The Year of Moving Forward

The Year of Moving Forward
At our 4 person wedding reception in DC

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Marriage as Defined in the Bible

Since when does creating a "Team of Rivals" include asking the pastor who purposely tried to make you look foolish, to pray at your inauguration?

Rick Warren is either a smart slimeball or senseless moron, and that's just based on his responses in this YouTube video.

First, he is right, divorce is a greater threat to the American family than same-sex marriage. But he spins statistics to say that most marriages are successful. He says in reality most marriages are successful, even though people say more than half the marriages end in divorce. And they do, he just doesn't count the second and third marriages which end in divorce 61% and 75% of the time, respectively.

Anyway, after comparing same sex marriage to brother-sister marriage, old guy-young girl marriage and polygamy, he talks about the re-definition of marriage, which has been defined for 5000 years, he says.

Ok, go back 5000 years, Rick. Around that time, Abraham included in his marriage having sex with and impregnating his wife's Egyptian maid, Hagar. As it says in the New American Standard Version of the Bible, "Abram's wife Sarai took Hagar the Egyptian, her maid, and gave her to her husband Abram as his wife." Gen 16:3. Great example of traditional marriage.

Who's Your Daddy?

Not long after, Lot's wife became a pillar of salt (think about that next time you season your green beans). Lot returned to his cave man roots (Gen 19: 30) and his daughters got him drunk and partied with him, and each had a baby boy.

Yeah Rick, marriage 5000 years ago is really something to hold on to.

Then there's that whole "sister, half sister, wife" thing Abraham goes into with Abimelech (Gen 20), and men fathering children by their concubines as part of their traditional marriage (Gen 22).

Next up is Esau, the hairy guy, who must have been a real stud. First he married Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, and also Basemath (his cousin). (Gen 36)

So these are examples of marriage when the relationship was being defined. Polygamy, incest and concubines. And that is just Genesis. Marriage has be re-defined so many times it's ridiculous.

Oh, and many conservatives are upset with Rick Warren also because they see him as an opportunist and don't like his broadening of the evangelical agenda. (Re-defining the evangelical agenda).


Anonymous said...

"My sins are perfectly acceptable. Your sins are hideous and evil." Did you catch that line Joe? See you want to try to point out a few Biblical examples of heterosexual marriages that went wrong, yet you refuse to recognize your own homosexual sins. You even try to use scripture to justify it.

Warren is completely correct. The majority of first time marriages do last. It is second and third time marriages that screw up the statistics. And marriage HAS ALWAYS been between a man and a woman.

Rick Warren is right!

Joe said...

Yes Kristi I caught that line. It was close to Warren saying "Why do we hear more about drug use than being overweight?" I noticed while he was saying that, that his tie does not hang in a vertical direction. So he is admitting the hypocrisy of ignoring his own sin and focusing the sins of others. and he laughs about it.

Kristi, you need reading lessons. I just gave biblical examples of marriages between one man and multiple wives. And you say "always been betwen "a" man and "a" woman."

Why don't you read before you post comments?

Anonymous said...

I've chosen to come to this blog daily, not for information, but for comedy relief. Thank goodness there are some smart, level-headed people who have sense enough to debate the garbage that is blogged here on a daily basis.
Rick Warren is one of the smartest, most respected pastors in this country, with one of the largest congregations in one of the most liberal parts of the country.
Obama has even invited Warren to be part of his inauguration ceremonies.
I did not hear him ignore his own sins in that clip. Maybe he knows he is over weight. Maybe he is involved in a workout program. We don't know.
We DO know that gays who are pushing this same-sex marriage are ignoring their sins.

Anonymous said...

Senseless moron? Obviously Joe you are smarter than Rick Warren.
Gay marriage is a farce. It must be banned.

Anonymous said...

My GOD! "Gay marriage must be banned." I never knew otherwise. However, I'll just be glad when all marriage is banned. Do you not realize that even in the great state of Alabama that the divorce rate is 15% higher than the marriage rate? But, I won't go there. Most, if not all of you, never supported Obama to begin with, BUT NOW you want to praise the minister for his Jan. 20 appearance in Washington at Obama's inauguration. I'll not debate our president elect's choice, other than to say that there were any number of ministers, priests, rabbis, etc., that would have made for a better choice. Those of us who actually supported and voted for Obama feel just slightly snubbed. All in all, though, it's better than an inauguration for a McCain! BTW, my own church, The Episcopal Church US;the Congregationalists, The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ),the Metropolitan Community Church in America, The Reformed Jewish Congregations and the Unitarians, among many others are all on record in support of gay marriage. Are you all just afraid of, "us," or maybe just afraid of yourselves and your own so-called religion?!? So, sorry, but their is just NO going back! My God is a BIG God, maybe your's is just some tiny little god who's oh so much like Santa Claus, writing down who's been naughty and nice. I'll take my God before your's anyday and if I'm right, I'll be there on judgement day to testify against all those who spent their lives judging all the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

You think you veel 'snubbed' by Obama now? Just wait until his one and only term as President is over. Probably by the 2-year mark, all of his 'supporters' are going to be looking for his replacement. It is about to get ugly.
As for judging you...nobody is judging you Bham. We are simply going along with what the Bible says. If you want to go to a church that will "tickle your fancy" and make you feel better, that is your choice. This is NOT about religion. It's about what the Bible says. A religion will take Gods word and spin it to fit a belief system.
I don't know how much more this blog can take. It seems that so many here seem to have a DIFFERENCE of opinion from that of the BLOGGER.
But hey, only in America.

Anonymous said...

I have a question.

Most people posting seem to be coming from a Christian religious background and are approaching the topics of homosexuality and gay marriage from that perspective. They differ on their interpretations of the scripture and if it refers to homosexuality as a sin.

I would like to know from people on both sides of the issue what they actually consider, in a nutshell, what is Christianity and being "Christian" and from what denominational background they are coming from.

Joe said...

Christianity is supposed to be a personal thing, taking the teachings of Jesus and applying them to one's own life. It has become a power struggle where some believers try to control the lives of others. I come from a United Methodist background with some Quaker instruction and Episcopal influence in the foreground.

Anonymous said...

You are totally wrong again Joe. Christianity is not a personal thing. At least not according to Jesus. Christianity is being Christ-like and is about TELLING OTHERS to do the same.
Ever hear of the Great Commission Joe? It is what Jesus himself instructed his followers to do. It is about TELLING OTHERS...spreading the gospel.

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. -Matthew 28:19-20

Unlike other religions, Christians do not strap bombs on their backs and blow up innocent people. True, there are those who say they are Christians but rarely act like it. But teaching others to OBEY Jesus commandments is exactly what he wanted us to do. It is what Christianity is all about. It is not a personal thing at all.

Joe said...

Live in your own world, Bill. Ignore the world around you. Timothy McVeigh, claiming to be a Christian, drove a truck load of bombs into the federal building in Oklahoma city. Eric Rudolph, a right wing Christian, blew up the Olympics, a gay bar and an women's clinic. KKK members, burning Christian crosses and claiming God's will, terrorized a whole race and others.

And we differ on Christianity. My college days are filled with Campus Crusade for Christ missions in which we stressed the personal relationship one must have with Christ. Should I share the Four Spiritual Laws with you? Then, once you have that relationship, telling others, or living in a way in which others see, is spreading the word.

Joe said...

Bill, also, "teaching others to OBEY Jesus commandments..."

OK, that I do. And Jesus made no commandment about homosexuality. In fact, never mentioned it.

Anonymous said...

Jesus never mentioned rape so it must be okay.

He never mentioned domestic violence so again, it's okay.

Christ used the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as an example of God’s wrath (Matthew 10:15, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12, and Luke 17:29). Throughout the Old Testament, prophets clearly described these cities as being notorious for the practice of homosexuality. (Genesis 18:20, Genesis 19:4-5, Isaiah 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14, Ezekiel 16:46-59). Jesus certainly knew that this was how the comparison would be understood.

Anonymous said...

Rev. Bill...give it up. You are talking to a bunch of gays who are much more concerned with their own self satisfaction then what the Bible TRULY says. Look at this:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 2 Timothy 3:1-4

Now Joe or Daniel or somebody will turn this around like they always do and say (probably in a very feminine voice) "Look, it says without love, unforgiving, slanderous, etc...." and that that is what we are being towards gays. But in fact, God loves the sinner but HATES the sin. That's the way i feel. The way my church feels. But if you try to convey that to these people, you are being mean, and rude and homophobic. WHATEVER.

Anonymous said...

The biblical references citing the practice of homosexuality in Sodom and Gomorrah only mention one reference to possible homosexuality. Most of the verses cited the promise of God's wrath and specific sins mentioned are adultery and not helping the poor when someone had more than enough for themselves.

Genesis 19 staring at verse 4 (which was cited) tells the story of Lot inviting two angels into his home. The story that unfolds sounds less to me like a tell of homosexuality but rather a tale of the attempted gang rape of angels. That, I am sure would defiantly seal the fate of the town.

I must point out that Lot offered to throw his two virgin daughters to the crowd to satisfy them before being brought back into the house by the angels. Offering your daughters up for a gang rape to me would fall under the category of something wicked and evil but Lot apparently pulled that off without any repercussions.

Now back on track. I come from a Southern Baptist background and have spent most of my adult life in non-denominational churches. I have even served some time behind the pulpit. Christianity to me is the acceptance that man is born into sin and it is through the blood of Christ and the acceptance of Christ as our savior that we were saved from those sins (trying to stay in a nutshell here). I believe that each denomination has its own beliefs about what constitutes sin. A baptist may not have the same views on alcohol consumption that a Presbyterian might have. A Presbyterian might believe that killing in a war is justified but a Shaker might not. One denomination might feel that women must cover their hair and never wear jeans while most of us do not believe the same. Heck I have even heard that if you don't raise your hands in church your are not a true Christian. Each denominational belief of what constitutes a sin evolves from one groups interpretation of scripture. My own beliefs have evolved from my readings of the scripture, and of others early Christian texts and secular texts from the period. I also do not believe that one single translation of the original texts should be relied upon.

I feel that if someone believes that drinking is a sin I will not drink around them or offer them drink. If I visit a church that expects me to cover my head I will not object even if I do not believe the same. At the core I feel that Jesus taught love and that we should help others that need help. We should also witness to his saving grace but should not force others to convert or live to our same belief system. Our love for others should serve as an example of Christ's love for others.

The two instances cited by Rev. Bill talk of two horrible acts of sin. Both of these acts are acts of violence that is perpetrated upon an unwilling individual. I would not find this to be the same as homosexuality.

Anonymous said...

Not talking about denominational differences here Brother. Anybody can take what they read and try to make it FIT their belief system. What you painted here with your words is a picture of TOLERANCE. While it is important that Christians be loving and caring, it is just as important that they not be tolerant of something that goes against scripture. And again, I do not men intolerant of PEOPLE but rather intolerant of SIN. What is happening today is that preachers are filling the pulpits and telling their congregations what they want to hear, rather than telling them the truth. And there IS ABSOLUTE TRUTH.
I continue to be amazed how the homosexual community has twisted and turned the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Verse for the day: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. -Romans 1:27

Anonymous said...

Most denominational differences revolve around differing opinions of what constitutes sin and what constitutes the proper way of worship. The examples I cited are considered sin by some Christians, and no big deal by others. They are indeed denominational differences but they are indeed differences in what some consider sin.

While I feel that there are some biblical references to homosexuality, the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah to me is one of the weaker examples of anti-homosexual scripture for the reasons I stated in my previous post. Again, the gang rang of a couple of angels would set God off for sure.

Anonymous said...

Have any of you seen that show COMING OUT on cable? I watch one episode and the guy blamed his lack of coming out on the RELIGIOUS BIGOTS. What a bunch of crap. If you are gay, and are born that way, and God made you that way, then what's the big deal? The big deal is that deep inside you KNOW that it is wrong and you are embarrassed because of it. That is understandable. Don't blame your insecurities on religion.

Joe said...

I am not going to use me time to respond to all those Bible verses, although I could. My responses use history and other writings og the time to come to conclusions, and I knwo some of you don't believe in history, just as you have already shown yourselves not to believe in medicine or science.

But let me ask this, since Kristi brought up the show "Coming Out" (which I have never seen. Why not bring up the show "Divorce Court" in which every person on the show is going against Jesus' teachings. Why is homosexuality the big "sin" you pick on? Why not liars? Oh, then you would have to go after your Republican friends (and many Democrats as well).

Trey said...

Where do you find these people, Joe? It's kinda fun being on what so clearly is the right side of an argument, but the abysmal stone-headedness of these people is mind-numbing. I mean, what are you trying to accomplish? What if you accomplished the absurd and implausible and convinced Joe not to be gay? Wouldn't that just make the world a much better place?

Please get a life. Or even better, go follow the teachings of Jesus and do something nice for someone.

Let me follow up on Joe's question with this one: If Jesus doesn't once mention homosexuality, but instead talks LOADS about charity to the poor, devaluing material things, refraining from judgement, and engaging in a life-long pursuit of becoming a more loving person, then why aren't you much more concerned about our hyper-materialistic consumerist society, or the plight of the poverty stricken, for example, than you are about gay people? Huh?

Here are a couple of possible explanations for this odd behavioral mode: As I've pointed out before, homophobia has been scientifically shown to be strongly correlated with latent homosexual desires, and I'm sure that's part of it, but I think there is a much more important mechanism at work here. As Rick Warren puts it, "My sins are perfectly acceptable. Your sins are hideous and evil." And as that Sociology Professor from UA put it (you remember her name Joe?), opposing gay rights is a "low sacrifice value". In other words, it is easy to oppose gay rights if you yourself are not gay. Doing so also has the added bonus of making one feel self-rightious and superior.

A bit of advice: if you want to cultivate your self-worth and engender favor with the almighty at the same time, you'd be much better off doing something that Jesus actually encouraged in his teachings, and knock off this ridiculous I'm-going-to-heaven-because-I-hate-gay-people nonsense.

And what about that "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" and, "judge not lest ye be judged" stuff. (That was Jesus by the way)

I keep wondering when these right-wingers are going to figure out that Christianity just isn't really a very good ideological fit for them. How profoundly ironic and bizarre that the teachings of a religion that encourages its followers to be loving, charitable, accepting, and non-judgmental has so many adherants who are so myopically focused on comdemnation, exclusion, and oppression. They'd be much better off just giving up on this whole Jesus thing and starting a, oh I don't know, the "We're a Bunch of Jerks" Church. They'd be much less encumbered by all these philosophical acrobatics.

(I really try to refrain from ad hominem attacks, but I think if you make such a spectactularly incoherent submission to the public forum, you're fair game) This Kristi person seems just profoundly dumb. In her first post in this thread, she quotes Rick Warren and then goes on the make herself a perfect manifest example of the point he was making. Amazing. (In other words, she implies that Joes sins (which Jesus doesn't mention) are "hideous" while, the fact that she herself likes diamonds, isn't very nice, covets her neighbors ox, doesn't give much money to the poor (which Jesus mentions extensively), etc, for example , are perfectly acceptable.) Perfect!

Then in her second post, she claims not to understand why it would be hard for someone to come out gay in an atmosphere of religious bigots. Hmmm... maybe becuse doing so can get you KILLED in some places?? At the very least, it's a very difficult thing to do in most families. That, of course, is a real tragedy, but what don't you get about that? In the same post she seems to be saying that God made the kid gay, in which case, of course, she would be saying that God makes people gay, it would seem. If that's not what Kristi thinks, then her post makes no sense. Read it again and think about it.

Anonymous said...

I am really taken aback by the so called Christians posting here, especially Rev. Bill. I truly hope that it is not a reverend from a church in McCalla. This type of judging and preaching is the very reason many have turned away from religion. I am a happily married woman, yes married to a man for 26 years. God is love. I do not see or feel much Christian love here today. I do not see in the Bible where it is right to be so rude and try to shove religious doctrines at someone. You have your opinion as do the rest of us. If Joe's opinions bother you, fine, either play nice or don't come back.


Anonymous said...

Anonymous, I am not a Pastor in McCalla, but in the B'ham area. And I don't see where any of the "Christians" here have been rude or trying to shove anything down anyones throat. What I do see are several people who are concerned about the way homosexuality is trying to be forced as NORMAL on our society.

Trey you did a great job of putting MANY words in Kristi's mouth.

Let me make it clear. I AGREE that there are MANY sins other than just homosexuality that need to be addressed in our society. The divorce rate is out of control. Husbands and wives sleeping with other peoples husbands and wives. Murder. Robbery. Lying. It is ALL WRONG and ALL needs to be dealt with.

The problem is when you discuss homosexuality as a sin, it strikes a nerve. People get defensive.

Trey I do consider myself to be loving, charitable, accepting, and caring. I love people. I am a Pastor. I am charged and called by God to help lead others in the right way. I cannot and will not compromise what the Bible says. If that makes you mad, I apologize, but if you will read your last post, it was MUCH more offensive and judgmental than anything anyone else has posted.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone hear Dominick Brascia today? He had a show very similar to what is going on on this blog. He had the Pastor from the Homewood Church of Christ, Rev. Marjorie Ragona - the homosexual Pastor of Bethlehem Metropolitan Community Church, and Blair Scott, State Director of American Atheists of Alabama.

While Dominick remained very neutral throughout the show, almost 100% of the callers, men and women, black and white, overwhelmingly expressed beliefs parallel to that of the Pastor from the Homewood Church of Christ. Blair Scott made a fool of himself saying he didn't even believe that the person Jesus ever existed, but then went on to try to explain how everything came into being thanks to an explosion of one small molecule.

All Rev. Ragona could do was tell almost every caller that they were misinterpreting the scripture (but yet she seemed to have it all together).

Thank goodness Alabamians have not jumped on the liberal media bandwagon just yet.

Joe said...

They live in a bubble. A bubble that encompassed the world in, oh, about 1350 AD. When the world was flat. I said before,they don't believe in science, they don't believe in medicine and they don't believe in history. Let's just be glad we have a president elect who believes in all three, and speaks in complete sentences. Oh, and who is also a Christian who believes in equality. Never mind that he might not support gay marriage...he won't block it and he will come around.

Anonymous said... forgot that he also cannot ...uh... speak a single sentence ...uh... with out ... uh ... a verbal pause, has Muslim roots in his bloodline, and still REFUSES to disclose his birth certificate.

Science, huh, Joe? Is that the science that says from NOTHING, NOBODY created EVERYTHING that we see. Yeah RIGHT. The whole BIG BANG theory is MATHMATICLLY unprovable and impossible.

What is SO FUNNY is that, once again, you guys are putting words in the mouths of those who disagree with you. Don't believe in science, medicine or history? Nobody here has said anything of the sort. And I hate to break it to you but there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that anyone is created homosexual. Yes, there are theories, like the one that said the world was flat (which was wrong) or that the moon was made of gas (which again was wrong).

Trey said...

Yeah Joe, I just feel kinda ridiculous arguing with people who are so obviously deranged and delusional, but like I said, it does have a bit of entertainment value.

Explaining science to someone like ^^ John is certainly an exercize in futility. But for the sake of anyone else who might be reading this, I'll take the opportunity to try to clear up one common misconception that arises from the common usage, versus the scientific definition, of the word, "theory".

In scientific usage, the word "theory" is used not to describe a guess or idea about something, as it is in common usage, but to describe an explanation for a phenomenon that has been tested over and over with all data pointing to the same explanation. The word is only used to express the highest degree of confidence in a particular explanation. Moreover, the term "theory" is only used if there is no scientific doubt about the explanation, and no data pointing to an alternative conclusion. It is a very high bar indeed. In that sense then, the "flat earth theory" etc were not "theories" in the scientific sense, but things that we do accept as certain fact are still called "theories" in science, for example, the theory of gravity and heliocentric theory (the one that says the earth revolves around the sun).

From Wikipedia, "...the term theory does not suggest a low confidence in the claim and many uses of the term in the sciences require just the opposite. However, in common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis."

I'm sure John just missed that day in seventh grade science class. Glad I could be of service.

And did he REALLY make fun of the way Obama speaks?? Wow. This on the heels of the most oratorically awkward and inept President in history? John must not have gotten the memo that Republicans are supposed to be saying that Obama won on his oratorical skills alone.

Trey said...

And I guess I can't resist this refuting this silly claim that "there is no evidence that anyone is created homosexual"

John, you must not be reading my comments, which you really must do if we are to have a productive discussion here. Also, as much as I love to type, I really don't enjoy repeating myself. So read the following carefully please.

When babies are born with ambiguous genitalia (you know, kinda boy parts and kinda girl parts), they can genetically test the child for its sexual preference in order to know what kind of surgical alterations, if any, should be done. Gay people have the genetic marker for orientation to their own sex. Isn't that proof that they were created that way?

And while we're on the subject of questions that you won't answer, none of you dufuses have offered an answer the one I posed in my last comment. I'll take that to mean you see the point I was making.

Anonymous said...

Trey is QUITE defensive. He need s to take a CHILL-PILL.

Joe said...

Trey, its useless I guess. I thought if they kept reading, they would learn something. All of this will be addressed soon in a new post.

Trey DOES impress. He's smart, he teaches, he works hard, he researches before he posts,More impressive than most of the commenters.

Joe said...

In your dreams!!! Trey is not gay. He's married, straight, has a baby. (That in itself does not mean anything, of course). He just is educated and believes in equality.

Trey said...

Yeah, I'm as straight as they come. Though, were I single, I wouldn't mind being at least bi-sexual... certainly would open up more possibilities.

So no, I'm not defensive. I am just an open-minded guy who has a number of gay friends who I care deeply about. I see what they go through in life and I feel it is my responsibility to undertake what meager efforts I can to work on their behalf.

So, The Man (and I'M arrogant?), if you dispute wikipedias definition of "theory", I guess my only other advice is to ask any scientist (or very good 7th grade science student) to define it for you.

Thanks for your comments Joe. It seems useless sometimes, but I'm pretty sure we're at least making a dent, as evidenced by the fact that they've gone into reactionary, incoherent attack mode. The internal conflict must be hell.

Trey said...

Jeez, I hate having to clarify what should be obvious, but dealing with this crowd, one can't be too careful.

When I said I wouldn't mind being bi-sexual, I was kinda joking, but then I realized that some of you have this bizarre notion that people can choose their sexual orientation. I have no ability to choose my sexual orientation. Nor do any of you, and you know it. So yeah, I'll stand by the statement, but at the same time, I'll strongly assert that I have absolutely no abiltiy to make it happen.

Good grief.

Anonymous said...

Too late already stuck your "foot" in your mouth.

Let's get this STRAIGHT. You are STRAIGHT...but IF you were single, you would be BI...but now wait...if you are straight then you would not choose to be with a man, right, b/c you were not BORN straight?


Anonymous said...

holy cow again....
i have heard so many times from 'christians'.."love the sinner..hate the sin". that is not in the bible anywhere. not anywhere at all. and...not that its any of my business but if christianity isnt a ' personal religion' then why i am i asked so many times.."do you take jesus as your personal savior"... you guys might be all nuts.
and before i sign my name i have read the bible from front to back in that order and not hurridly and was saved in a storefront pentacostal church ...baptised in tampa bay and spoke in tongues ..have a grandchild who is a living miracle.
we all need to focus more on what we have in common rather than what our differences are. if we do just that some things would begin to fall into place.
an interesting website even if you ignore any reference to gays is:
maybe ill start my own

Joe said...

John...grow up. Trey did not say he would be bisexual, or even "choose" to have a relationship with a man. He said he wouldn't mind being bisexual... That is like a blue eyed person saying they wouldn't mind having brown eyes, but it doesn't mean they can make their eyes turn brown. They could act like their eyes were brown, by wearing brown contacts, but that wouldn't make them "brown-eyed." Or me saying I wouldn't mind being 19 years old. I can think about the "possibilities", but that doesn't mean it can happen.

See todays blog post to learn where you are wrong, John, about science.

Lipscomb, Holy Cow 'bout sums it up. They just want to argue against science, history and medicine...and let me add "reason" to that.

Trey said...

Thanks Joe. John's lack of either seriousness or ability to process written language is becoming tedious.

Yeah, my point was that I see nothing wrong with any sexual orientation, but I have no ability to change the fact that I am completely striaght. My fault was that I assumed folks could absorb a little humor with a bit of honesty and maturity.

I will raise my daughters to know that it is okay to be gay if that's what they are. I will let them know that I will have just as much love and acceptance for them anyway. I would encourage all parents to do the same.

Drew said...

God bless you all!!