Politics, Scranton Style...There has long been an anti-Chris Doherty message board (and a message board against the anti-Doherty message board...I know, that is confusing), but now there is an "Impeach Janet Evans" Facebook group. Having read the wall postings, I'd say that Mrs Evans is getting off relatively easy compared to the Internet pasting regularly dished onto Mayor Doherty. Oh, and no, the Mayor isn't a member...yet.
In the Rush is (usually) Wrong Department...Apparently the Gulf of Mexico is having trouble absorbing the massive BP oil spill. Hmmmmm, maybe noted environmental scientist Rush Limbaugh was wrong when he said (and I quote) "...The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there" (reference HERE). In case you are curious, estimates are that upwards of 25,000 barrels of oil a day are spewing into the Gulf. For factual...as opposed to Limbaugh...information on the oil spill, you can click HERE.
Al & Tipper Gore Divorce...It was widely reported this afternoon that the Gores will be getting a divorce. While I'm sure some will have a field day with this, all I'll note is that I hope this is the best for both of them. I do want to note though that the divorce papers were not served while one of them was in the hospital receiving cancer treatments*. That's one small victory for family values.
Doctor's Appointment...In news of the more mundane kind, I had a check-up today and it seems that I will be blogging for a while to come. No big problems detected, and my blood pressure is at a manageable level. Here's to the joys of clean/boring living I suppose.
Israel vs Gaza vs Turkey...I have mixed feelings about this whole mess in the middle east. The "starving out" of Gaza residents via blockade is clearly wrong, yet the moral outrage of Arab countries seems to wane when Israeli citizens are on the receiving end of rocket attacks from Gaza (and there are no rocket factories in Gaza, so the materials are coming from somewhere else). The whole mess is what happens when you have extremists of both sides of an issue running the show. It's time for moderate Arab states to...
...acknowledge that Israel is not going to simply disappear off the map
...start taking an active role in encouraging peace in the region
...publicly take a stand against nut-jobs like the Iranian president (who would probably make Dr Goebbels blush with his rhetoric).
It's time for Israel to...
...end the illegal blockade
...stop the settlement craze that is nothing more than invasion via bulldozer
It's also time for the United States to stop being Israel's world apologist. I think it was Bob Dole who once commented that Washington DC was the "real occupied territory".
Dumore Borough Council...is apparently considering adding the court system to their arsenal of financial tools, right next to "begging" and "ignoring the problem". Maybe bankruptcy will prove a little more effective. Regardless, the bills are coming due and the checkbook is empty. No word from "Mayor Nibs", who has managed to remain remarkably stealthy throughout the 10+ year fiscal pickle that Scranton's neighbor has faced. In news that will make some residents happy though, rumor has it that Dunmore's garbage-gas fueled anti-heroin deflector shield is still fully functional, quietly protecting the populace from all manner of drug addicts (hence no need for any of those silly treatment centers).
(*) If you don't get the sarcastic reference, just google "Gingrich Divorce".
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Monday, May 31, 2010
Memorial Day
My father, in an undated photograph taken at the Casey Inn, wearing his U.S. Army uniform.My father was an SP2 and served in the medical corps during the Korean Conflict. In addition, my late uncle, Francis Xavier, served in the US Army Air Corps during World War II.
Both "Albert Boys" served their country with honor. My mother tells me that my father saw combat injuries that were nothing short of horrible during his service. It impacted him for the rest of his life.
Thank Someone Who Seved Today
Take the time today to thank someone who served...be they here or in the next life.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Game Changer
I was talking to a friend the other day about current events, and in the course of the discussion I mentioned that right now we have two events happening in the world...
...the situation in Korea
...the oil spill in the Gulf
I know the old saying about "may you live in interesting times" is mainly a curse, but whether we like it or not, these are certainly interesting.
Korea
As I write this, I don't see any reports in the news about significant troop movements in North Korea. That's a good sign, or is it? If the Kim dynasty in North Korea is getting ready to start a shooting war I don't know if they would make it so obvious. Let's hope I'm wrong. Regardless, this is a desperate country run by a desperate leader, armed (in theory) with nuclear weapons. Scary enough for you? Maybe the Chinese will put the screws to them and end this madness.
Look for North Korea to eventually back down with some prodding from China, with the South accepting something less than the apology they deserve.
Gulf Oil Spill
Since the 1930's the United States has been on an extended oil bender, and now I think the hangover is finally starting to kick in. As I write this the well is still spewing, and the damage to the environment is only just beginning. It's not just about oiled birds...it's about the destruction of an entire environment-based economy. Like shrimp? Buy'm now because they may be getting somewhat rare. Inconvenient for us, devastating for for the people that live there. Look for extended blame-storming, including the asinine assertion that this could have been avoided had we drilled closer to shore (as noted by Krauthammer and others). Why asinine? Several reasons including...
...the fact that both Democratic and Republican governors in coastal states have fought against off-shore drilling (negating this as being a Democrat-caused problem)
...a smaller spill closer to shore can do just as much damage as a larger spill further off-shore. Sure, it is easier to plug in shallow water, but it doesn't take much oil to destroy an estuary
...deep water wells are not a recent, knee-jerk reaction to political policy; oil companies drill where the oil is
Look for more blame-storming and incredible amounts of damage. Hopefully this will lead to a serious (finally) re-examination of America's energy policy. There are alternatives, but none are cheap. However we are learning that maybe cheap oil isn't really so "cheap" after all.
...the situation in Korea
...the oil spill in the Gulf
I know the old saying about "may you live in interesting times" is mainly a curse, but whether we like it or not, these are certainly interesting.
Korea
As I write this, I don't see any reports in the news about significant troop movements in North Korea. That's a good sign, or is it? If the Kim dynasty in North Korea is getting ready to start a shooting war I don't know if they would make it so obvious. Let's hope I'm wrong. Regardless, this is a desperate country run by a desperate leader, armed (in theory) with nuclear weapons. Scary enough for you? Maybe the Chinese will put the screws to them and end this madness.
Look for North Korea to eventually back down with some prodding from China, with the South accepting something less than the apology they deserve.
Gulf Oil Spill
Since the 1930's the United States has been on an extended oil bender, and now I think the hangover is finally starting to kick in. As I write this the well is still spewing, and the damage to the environment is only just beginning. It's not just about oiled birds...it's about the destruction of an entire environment-based economy. Like shrimp? Buy'm now because they may be getting somewhat rare. Inconvenient for us, devastating for for the people that live there. Look for extended blame-storming, including the asinine assertion that this could have been avoided had we drilled closer to shore (as noted by Krauthammer and others). Why asinine? Several reasons including...
...the fact that both Democratic and Republican governors in coastal states have fought against off-shore drilling (negating this as being a Democrat-caused problem)
...a smaller spill closer to shore can do just as much damage as a larger spill further off-shore. Sure, it is easier to plug in shallow water, but it doesn't take much oil to destroy an estuary
...deep water wells are not a recent, knee-jerk reaction to political policy; oil companies drill where the oil is
Look for more blame-storming and incredible amounts of damage. Hopefully this will lead to a serious (finally) re-examination of America's energy policy. There are alternatives, but none are cheap. However we are learning that maybe cheap oil isn't really so "cheap" after all.
Rand Paul
I've had some distractions this week that kept me from raising the issue of Rand Paul's comments on race. This was widely reported, so I'm thinking anyone who really cares about the issues raised probably doesn't need to read another article about it, so no link from me. I did, however, want to make a point or two myself.
I enjoy reading the columns of Leonard Pitts, which appear every week in the Scranton Times (and I'm assuming the Citizen's Voice as well). His latest column discussed Rand Paul's comments about the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You can read the column HERE. As usual, Pitts goes to the heart of the issue, which is namely that Rand Paul put himself in this position; unlike Sarah Palin, I don't believe that the "evil media" somehow "forced" Rand Paul to make an ass out of himself. Doctor Paul seems a like a bright guy to me, far too bright to say something like this without actually knowing what he is saying. If you believe he is the victim of, as (former) Governor Palin says the "gotcha media", then he has no business in the U.S. Senate, for clearly he's not bright enough for the job. Nope, from my perspective he meant what he said.
Anyway, the crux of Dr Paul's argument was that the government shouldn't be telling private property owners what to do. On the surface that could sound reasonable, but when you take more than 30 seconds to think about it, most would come to a different conclusion. Specifically, I think in point of fact Dr. Paul probably has no problem with the government telling private property owners what to do sometimes. How could I say that? Ah, an example is in order.
Let's say for example that Dr Paul's neighbor decided to start a combination pig farm and methane plant. This neighbor owns the property, so why shouldn't he be able to do what he wanted on it without government interference? If Dr Paul's pleas to he neighbor to stop the pig farm/methane plant went unanswered, where would he go? Yes, you guessed it, to the government. Why? Because the government has established rules (zoning rules) saying that (for example) opening a pig farm/methane plant in a residential area isn't allowed. I bet in this example Dr Paul would be more than happy for that bit of government intervention, as would most people. Sometimes we need the government to help protect us from idiots.
Look, I want as little government as is necessary. But that's the point: sometimes government is necessary. It's necessary when an idiot neighbor wants to do something that could harm you or your property, and it's necessary when some racist swine would treat other human beings like they are sub-human simply because they look differently. What someone does in the privacy of their own home is none of my business, but the moment they do something that could effect me...or society at large...then it becomes something for our collective business. In our society, our "collective business" is reflected in the government.
In the final analysis...
I enjoy reading the columns of Leonard Pitts, which appear every week in the Scranton Times (and I'm assuming the Citizen's Voice as well). His latest column discussed Rand Paul's comments about the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You can read the column HERE. As usual, Pitts goes to the heart of the issue, which is namely that Rand Paul put himself in this position; unlike Sarah Palin, I don't believe that the "evil media" somehow "forced" Rand Paul to make an ass out of himself. Doctor Paul seems a like a bright guy to me, far too bright to say something like this without actually knowing what he is saying. If you believe he is the victim of, as (former) Governor Palin says the "gotcha media", then he has no business in the U.S. Senate, for clearly he's not bright enough for the job. Nope, from my perspective he meant what he said.
Anyway, the crux of Dr Paul's argument was that the government shouldn't be telling private property owners what to do. On the surface that could sound reasonable, but when you take more than 30 seconds to think about it, most would come to a different conclusion. Specifically, I think in point of fact Dr. Paul probably has no problem with the government telling private property owners what to do sometimes. How could I say that? Ah, an example is in order.
Let's say for example that Dr Paul's neighbor decided to start a combination pig farm and methane plant. This neighbor owns the property, so why shouldn't he be able to do what he wanted on it without government interference? If Dr Paul's pleas to he neighbor to stop the pig farm/methane plant went unanswered, where would he go? Yes, you guessed it, to the government. Why? Because the government has established rules (zoning rules) saying that (for example) opening a pig farm/methane plant in a residential area isn't allowed. I bet in this example Dr Paul would be more than happy for that bit of government intervention, as would most people. Sometimes we need the government to help protect us from idiots.
Look, I want as little government as is necessary. But that's the point: sometimes government is necessary. It's necessary when an idiot neighbor wants to do something that could harm you or your property, and it's necessary when some racist swine would treat other human beings like they are sub-human simply because they look differently. What someone does in the privacy of their own home is none of my business, but the moment they do something that could effect me...or society at large...then it becomes something for our collective business. In our society, our "collective business" is reflected in the government.
In the final analysis...
- Racism isn't a blurry kind of issue; either you think it is wrong to discriminate against someone because of how they look or you don't. If it's wrong, then it should be stopped without exception.
- I don't know Rand Paul well enough to say whether or not he is a racist. He has, however, now defended racism. Forget the comments about deploring it; if you say that something shouldn't be done when a black person isn't allowed to eat at certain restaurant (for example), then you are as guilty of racism as the owner. It's that simple.
- Either you are smart enough to answer reporters questions without coming off like an ass or you are not. If the latter applies, then give up the future in the U.S. Senate.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Remember
One of my favorite...and one of the most beautiful...songs ever.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Harry Nilsson...
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Harry Nilsson...
Walk Like An Egyptian
Well I picked up my oldest daughter yesterday afternoon in Philadelphia, as she arrived from Cairo via Frankfurt. As I may have noted before, she spent May studying abroad in Egypt, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that I am glad she got, even if her digestive system wasn't.
A few random thoughts that I culled from her experience:
Garbage - There is garbage everywhere in Egypt. She showed me a picture of this river that was literally blocked by a dam of garbage. There aren't garbage cans out in public; apparently if you have waste you just throw it outside. They were thrilled when they landed in Frankfurt and immediately saw a trashcan at the airport. Got to love that in-bred German sense of cleanliness.
Cats - In addition to garbage, there are cats everywhere. They just wander everywhere...hotels, mosques, shoppes, etc. It's kind of cool actually.
The Food - Just about everyone on their tour got almost immediately sick from the local food. It's much, much more spicy than we are used to. They were thrilled when they got to go to mall in Alexandria where there was a McDonald's. Apparently Chicken McNugget taste exactly the same everywhere in the world.
The Air - It's so thick and polluted that Cairo is covered in an almost constant haze. It's like LA on a bad day, all the time. It's a combination of everyone cooking with God knows what & all those crappy little weed-wacker engine powered cars that they drive over there.
They Love Americans - There seem to be rules for foreigners traveling in Egypt, most of which are waived if you are an American. Oh, and all Egyptians know who Obama is. He's more popular over there than he is here.
There is Real Poverty There - There are kids that go out and beg for tourist money as a kind of "job". It's incredibly sad. Want a picture taken with a cute local? That will be some pounds please.
It's Incredibly Cheap - She bought three pair of leather shoes for the equivalent of $50.
It's Secure - She was very, very impressed with how local police and security looked after tourists. They would literally get escorts where ever they went. And those dudes were well armed. Clearly, Egypt knows that they are just one incident away from killing the goose that laid the golden egg...tourism...so they take the security stuff seriously.
The Airport at Frankfurt is Very Secure - She referred to the well-armed German airport security as "the Gestapo". I asked her if she said that when she was there...she said no...I said "good idea...for some bizarre reason they don't think the NAZI references are very funny in Germany".
I told her that the whole experience should remind her of how truly blessed we are to live in this country. Yes, we have problems, but they pale in comparison to how other people are forced to live in certain parts of the world.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
The Last (Gay) Waltz
PREFACE
This is it...after this I am finished arguing on the Rockin Apologists blog that Gays are not mentally ill individuals who deserve to be discriminated against. While I love a good argument as much as the next guy, you do reach a point where it all becomes so very clear that no one is really listening, and in the final analysis I do this for fun...not to save souls, or spread the "my way or the highway" gospel. Plus, in my case, I can only devote so much of my free time (what little there is) to the whole blogging endeavor and I've missed out on other topics.
You can link to the discussion HERE. I'm just going to cut and paste the offending passages in this blog (in italic).
Enough excuses. This is my Last (Gay) Waltz.
*************
In (final) response to your comments JD...
Comment - Are you actually trying to equate "hair growth" with "average life expectancy" and "higher incidences of mental health disorders"? Simply stunning.
No JD, the part about "hair growth" was an attempt at humor. I believe that laughter is a gift from God. Try it. Besides, quoting testimonials about Gay conversion proves nothing...and more on testimonials in a few.
Comment - Then neither alcoholics nor adulterers should be either? I'm just trying to see if youre consistent in your rejection of Biblical claims or if you are just cherry-picking and choosing the Gospel you wish to live by.
If you mean by "rejection of Biblical claims" that I reject the notion that homosexuals should be put to death, then yes, you are correct. As for cherry-picking, I think you are just as guilty (the whole "this only applied before, but this applied now" stuff). As for the "Gospel I wish to live by" I suggest that if you are interested in knowing then I suggest you ask...otherwise your statement sounds like nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that I've pointed out inconsistencies in your arguments.
Comment - Youre only obfuscating the matter. The comparison here is between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Again, statisticaly speaking, is anything that I wrote above concerning comparisons with mental illness and life expectancies between the two groups inaccurate?
Me obfuscating? I think you are my friend, as Ive answered this before...but for the last time here goes...I have no doubt that homosexuals may suffer from a greater degree of mental illness. If all people who were left handed were told that they were engaged in left-handed sin...if there was a book that said that being left-handed was punishable by death...that being left-handed was wrong and needed to be cured...OF COURSE more left-handed people would suffer from various forms of mental illness. Now of course some homosexuals are well adjusted and some suffer from mental illness for reasons outside of their sexuality, but being a 3% minority where a portion of the remaining 97% believe that you are defective takes a toll.
Comment - And neither are car accidents and drowning incidences. None of which explains why homosexuals live considerably shorter lives than heterosexuals while having considerably higher rates of mental health issues. Would you care to either..
A) Disprove statistically that this is not the case? Or..
B) Care to speculate as to why this may be the case?
I already have...twice now.
Comment - Really? In what way? Is it the case that the countless testimonies from former homosexuals about completely changed lives that could be provided by such ministries are in some way "invalid"? If so, please explain why.
Testimonials???? TESTIMONIALS???? Are you serious???????????
There are entire areas of science and business where testimonials are not even allowed. Did you know that folks working in the securities industry are BARRED from using testimonials when dealing with customers? Do you think that testimonials are considered to be valid proof when a drug needs to be approved by the FDA? (Hint: No). What's more, for every "Exodus cured me" testimonial, do you not think that there are testimonials where someone says "Exodus is crap"? Please, save the testimonials for vitamin commercials and crap they sell on QVC, as the very concept doesn't belong in a serious discussion. It's the stuff of hucksters and used-car salesmen.
Comment - And who are they SGA? I don't think that even such a fringe group as the Westboro Baptist Church is calling for the stoning to death of gays. Even if they are, they have at most, what? 50-60 members?
The reference is to people that believe in a strict literal interpretation of the Bible. Call me a fool for logic, but if someone believes in a "strict literal interpretation of an error-free, divinely inspired word of God", then that seems to negate the actual interpretation of the Bible...why interpret something if it is error free? The very word "interpret" seems to imply that the Bible is somehow unclear or in need of clarification. In fact, if the passage in Leviticus doesn't apply now...and the Bible is 100% true...wouldn't the Bible come out and specifically say that some of it's teachings no longer apply? The fact is that the Bible has no such "no longer applies" passage...you made that part up JD. Making something up in the Bible runs counter to the belief systems of several mainstream demoninations, including...
Southern Baptists (From SBC.net): "It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy." [I don't see any "except for ____" in that statement.]
Assemblies of God (from Ag.net): "The Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct." [I don't see any "except for ____" in that statement.]
Foursquare Church (from foursquare.org ): "We believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God: true, immutable, steadfast, and unchangeable" [Immutable means "unchangeable"...as in it was right during the time of Leviticus and it is right now.]
I could go on, but this is growing tiring; I will say though that I personally am fine with interpreting the Bible..even your interpreting the Bible. My point is though that not everyone else is...and I'm not referring the the Wackos of Westboro either. Ya can't have it both ways, claiming that the Bible is always true, but that it also needs to tweaked for modern times.
One final point: you claim that homosexuality is a mental illness. According to the authorities on mental illness, the American Psychiatric Association, it is not. In fact in December of 1973 they determined that it is not a pathological psychiatric condition. Reference HERE.
Okay, that's it. I'm done. I know there are points remaining, but too bad. Pointing fingers at others...claiming that they are mentally ill...advocating that it's okay to discriminate against some...is simply wrong. If that's what you call my "Gospel", then so be it.
This is it...after this I am finished arguing on the Rockin Apologists blog that Gays are not mentally ill individuals who deserve to be discriminated against. While I love a good argument as much as the next guy, you do reach a point where it all becomes so very clear that no one is really listening, and in the final analysis I do this for fun...not to save souls, or spread the "my way or the highway" gospel. Plus, in my case, I can only devote so much of my free time (what little there is) to the whole blogging endeavor and I've missed out on other topics.
You can link to the discussion HERE. I'm just going to cut and paste the offending passages in this blog (in italic).
Enough excuses. This is my Last (Gay) Waltz.
*************
In (final) response to your comments JD...
Comment - Are you actually trying to equate "hair growth" with "average life expectancy" and "higher incidences of mental health disorders"? Simply stunning.
No JD, the part about "hair growth" was an attempt at humor. I believe that laughter is a gift from God. Try it. Besides, quoting testimonials about Gay conversion proves nothing...and more on testimonials in a few.
Comment - Then neither alcoholics nor adulterers should be either? I'm just trying to see if youre consistent in your rejection of Biblical claims or if you are just cherry-picking and choosing the Gospel you wish to live by.
If you mean by "rejection of Biblical claims" that I reject the notion that homosexuals should be put to death, then yes, you are correct. As for cherry-picking, I think you are just as guilty (the whole "this only applied before, but this applied now" stuff). As for the "Gospel I wish to live by" I suggest that if you are interested in knowing then I suggest you ask...otherwise your statement sounds like nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that I've pointed out inconsistencies in your arguments.
Comment - Youre only obfuscating the matter. The comparison here is between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Again, statisticaly speaking, is anything that I wrote above concerning comparisons with mental illness and life expectancies between the two groups inaccurate?
Me obfuscating? I think you are my friend, as Ive answered this before...but for the last time here goes...I have no doubt that homosexuals may suffer from a greater degree of mental illness. If all people who were left handed were told that they were engaged in left-handed sin...if there was a book that said that being left-handed was punishable by death...that being left-handed was wrong and needed to be cured...OF COURSE more left-handed people would suffer from various forms of mental illness. Now of course some homosexuals are well adjusted and some suffer from mental illness for reasons outside of their sexuality, but being a 3% minority where a portion of the remaining 97% believe that you are defective takes a toll.
Comment - And neither are car accidents and drowning incidences. None of which explains why homosexuals live considerably shorter lives than heterosexuals while having considerably higher rates of mental health issues. Would you care to either..
A) Disprove statistically that this is not the case? Or..
B) Care to speculate as to why this may be the case?
I already have...twice now.
Comment - Really? In what way? Is it the case that the countless testimonies from former homosexuals about completely changed lives that could be provided by such ministries are in some way "invalid"? If so, please explain why.
Testimonials???? TESTIMONIALS???? Are you serious???????????
There are entire areas of science and business where testimonials are not even allowed. Did you know that folks working in the securities industry are BARRED from using testimonials when dealing with customers? Do you think that testimonials are considered to be valid proof when a drug needs to be approved by the FDA? (Hint: No). What's more, for every "Exodus cured me" testimonial, do you not think that there are testimonials where someone says "Exodus is crap"? Please, save the testimonials for vitamin commercials and crap they sell on QVC, as the very concept doesn't belong in a serious discussion. It's the stuff of hucksters and used-car salesmen.
Comment - And who are they SGA? I don't think that even such a fringe group as the Westboro Baptist Church is calling for the stoning to death of gays. Even if they are, they have at most, what? 50-60 members?
The reference is to people that believe in a strict literal interpretation of the Bible. Call me a fool for logic, but if someone believes in a "strict literal interpretation of an error-free, divinely inspired word of God", then that seems to negate the actual interpretation of the Bible...why interpret something if it is error free? The very word "interpret" seems to imply that the Bible is somehow unclear or in need of clarification. In fact, if the passage in Leviticus doesn't apply now...and the Bible is 100% true...wouldn't the Bible come out and specifically say that some of it's teachings no longer apply? The fact is that the Bible has no such "no longer applies" passage...you made that part up JD. Making something up in the Bible runs counter to the belief systems of several mainstream demoninations, including...
Southern Baptists (From SBC.net): "It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy." [I don't see any "except for ____" in that statement.]
Assemblies of God (from Ag.net): "The Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct." [I don't see any "except for ____" in that statement.]
Foursquare Church (from foursquare.org ): "We believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God: true, immutable, steadfast, and unchangeable" [Immutable means "unchangeable"...as in it was right during the time of Leviticus and it is right now.]
I could go on, but this is growing tiring; I will say though that I personally am fine with interpreting the Bible..even your interpreting the Bible. My point is though that not everyone else is...and I'm not referring the the Wackos of Westboro either. Ya can't have it both ways, claiming that the Bible is always true, but that it also needs to tweaked for modern times.
One final point: you claim that homosexuality is a mental illness. According to the authorities on mental illness, the American Psychiatric Association, it is not. In fact in December of 1973 they determined that it is not a pathological psychiatric condition. Reference HERE.
Okay, that's it. I'm done. I know there are points remaining, but too bad. Pointing fingers at others...claiming that they are mentally ill...advocating that it's okay to discriminate against some...is simply wrong. If that's what you call my "Gospel", then so be it.
Okay, It's Gay Wednesday Too
Occasionally I write stuff as comments on other blogs that I want to capture here. Pasted below is a response to a comment written on the blog of the Rockin Apologist, saved for posterity (or for however long I choose to save it).
You can see the entire exchange HERE (with typos corrected).
**************
JD...
Wait a minute my friend...you are not snookering me into a debate about whether or not homosexuality is healthy, good, promotes healthy hair growth, etc. That has never been my intent. Nice try though. My point is people shouldn't be subject to blatant discrimination because they are gay. Want a list of all the "dangerous" behaviors that heterosexuals engage in that cause many of the same problems you ascribe to homosexuals? I can do it if you want.
That noted, time to clear up a few points:
First, physical violence and venereal diseases are not the exclusive property of the heterosexual community. For example, AIDS in Africa is spread mainly through heterosexual behavior. VD has been spread through heterosexual conduct since before our great, great, great grandfathers were born.
Second, a straight person referencing "Exodus International" as a valid source is like a gay person referencing "Queer Nation" as a valid source. I think both are equally full of crap. Quote an objective source or quote none at all, otherwise this becomes a silly debate alone the lines of "the Bible is true because the Bible says that it is true".
As for Leviticus, well I throw that one in there for all those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. For the record, Leviticus doesn't have a disclaimer that says "Warning: this only applies to the ancient Israelite community". I know this because I read it...along with the other first five books of the Bible...word for word in high school religion class. Either you believe the Bible word for word, or you believe that it can be interpreted. If you believe the latter, well then your comment seems reasonable to me. If you believe the former, then I suggest you get ready for prison, as your god (small g on purpose) compels you to stone gay people to death (and in this country that is currently illegal).
Finally, I personally don't get the "being gay is a choice" mantra thrown out there by the Exodus people. I really don't. Want some "straight" (get it, straight as in not gay...) truth? The act of two men kissing disgusts me*...I find it revolting...and I am not alone in that regard. That very point though proves to me that it's NOT a choice for some, as who would choose to do that? Being depressed or suffering from some "mental illness" make you kiss a dude? I'm sorry, but there is NO amount of depression that could ever make me do that. The answer for me is simple: no one would choose it, instead you must be born with that predisposition.
(*) I mean no offense to anyone by that statement. In fact, I am sure that for some gay folks, the idea of a man and a women kissing is equally disgusting.
You can see the entire exchange HERE (with typos corrected).
**************
JD...
Wait a minute my friend...you are not snookering me into a debate about whether or not homosexuality is healthy, good, promotes healthy hair growth, etc. That has never been my intent. Nice try though. My point is people shouldn't be subject to blatant discrimination because they are gay. Want a list of all the "dangerous" behaviors that heterosexuals engage in that cause many of the same problems you ascribe to homosexuals? I can do it if you want.
That noted, time to clear up a few points:
First, physical violence and venereal diseases are not the exclusive property of the heterosexual community. For example, AIDS in Africa is spread mainly through heterosexual behavior. VD has been spread through heterosexual conduct since before our great, great, great grandfathers were born.
Second, a straight person referencing "Exodus International" as a valid source is like a gay person referencing "Queer Nation" as a valid source. I think both are equally full of crap. Quote an objective source or quote none at all, otherwise this becomes a silly debate alone the lines of "the Bible is true because the Bible says that it is true".
As for Leviticus, well I throw that one in there for all those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. For the record, Leviticus doesn't have a disclaimer that says "Warning: this only applies to the ancient Israelite community". I know this because I read it...along with the other first five books of the Bible...word for word in high school religion class. Either you believe the Bible word for word, or you believe that it can be interpreted. If you believe the latter, well then your comment seems reasonable to me. If you believe the former, then I suggest you get ready for prison, as your god (small g on purpose) compels you to stone gay people to death (and in this country that is currently illegal).
Finally, I personally don't get the "being gay is a choice" mantra thrown out there by the Exodus people. I really don't. Want some "straight" (get it, straight as in not gay...) truth? The act of two men kissing disgusts me*...I find it revolting...and I am not alone in that regard. That very point though proves to me that it's NOT a choice for some, as who would choose to do that? Being depressed or suffering from some "mental illness" make you kiss a dude? I'm sorry, but there is NO amount of depression that could ever make me do that. The answer for me is simple: no one would choose it, instead you must be born with that predisposition.
(*) I mean no offense to anyone by that statement. In fact, I am sure that for some gay folks, the idea of a man and a women kissing is equally disgusting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)