucia
"Lets drop the social
January 30, 2009 - 16:37 ET by danebramage"Lets drop the social conservatives for a more liberatarian streak, the voters will follow."
Lol. You act like you're in the majority. You have a party (the Libertarian Party) that's been trying for decades to find a constituency, but it has never succeeded. Libertarianism is an ultimately incoherent and impossible political philosophy--one minor proof of that being that there are about as many strains of Libertarianism as there are Libertarians.
If you love Libertarianism, then that party is the place for you. If the social conservatives do leave the Republican Party (as I myself did and urge others to do), you will simply find yourself dominated by another party.
P.S. People *my* age don't want to associate with people who mindlessly reduce serious political objections to the normalization of sodomy to "hating on gays," nor with people who speak in childish, ungrammatical slang.
Anderson, baby
January 30, 2009 - 15:55 ET by jdubyaSo did the reparative therapy not work out for Anderson? Does he still think that he is a international crime solving fashion model with too much time on his hands so he moonlights as a teleprompt expert, or does he still think he is a cat?
I am confused.
So let me see if I
January 30, 2009 - 16:12 ET by TruthMattersSo let me see if I understand your reasoning CNN... If Ted were born with natural impulses to have sex with children, that would be OK because he was born that way?
Excellent Point!
January 30, 2009 - 17:10 ET by JillCWNow, you've hit the nail on the head. That's how they want us to see things. We're nothing more than animals with animal instincts and no souls that need redemption through Christ. That said, they are doing just what the Bible said they would do: calling good evil and evil good. As for the children, pedophilia is the last rite (not right) of the fallen archangel (Obama's mentor). In the words of a great evangelist as taken from scripture: Homosexuality curses the cities (and we have proof that our cities are a nightmare today) and abortion curses the land (which the UN is slowly stealing from us through multitudinous World Heritage Sites). Get over it folks, if the Lord doesn't get us out of here soon, we're toast. The MSM doesn't just want to destroy conservatism and Christianity, it wants to devour it after rendering it bloody and dead.
Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDe50Phgl6g
I don't think it was supposed to be a show on homosexuality
January 30, 2009 - 16:46 ET by nwahsI really doubt it was a supposed to be a show about the reasons for homosexuality. If it was, yes, having one doctor's point of view is ridiculous. But I think it was just a hot button issue and they were playing off the fact that Haggard is making the talk show tour. I guess they couldn't book him. He is their classic villain - a perceived Evangelical hypocrite.
I understand one poster's objections, as it seems the article here seems to be about whipping up the "peeping tom" base.
'Peeping Tom' base?
January 30, 2009 - 16:50 ET by choselife3xShould I be checking your buddy list to see who belongs to that?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
You actually have on of those?
January 30, 2009 - 17:00 ET by nwahsYou actually use a buddy list? I've never had a need for one. Who can't keep track of a couple of names?
it's okay, shawn
January 30, 2009 - 17:07 ET by choselife3xI was a buddy virgin once too.
I'm sure it doesn't mean yer ugly or nuthin. :-O
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
cl3x
January 30, 2009 - 17:12 ET by sherylsimsI was your first...
I was, wasn't I?
OMG!!!
January 30, 2009 - 17:16 ET by choselife3xJerk me out of the closet, why dontcha?!
All right!! I ADMIT IT! My first time was with another girl!
(but she only made it to second base, I SWEAR)
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
And I don't think anyone
January 30, 2009 - 17:21 ET by sherylsimsAnd I don't think anyone really appreciates the level of difficulty getting to second base here.
Sheryl
January 30, 2009 - 17:32 ET by choselife3xIs a silver-tongued devil, you guys! I never knew what hit me till I woke up the next morning.....
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
I believe
January 30, 2009 - 19:57 ET by sherylsimsI believe our first conversation was about the size and power of my firearms... heh heh
I'm sure it doesn't mean yer ugly or nuthin. :-O
January 30, 2009 - 17:23 ET by nwahswell there is that...
:)
Check out Anderson's logic
January 30, 2009 - 17:34 ET by Richard RomanoCheck out Anderson's logic -- every single instance of reparative therapy has not worked because the subjects still experience 'same-sex' feelings.
So I guess alcoholic recovery programs are failures since no doubt their subjects do still thirst for booze from time to time. Honestly, you can't make this stuf up.
These liberals really are this stupid.
Ditto on cigarettes,
January 30, 2009 - 17:55 ET by taterDitto on cigarettes, gambling, porn, and other addictions.
www.theholyrosary.org
"There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we can not resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary." -Sister Lucia
Homosexuality is a Behavioral Choice
January 30, 2009 - 17:57 ET by Retired GeekThe specific attribute which distinguishes man from all other living species: his rational faculty.
Animals are incapable of using facts, logic and reason to make choices i.e. sex perversion.
Humans are capable of using facts, logic and reason to make choices i.e. Homosexuality.
Homosexuality is NOT genetic.
Homosexuality is a learned behavior that is abnormal, perverted, irresponsible and extremely unhealthy physically, emotionally and spiritually.
Homosexuality is clearly a choice when practiced by humans.
amen
January 30, 2009 - 18:34 ET by puredmashiebeing gay is a concious decision. remember the comedian sam kinnison? he would say, "what makes a man get up in morning and say to himself, 'yes, i will...'", and blue language ensued.
swing hard in case you hit it.
What if a homosexual never acts out the behavior?
January 30, 2009 - 18:48 ET by nwahsWhat if a homosexual never acts out the behavior but their heart quivers when some cutesy of the same sex walks by? You're telling me they're not homosexual? If you're serious, your argument is flat out stupid. If you're trolling, I'll give it a 3 of 10.
Homosexual behavior is a choice. Homosexuality is most cases is probably not a choice.
Reality of Homosexual's chosen Lifestyle
January 30, 2009 - 18:02 ET by Retired GeekMany volumes have been written about 'Reality' and no consensus has been reached that will satisfy everyone.
In simple terms, reality mean perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward reality.
If one believes in God or does Not believe in God, that does not change reality, only ones beliefs, perceptions and attitudes towards reality.
When one uses 'Coercion' to force particular beliefs, perceptions and attitudes on others, is where damage and consequences begin.
Their is NO destructive consequences of belief in God, only consequences of man's interpretation of who God is and what his rules are.
When God flatly condemns homosexuality and ones perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes, say no God doesn't condemn homosexuality, that does NOT change reality.
Most humans, if not all, think their 'Reality' is the correct one or they would NOT hold that view (as earlier defined). Humans will either associate with those who hold their view of reality and/or 'Coerce' others into accepting their view, to assure themselves they are correct.
If after all is said and done, if we must stand before God to give account for the gift of life God has given us (I believe we will), then the argument that others said it was right or others practiced homosexuality too, flies in the face of Gods' commandments.
Good luck with that argument.
The only avenue of escape logically, is to deny the existence of God, or deny His Word, or say it was approved by others, or blame God and say homosexuality is Gods' fault.
Perhaps there is other logical arguments but these are all I can see.
There is NO 'collective' salvation in my view, only individual salvation.
Choose this day whom you shall serve, God or your personal reality.
where is the problem in saying there are gay christians?
January 30, 2009 - 19:57 ET by GNI don't understand the problem in Cooper saying there are people who are happily gay and happily Christian.
There is some negative reference to homosexuality in the bible, but that sort of thing does not normally make someone cease to be Christian.
The bible is clearly against divorce. In fact, it devotes more words to giving negative attention to divorce than it does to homosexuality. There are many people who are both divorced and Christian, as well as happy with their situation and not feeling that they have to give up their religious identity because of their identity as a divorced person.
The bible is also against gluttony. There are many very fat gluttonous Christians, none of whom are being told they cannot be Christians if they keep stuffing their mouths with too much food.
Research and the testimony of gay people does support the case that people are born (thus created by God) with a natural attraction to their own sex. Certainly straight people do not report having a time in their youth when they "choose" to be straight and decide to have crushes on other young people and celebrities of the opposite sex. And gay individuals and gay pair bonding are found in species throughout the animal kingdom. But even if you adhere to the idea homosexuality is a chosen thing and a lifestyle decision, how does that make being gay and being Christian mutually exclusive?
Overeating is a choice. Divorcing your spouse is a choice. Those fat gluttons and people who file for divorce have chosen to defy the word of God with their lifestyle, but no one denies that they can still be Christians if they self-identify as Christians.
"people who are happily gay
January 30, 2009 - 19:59 ET by NL207"people who are happily gay and happily Christian."
An oxymoron. One cannot be a Christian and at the same time be Gay. One can only be a Christian and be a repentent homosexual.
The distinction is really not all that subtle. The unabashed homosexual is in effect, claiming that God is wrong in condemning homosexuality as sin. Anyone who rejects God's moral code as wrong cannot be saved.
The same is true for all other sinners. They cannot be Christians until they accept God's moral code as the one moral truth in the Universe. To do so for the homosexual is to condemn and reject the practice of homosexuality, to repent of their sin. The same for the prostitute, the same for the thief, etc. None may be saved who reject God's word.
You seem to be picking
January 30, 2009 - 20:05 ET by GNYou seem to be picking and choosing to apply that to a few groups you personally disapprove of. Unless you are also claiming gluttons and divorcees are not Christians?
Surely the unabashed glutton and unabashed divorcee are also rejecting God's code?
Given the horrendous obesity problem in America, that would mean America probably could not be considered a Christian nation once all the gluttons were excluded from the category of "Christian".
"unabashed
January 31, 2009 - 00:56 ET by NL207"unabashed divorcee "
obviously you haven't read the Bible. God sanctions divorce under three conditions: Abandonment, Adultery and Cruelty.
Where in the scriptures does it say being fat is immoral?
I didn't express one iota of personal approval or dissapproval for any particular brand of sin. Projection is a liberal trait. You need a mirror.
What I did do was try to explain to a moral relativist the concept of an absolute moral standard.
In the context of Christianity, the only unforgivable sin is the sin of disbelief. All other transgressions of God's morality can be forgiven under penance. Rejection of the Christian standard of right and wrong is rejection of the Word of God. This rejection is by definition, un-Christian. Those who reject God cannot be Christians.
Therefore, Homosexuals who reject God's Word are not Christians, regardless how they label themselves. God promises to judge them, not because they are homosexuals, but because they rejected His Word, and said Homosexuality was good. This is different than the thief who knows he is a thief and is ashamed of himself in his heart for stealing. Were the thief to parallel the Homosexual, the thief would be proud of stealing and proclaim there is nothing immoral about it.
This is the ugly arm of the Evangelicals
January 30, 2009 - 20:28 ET by nwahsIMO, this is the ugly arm of the Evangelicals. I'm not going to pretend I'm comfortable with demonstrations of homosexual behavior in public, but I'm also not comfortable with the witch burning mob mentality Evangelicals sometimes display.
This is the cruel part of Evangelicalism.
I don't think anyone chooses their sexual orientation. I don't know how they get it but its probably a combination of genetics, chemistry in uterus, and nurturing. One thing is clear. A person's authentic sexual orientation is not a choice and its probably formed before cognition - about 2 years old.
Now that leads to all sorts of problems. I don't see how you desensitize someone who is truly heterosexual, to displays of homosexuality. A person can be legitimately grossed out by homosexuality, simply because its truly unnatural to them. It doesn't mean they are a bully or intolerant, it just means they're queasy at the sight of what they consider unnatural.
I doubt its possible to desensitize someone to this, just as I doubt its possible to change someones sexual orientation. But that doesn't excuse lawmakers ( or anyone) going on witch hunts or "peeping toms" passing bedroom legislation.
I don't see an easy solution, but I suspect its erring on the side of humility and not arrogance. When you have people pounding on a Bible saying the *KNOW* the reason for homosexuality, be wary and be civilized. We don't burn people anymore. We have progressed.
Repress feelings?
January 30, 2009 - 21:01 ET by pgrossjrSo those who go through reparative therapy are still attracted to members of the same sex? Recovering alchoholics (of which I am one) are still attracted to booze and the prevailing science says we are most likely genetically disposed to alchoholism. To say a human is born a particular way and has no power of choice is to equate them to an animal who is chained to their instincts. What separates us from animals is our ability to make choices based on rational thought and not on instinct. would Dobransky suggest I should return to active alchoholism?
1. Ted Haggard was not and
January 30, 2009 - 21:12 ET by1. Ted Haggard was not and is not a "Christian". He was a "minister" of false doctrine leading people to hell. And YES I am perfectly able to "judge" who is or is not a CHristian. Especially when we're talking about a preacher or teacher who's false doctrine is on the record! And before some "emergent church" member pipes up with the only scripture they know, about "Judge not" blah, blah, blah, I'll say this. You don't understand THAT scripture either ! Or else why would the Lord SPECIFICALLY tell you to JUDGE those who claim to speak for Him by their FRUIT?Hmmmm. See, Matt 7:15-20 before you embarrass either of us with a lack of acumen. Haggard is part of the deceived "church" which imagines itself to be saved or "christian" in a manner that differs VASTLY from that proscribed by scripture.
2. Being Christian and "being" gay are NOT mutually exclusive. Being Christian and being a PRACTICING homosexual IS mutually exclusive. You cannot be a practicing homosexual and make it to heaven. Sodom and Gomorrah were supposed to tell this fool that. 2 Pe2:4-9
4. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons[b] to be held for judgment;
5. if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;
6. if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
7and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men 8(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)—
9. if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
So I guess Jesus thinks that as far as being a practicing homosexual and a "Christian", it's pretty "mutually exclusive", huh?
3. The lilly livered proponent of false doctrine in the piece said. .. "every one of them basically admits that they still are attracted to a member of the same sex, they're just forcing themselves to repress those feelings....That can't be a healthy thing."
This buffoon has NO concept of what it is to BE a Christian in the first place. At least in that, he is not alone. The bible says that before those of us who are saved, were saved, we were ALL fornicators, idolators, homo's, liars, thieves, etc. The POINT of the Christian walk is to not be these things any longer. REPRESSION is what it's all about. Repression of man's fallen nature. As a former womanizer of the highest order, it is a STRUGGLE not to involve myself in that deathstyle any longer. A struggle made all the more arduous by a profession which makes some women easy prey for me. A struggle that has had it's ups and downs to be frank about it! Thanks be to Jesus that there are NOW more victories than defeats! It's no different for a person who was a homosexual and gets saved, I mean really saved, not that "confess and believe" junk they're pimping in most "churches". So this man's understanding of the Christian walk is replete with false doctrine in the first place. He imagines Christians as too many of the fake ones imagine themselves, "holier than thou" , "special" or able to leap tall buildings whatever. Not so. As Paul said. Romans 7:19-25."
19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
It wouldn't be a "fight" if the old nature were not constantly in opposition to your salvation. Why does this man imagine Satan to have tempted Christ? If that were not a "archetype" of the Christian walk, I don't know what would be! If there be any "unbelievers" or "scoffers" amongst you, this should show you that the bible is true. The bible specifically said that there would be people like this guy who who would call good evil and evil good and their end is not , well, "good". :)
Isaiah 5:20
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Now, I'm sad. I was enjoying calling this liberal buffoon and stuff but now I'm just sad for his life and his chances.
This poor deluded man, in his righteous liberal zeal, imagines God to be "tolerant" of the very abomination he destroyed TWO CITIES for. If that isn't scary, I don't know what is. *sigh*
speaking of fruit....
January 30, 2009 - 21:50 ET by choselife3xYou told BD last week that his life was 'puny and insignificant'.
Care to back THAT up with some Scripture?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Best Friend
January 30, 2009 - 21:55 ET by sherylsimsNot to get in the middle of anything that I don't belong in, but there is a verse *somewhere* (I would look it up, but I am under a time constraint) that talks of hour our lives are just a vapor.
(As to the puny and insignificant though, I don't think BD is any more puny or insignificant than you or I am)\
Love you!
Sounds like you might
January 30, 2009 - 22:16 ET by choselife3xBe thinking about Ecclesiastes. Talk about a blue funk! *laughing*
Acts....like a tool lost all Scriptural credibility with me when he showed his pasty white behind all over the Lowery thread.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
That's because you're a
January 31, 2009 - 02:57 ET byThat's because you're a bigot masquerading as a "conservative" and apparently you've never read a history book. Joseph Lowery's name will be in them, YOURS won't.
How dare you call this man who RISKED his life fighting against racists, a racist. Booooo. to you.
Sorry, Keith, but Joseph Lowery will go down in history...
January 31, 2009 - 03:15 ET by R D Helm...as a bitter old fart who saw a racial issue forming in the mirror each morning while shaving.
This man could make a racial issue out of grocery shopping.
I have lived in Atlanta my entire life. Trust me. Lowery is stuck in 1963, and when he finally kicks off, and if the engravers are honest, they will put that as the year of his death on his grave marker.
And chose is not a dude. She is a young mother of three, and a damn fine Amurrican. :-)
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
I love you too, Dave
January 31, 2009 - 10:45 ET by choselife3xIf you and Blonde ever fall out I'm on you like white on rice.
(oops, was that racist?) :-O
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Now you've stopped being ridiculous
January 31, 2009 - 16:21 ET by choselife3xAnd crossed over into laughable.
I never said a word about Lowery, Acts like a tool.
I simply defended the people you called racist on that thread. Go back and read carefully.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
And I couldn't give a dry
January 31, 2009 - 02:36 ET byAnd I couldn't give a dry fart what you think of my "scriptural credibility". I don't HAVE ANY credibility. I DIDN'T WRITE THEM. I simply, unlike you, KNOW WHAT THEY SAY.
Ahhhhhhh... he admits it
January 31, 2009 - 10:32 ET by choselife3xNo credibility.
I never questioned any Scripture you quoted, Acts like a tool, just an unScriptural sneer you made. Which exposed you for a complete fraud.
And I've read the Bible. Many, many times. Satan knows what's in there too. What's your point?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
here is a verse with that has that feeling
January 30, 2009 - 22:35 ET by porpoiseboyPs 39:5 - You have made my days a mere handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you. Each man's life is but a breath. Selah
"Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason" Ben Franklin
Ecclesiastes 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left
See this is how I know
January 31, 2009 - 02:55 ET bySee " CHOOSELIFE", this is how I know you're just a trouble making pain in the butt. I answered your exact question on that same thread with scripture, I also clowned your "puny" and "insignificant" biblical "knowledge". LOL.
I told you that you misunderstood what it was that i said to BD and I apologized to HIM not you, YOU need to mind your business. As for your stupidity in thinking that your life, or my life for that matter is NOT insignificant to an almighty God, that's just stupid. (this time I'm not going to tell you where the scriptures are since you were too trifling to read them when they were first printed. You're just trying to invalidate the things I say with a pretend beef about what happened to your boyfriend BD. If he's NOT your boyfriend you really need to mind your business! LOL. Try a biblical search and start with the scripture that saY, "What is man that thou art mindful of him"..or " I know this that in my flesh dwelleth no good thing", or Perhaps Jesus telling the man that "there is no one good but GOd", but I'm just spitballin'. Now that you've been PUNK'D. You might just learn something since the "aha"you thought you had blew up in yo' face!
Wow, that was lame even for you
January 31, 2009 - 10:26 ET by choselife3xI suppose Yashua died and rose for us because we are 'puny and insignificant'. It's not like he has the hairs of our head numbered or anything....
Face it, Acts like a tool, you exposed your sorry self for the hypocrite you are.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Dude seriously, stop hating
January 31, 2009 - 02:52 ET byDude seriously, stop hating on me and read your bible! Start with the book of Acts. I'll bet you'll learn something. Like you're most likely baptized incorrectly and you probably don't really have the Holy Ghost, since all this seems foreign to you and it's pure 100% bible baby!
Dude, not only is it bible but it's ELEMENTARY bible. It's the stuff that Paul said only babies struggled to understand. Paul said "Hebrews 6
1Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,[a] and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so.
But Paul was talking to people who had ALREADY been baptized properly in Jesus' NAME , unlike you who have been improperly baptized in the empty titles (NOT NAMES) of "Father, Son and Holy Ghost". So we really can't LEAVE the ELEMENTARY principles and move on to the hard stuff like LOVE that you think you know BUT DON'T, because you're still drinkin' from the teat!
PROPER INSTRUCTION IS AN ACT OF LOVE.
I couldn't care less what you think of me. But what I write about scripture cannot even be questioned by such as you, because you only have a "zeal for God", but it's not "according to knowledge". Besides I have the Word Of Knowledge and you probably don't even know what it is.
Hint: it means that through the Spirit of the One who Wrote IT, I know what it all says, all at the same time. Upon hearing a new "doctrine" or even casual utterance, thanks be and glory be to Christ and Christ alone, I know whether it's biblical or not. And I instantly know all of the scriptures that either support or refute said statement. Again, my boast is in the Lord, still it's a good reason for you to search the scriptures that I give you for yourself, because the Holy Ghost is NEVER wrong, thank you Jesus, let he who has ears to hear, understand.
Acts.......like a fool
January 31, 2009 - 10:41 ET by choselife3xStill didn't back up the 'puny and insignificant life' comment.
(and I much doubt that you would know the Holy Ghost if He goosed you in the dark)
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Yikes
January 31, 2009 - 12:32 ET by sherylsimsI take ONE evening to have guests and look at what happens when I go away. It is like when the teacher goes out into the hall and all hell breaks loose in the classroom (Not that I am saying I am the teacher, just that I missed all the interesting discussion while I was trying to be a polite hostess!) DARN!
Acts...like a tool
January 31, 2009 - 16:19 ET by choselife3xIs even MORE fun than UNPopTech! Shore is ugly when you flip him over, ain't he?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Acts,
February 1, 2009 - 00:31 ET by RESTLESS 1So, do you not believe in the Trinity? Are you a modalist?
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Acts 2:38
January 30, 2009 - 21:51 ET by sherylsimsGreat post! I think that a lot of Christians have been conditioned to think that they are not being "loving" to state GOD'S position on sin. People tend to forget God's holiness and righteous and want to concentrate on his grace, forgiveness and love. All are attributes of God, but must all be considered to give the full picture.
FINALLY somebody who get's
January 31, 2009 - 02:33 ET byFINALLY somebody who get's it ! Thank you so much sheryl!
Please!!
February 1, 2009 - 00:26 ET by RESTLESS 1You come in here and admonish us all for not being Christian enough for you, then kiss the ass of one post on God's anger?
That God's anger and judgement is understood and unsaid, does not give you some insight the rest of us don't have.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
And neither are you
January 30, 2009 - 23:36 ET by nwahsAny man that states another is not a Christian, is not a Christian. Welcome to hell. You are a typical idiot. It takes one sentence for you to indict yourself and 20 paragraphs for you to elaborate. What part of the Bible did you miss that states its not your job to decide who's a Christian?
How does being a Christian and stating as fact one man isn't and never was a Christian stack up Biblical teachings?
I give you 0.5 out of 10 on the troll meter and A+ in ignorance of the Bible.
That shows how LITTLE you
January 31, 2009 - 02:32 ET byThat shows how LITTLE you know. The subject was the fake preacher Haggard. On the subject of fake preachers the Lord Jesus Christ said this....
A Tree and Its Fruit
15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
See , "You've been dumb for so long that you don't know when somebody smart is around", you had NO idea what you were talking about did you? You just wanted to make me look bad. Well, that's okay, i can take your abuse. It isn't about me. It's about Jesus who told YOU TO JUDGE A BRINGER OF HIS WORD BY THEIR FRUIT. When the fruit of a Preacher is filth, degradation and sodomy, you have a problem. Did you know that a homosexual prostitute is the LOWEST THING IN THE BIBLE? Thar' ain't nothin' lower buddy! BUT I am not even "judging" Haggard by his sins! For ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God ! No I'm judging him and YOU by the "doctrine" he or YOU teach! When you say no Christian can say that someone isn't a "christian" you sound like a complete moron who hasn't read his bible! IF you're not supposed to say that someone isn't a "Christian" how could Paul say this?,,,
Romans 8:9
9You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 1
See my friend? Paul could say that if someone doesn't have the Holy Ghost they don't belong to Christ because Paul UNLIKE YOU, knows how the Holy Spirit manifests itself. And he knows that there is evidence that a third party can see, UNLIKE what is taught in Haggards alleged ministry! I judge Haggards DOCTRINE as being false since his church is a direct descendant of the false Church prophesied by Paul in 1Tim4:1-4 Get it? Got it? Good.
You are publicly judging someonee for the sake of rhetoric
January 31, 2009 - 10:02 ET by nwahsYou are publicly judging someone for the sake of rhetoric. You're waving Bible verses not to further Christianity but to further YOU. You can nuance it all you like, Mr Acts, but that aint righteous judgment, its self-righteous judgment. Got it now?
Speaking of self-righteous
January 31, 2009 - 23:06 ET by NL207Speaking of self-righteous judgement ...
Not from my point of view
February 1, 2009 - 00:12 ET by nwahsNot from my point of view. I don't look at the world from a Christian point of view. I look at it from a cellular or bio reasoning point of view. I know his role, but I would never convince him of that. I know why sperm swim and idiots quote Bible passages out of context. So no, its not self-righteous, but evident in my case. I'm more of a chemist than a Christian.
nwahs
February 1, 2009 - 00:22 ET by RESTLESS 1Do you really believe that we are not to judge each other's actions? Are you that dense? The phrase "Judge not, lest you be judged" is clearly directed to admission to Heaven. We cannot determine who has God's Grace, and who does not, but we CAN determine whose lifestyles and teachings go against His laws.
You want to preach to us about quoting the Bible out of context? You would do well to read one.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
No
February 1, 2009 - 00:35 ET by nwahsI think a Christian or a follower of the Bible can't say someone is not, and has never been a Christian, and that's exactly what I wrote. If you don't get it, I don't care.
Yeah, well, I don't care that you don't care,
February 1, 2009 - 00:50 ET by RESTLESS 1and I don't care if you care that I don't care, and, and, and,
Are we done with the childish portion of the proceedings yet?
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Let me tell you something sweet pea
February 1, 2009 - 00:58 ET by nwahsYour goal was to call me dense and tell me to read a Bible. You're not clever and you're not subtle. The childishness is what you brought.
Sweet Pea???
February 1, 2009 - 01:51 ET by RESTLESS 1Hmm, does that qualify as an ad hom? I'll let it slide.
The fact that you cannot differentiate between God's final judgement and our judgement of people's actions leads me to see you as dense. If you had read the Bible, this would not be an issue.
For the record, I am not identifying as Christian or not, I am simply replying to your claim that we are not to judge between right an wrong.
BTW, I was not trying to be clever or subtle. The fact that you ignored the meat of my post speaks volumes.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Christianity And Homosexuality 'Not Mutually Exclusive'
January 30, 2009 - 21:43 ET by thebronzeAnderson Cooper ought to know...