Oh, sorry...is road paving just another part of the "gay agenda"?

...insert joke about the Hershey highway....

(not that there's anything wrong about that.)

Say, let's hear Saint Augustine on such an issue:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]"

-----

And Kern's not all Oklahoma's troubles:

"The Oklahoma House of Representatives has passed a bill that says that a student can receive a passing grade in an Earth Science class if they say that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the Earth an hour ago, and then planted false memories into every single living creature on Earth to make it seem like they’ve been around longer.

Of course, that’s not the intent of the bill. The intent is that a student can say the Earth is 6000 years old and still get a passing grade. The bill itself says that a student cannot be graded down if they say that what they are being taught interferes with their religious beliefs." That's from Oklahoma: One Step From Doom , by the Bad Astronomer, Phil Plait.

Wait - maybe she is all OK's trouble. Kern's the bill's author. 'swhat I get for hurrying.

Yes, she is perhaps a bit extreme. But there are other extremes to which she is reacting.

Textbooks are incredibly overly PC. One cannot show that the "usual" family is mom, dad and kids unless one treats gay families and single-parent families as equally "usual" choices - even though they clearly are not. Illustrative photos of people may (optionally) include pictures whites, but absolutely must have pictures of minorities.

In this sense - while hardly the end of civilization - I do understand what she is reacting against...

Oklahoma House representative Sally Kern is under fire after an audio recording was leaked of her comparing gays to terrorists and telling fellow Republicans the "homosexual agenda is destroying this nation."

Yeah, right. Methinks Rep. Kern suffers from a severe case of ganglebetis, you know, that condition in which the optic nerve attaches itself to the rectum, thus giving one a shitty outlook on life.

In this sense - while hardly the end of civilization - I do understand what she is reacting against...

You do?? Hmmmmm...

Show gay families? Show black people? How dare they?! Here's a book that'll put those textbooks to shame for shocking matter:

Genesis 38:16-24 Tells a very interesting story of a man named Judah whom lived with his widowed daughter in law. His daughter in law was grieving and wearing the veils of mourning which Judah (a rather stupid man) mistook for the clothing of a prostitute. He ended up impregnating his daughter in law and she left the city. On a later date Judah sees the young woman again and demanded she be burned for being a prostitute (I like how only the woman is punished when THEY BOTH engaged in the sexual act). It wasn’t until Judah recognized the woman as his daughter in law and she was with his child, that he decided not to kill her. Basically, Judah can commit incest, use a prostitute (in his mistaken perception), and impregnate a MUCH younger woman, yet he thinks she is the one deserving of death.

Exodus 21:7 God not only sanctions selling ones daughter into slavery, but he also gives out laws on how it should be done.

Exodus 21:10 God ordains men taking several wives and even sets up laws as to how multiple wives should be handled.

Leviticus 19:20 Says that if a man has sex with a slave or betrothed woman he must then “scourge” her. Scourging is a term for a severe flogging or whipping. I find it quite curious that the woman shall be punished to the point of a beating for such an occurrence, yet the man gets to go free for the deed.

Leviticus 21:9 Explains that unchaste daughters of priests must be burnt to death. What about his unchaste sons? Of course this isn’t even answered in the Torah, we are to assume yet again that men have the power to do as they wish and a woman must suffer the punishment for BOTH of them.

Numbers 31: 14-18 Moses tells his men to kill all the males, non-virginal women, elderly and children of the Midianite tribe. Of course, the virgin women are kept for raping. If you read later down in the scripture God states that the Jews can not even marry a Midianite woman (with exception to Moses). Hence these women who were captured were repeatedly raped and impregnated and they weren’t even allowed a marital status in which to protect them.

Deuteronomy 20:13-15 Kill all the men and boys in the cities that God “delivers into your hands,” but keep the women for raping.

Deuteronomy 21:11-14 If you see a pretty woman among the captives then just take her home and “go in unto her.”

Deuteronomy 22:13-22 Women, be sure to keep the tokens of your virginity. Otherwise the men of your city may stone you to death. This does not apply to men though, of course. What is interesting to note here is the actual wording, it says : “that if a man hateth his wife he may say she did not have the tokens of her virginity”. Since there is no way a woman can truly prove she had a hymen upon marriage the word rests on the husband and she can be disposed of simply when he tires of her.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is one of the most cruel and sexist passages of the Torah. It says that women who are raped and fail to “cry out loud” in a populated area are most likely enjoying the attack should be killed.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 A rapist must buy his victim from her father for 50 shekels. Is this supposed to be some type of retribution? What about the victim here, what if she doesn’t want to marry a pig who raped her? All that matters is her father receives payment for his “property”.

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 Says that we must cut off a woman’s hand if she touches the “secrets” of a man who is fighting with her husband…“And thine eye shall not pity her.” Once again, there is no punishment for the man she touched, only the woman.

"Heather Has Two Mommies" looking kinda tame by now, huh?

Methinks Rep. Kern suffers from a severe case of ganglebetis, you know, that condition in which the optic nerve attaches itself to the rectum, thus giving one a shitty outlook on life.

Thanks, Flynne...didn't need to snort coffee this early in the morning.

Just hilarious.

"In this sense - while hardly the end of civilization - I do understand what she is reacting against..." So her obvious hatred of gays and lesbians is just her reaction to an overly PC world?

As far as gay parents and single parents that depends on how you define usual. I think the word your looking for here is average, not usual. Usual is as per MW online dictionary something found in ordinary course of events, gays and lesbians can be found during the ordinary course of ones life.

The average family is a mom, dad and kids, you sure about that one? With divorce rate hovering around 45% and the lower marriage rates how do you figure? Are you of the opinion that being a single parent is "unusual", or is it wrong for "moral reasons"?

Outside the 2000 year old text what justification would one have against gay marriage?

"Oh, sorry...is road paving just another part of the "gay agenda"?" Of course it is, this allows the FDA, IRS, and other forces of federal oppression to march their tank and troops faster across country. This then allows the feds with their gay masters to rapidly oppress the good and just like Felps and halt his god given mission to save our souls. Bastards all of them, pave our roads how dare you.

The really sad thing to me is that most people continue to excuse this kind of thing because of the religion angle. Even if you accept it's a sin for argument's sake, these people are still plain bigots for treating this one particular group of sinners as if they were worse than all the others. There's like a dozen child abusers or adulterers for every homosexual and we're supposed to believe they're not bigots when they claim gays are the big-time threat to society and marriage?

Pederasts and adulterers should be pitied...they can't help themselves!

But being Gay is a Choice. Therefore Gays are Evil!

The central problem is that the evangelicals see that the gay agenda is being driven by the courts and not by the legislative process.

This leads to a scenario of legal action that fuels the fear that they will be forced to associate with people whose behavior they do not condone.

They see this as a threat to their kids and families which then becomes a primal threat which creates a great emotional response.

It then becomes a primal emotional issue and there is no way to win an emotional argument unless you can begin with the thing that they are trying to protect - their kids and families.

There will always be gay people and they will be born into evangelical homes. Do you want the kids to grow up wracked by conflict and hiding things from their family or happy and successful and close to their family? This is a very sucessful argument.

As for single moms and dads, having two parents around greatly reduces the chances that kid will be messed up even if the parents are messed up themselves.

Single moms live in poverty at a much higher rate than married women as well, thus reducing their childrens' opportunities further.

If the United States falls from it's vantage point atop the mountain it will most definitely not be due to our disregard for the environment, greed and hubris in waging a war that will not be won. It will be because of The Gays.

Phew, glad I don't need to feel any responsibility and don't have to take any action 'cept for throwing rocks at The Gays.

It will be because of The Gays.

It's about time the Jews had some competition.

A colloquy I saw on a bathroom wall long ago...


"I Like Men"

"I Like Grils"

"You mean Girls"

"What about us Grils?"



The Love That Will Not Stop Nagging seems to be creating a lot of blowback.



Remember when the only black people on TV were saints, victims and chiefs of police? I'm ready for the day when the gayness of the gay person in the TV drama has no connection to the plot, and no preachy payload.


--

phunctor

The Gays should stop committing so much suicide and start shooting people like her instead.

"Do you want the kids to grow up wracked by conflict and hiding things from their family or happy and successful and close to their family?"

I think when it comes to the fundies, they'd rather have the kids grow up wracked by conflict and hiding things from their families. That way, when the kids end up miserable, the fundies can trot out the line that gays "have more suicides… there's more illness, their life spans are shorter… studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades."

i am gay. we are not NEARLY organized enough to have an agenda at all. at the very least, not the kind of horrific one we get blamed for all the time. if we did, you might actually see the little kindergarten girls chasing the other little kindergarten girls.....just kidding. i really don't know where people like her get that stuff.

> we are not NEARLY
> organized enough

Do we have to lay it out for you?

Loved this old comment of Crid's at the link just above:

Hateful Gay Agenda:

6:30 Awaken; shower
6:45 Kiss another man
7:00 Bran muffin
7:30 Freeway; Stern or NPR, depending
8:00 Work
10:30 Timeout for yoga
10:38 Back to work
12:04 Break for lunch
etc.

we also don't agree on enough to get anything done. the lesbians can't even agree with each other, much less anyone else, the gay men don't work well with lesbians because plaid flannel with birkenstocks is just too disturbing, no one really understands the trans group, and the bis are all just sluts. (please don't anyone actually think i'm serious.) i mean come on, seriously, the only thing we have in common is the gay thing itself. beyond that, we can't do anything together beyond a pride party.

That's very funny. In fact, except for having to unite against all the asshats like Kern, you'd probably all be duking it out.

I do want a pair of those leather pants with the butt circles cut out.

so does my girlfriend. i don't know why. i don't do a whole lot with that end. but if you go to a pridefest somewhere they'll probably have them at the dykes on bikes stand. at least they do at ours. although i've heard sweaty leather pants are not all that comfortable....

I go in for a bit of western flair, and I'm (sorry)...cheeky. Just like 'em.

and we actually do duke it out, instead of "fighting the power" or whatever. the lesbians say the gay men don't appreciate us, the gay men say the lesbians don't understand what it is to be gay, the trans - well, i don't really understand them either, and nobody's really sure there's any such thing as a bisexual, they're either straight people who want to be interesting (i dated one of those once. don't recommend it.) or gay people who are afraid to come out of the closet. we're all too busy saying how we have nothing in common to realize that hey, we do. i could go on. but i won't. i also could go on to do exegesis on each and every one of the bible verses you quoted and explain the historical context in a way to make the religious right out to be the idiots they are. but i won't do that either.

> they're either straight people
> who want to be interesting ...
> ...or gay people who are afraid
> to come out

I think that's right. A favorite radio joker used to say a bisexual is someone who ought to say 'Bye! to being straight.

Check out this rebuttal to Kern's comments, written by a high school student who lost his mother in the Oklahoma City bombing:
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/03/a_brilliant_reply_to_sally_ker.php