Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Larry Craig and Hypocrisy

It's always fun to hear Bob try to spin news about Republican hypocrisy. The latest instance was uber-conservative Republican Larry Craig being convicted for attempting to solicit gay airport bathroom sex.

Bob tried to spin this by saying that Democrats don't have any "standards" and therefore can't be revealed as hypocrites. Please, Bob. Don't insult our intelligence. The difference is that Democrats (and myself) typically don't try to force moral standards on the entire population using the force of law in matters that are private in nature. The Carpetbagger has a good article on this very issue.

But, just for fun, let me run down some examples of how wants the world to work contrasted with what I believe.
  1. Bob and his ilk want to use the power of the government to prevent people of the same sex from having sex. Conversely, I don't care what people do in private.
  2. Bob and his ilk want to use the power of the government to prevent same-sex couples from marrying. Conversely, I can see no reason why committed same-sex couples shouldn't enjoy the same benefits of society as opposite-sex couples do.
  3. Bob and his ilk want to use the power of the government to prevent women from having abortions or even using oral contraceptives. Conversely, I can't see why some strangers decision to end her pregnancy (or prevent it) effects me in any way, so therefore, I don't care.
  4. Bob and his ilk want to use the power of the government to tell my child that there is one God and that we, as a nation, are under Him. I think that religion, including the belief in God or gods, is a personal issue and shouldn't be mandated by the state.
I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. Bob wants to use the law to impose his morality on everyone in matters that don't personally effect him in any way. Why? Can't Bob just be happy by living by his moral code and teaching it to his children?

30 comments:

djtyg said...

That's Bob Dutko. Fearlessly defendinng the GOP.

John said...

I heard Bob when he was discussing Larry Craig. What caught my attention in his rant about calling Craig's behavior hypocrisy was this example of Bob's wisdom : if you don't want to be a hypocrite, don't have any standards. Well, yes I suppose that's one way. But how about this: if you don't want to be a hypocrite,practice what you preach. Like, if you like to have sex with a same sex partner don't preach against this behavior. If you support the sanctity of marriage, don't have an affair when you trying to impeach a president for his own extramarital dalliance ( hey Newt I'm talking to you).

Cats Pjs said...

You guys REALLY need to listen to this guy right now. He's saying that God thinks war is A-OK.

Anonymous said...

Wow-I just found this sight. Larry Craig is an idiot! Re: abortion he states:"It doesn't affect me, so I don't care!" That statement alone is why America is so messed up. If your neighbor gets murdered, I guess that would be ok, because, hey, it doesn't affect you. Or does it? You don't think the devaluing of human life affects you???? Wake up! Liberals are so illogical, they fail to make any sense. But that's ok, because I believe that what goes around comes around. Just keep on doing "whatever feels good."

Jeff said...

Anonymous,

(1) Since you brought up logic, I would argue that comparing a fetus that is completely dependent on its host (the woman) to a conscious, self-aware, living and breathing person is illogical. They are clearly not the same. Don't believe me, check your bible! According to God's law, causing a premature miscarriage results only in a fine, while killing of an adult results in the death penalty! If God truly believes that the "pre-born" are fully human persons, then God is the one who is "devaluing human life".

(2) Please do explain to me how when my wife gets an abortion, it effects you. I'd like to know.

(3) You may want to deny yourselves the pleasures of life, but I will continue to do things that "feel good", while still living by the Golden Rule. After all, I thought the American Way includes "the pursuit of happiness"?!

Anonymous said...

Could you back this up with facts? I don't care if homosexuals have sex with each other, but the following are facts
1. The U.S. Is a judeo christian nation as ruled by the U.S. Supreme court 1895.
2. The founders of this land came here for religious freedom
3. I am waiting for someone to tell me how this awesome earth with oceans, lakes, mountains an awesome atmosphere, perfect order day to nite, seasons etc.. How did these things come about? oh yes an accident. a random explosion. Who is the fool?

Anonymous said...

Jeff In regards to your pursuit of happiness. I have to reluctantly agree with you. You are 100 percent correct. That is the glory of this awesome country. I am a Christian who listens to Bob Dutko, and while I like his show, I agree with some of what he says not all. I like this site and thank you for accepting opposing viewpoints. Look forward to debating you again K anonymous.

Anonymous said...

Hey cat pjs: Have you ever actually read the BIBLE? The old Testament is full of war. God led his people thru many wars and the Bible makes it clear that governments have the right to defend themselves. k anonymous

Jeff said...

Anonymous said:

Could you back this up with facts?

I'm really not sure what you mean by "this". If you're referring to the initial points in the post regarding what Bob believes, I think its hard to take exception to any of those points. Just listen to Bob's show for long enough and you'll hear him admit each one.

[T]he following are facts
1. The U.S. Is a judeo christian nation as ruled by the U.S. Supreme court 1895.


Frankly, I'm not familiar with the case that mandates that the U.S. is a "judeo christian nation". Could you provide me the name and or a citation? I am familiar with other cases, such as Allegheny County v. ACLU where the Court stated that "the Constitution mandates that the government remain secular, rather than affiliating itself with religious beliefs or institutions, precisely in order to avoid discriminating among citizens on the basis of their religious faiths." That sounds about right to me.

2. The founders of this land came here for religious freedom

Well, yes and no. It is true that many people, e.g., some Puritans, did come to the New World to practice their religion. However, e.g., the Puritans who settled in Massachusetts didn't extend that freedom to others by promptly banning voting by non-Puritans (Congregationalists) in 1631.
Nevertheless, many more people came to the New World for economic opportunity, e.g., the Jamestown Colony.

The "Founders", i.e., signers of the Declaration of Independence and Framers of the Constitution, were mostly born in North America and didn't "come here" at all.

3. I am waiting for someone to tell me how this awesome earth with oceans, lakes, mountains an awesome atmosphere, perfect order day to nite, seasons etc.. How did these things come about? oh yes an accident. a random explosion.

I'm guessing that you're not actually "waiting" for someone to tell you how the Earth and the Universe came about. Bob "explains" it all the time: God did it in six days about 6000 years ago.

I, of course, don't subscribe to this explanation as there is simply too much evidence that discounts it.

Of course, the Big Bang isn't an "explosion", but an expansion of the Universe.

I'm not sure why you believe there is "perfect order" to day and night and the seasons. Obviously, the seasons and the amount of daylight are different depending on the point on the Earth that you are. Is there more order here in Michigan than on the Equator? The north pole? Would there be less order if our days were 23 hours and 45 minutes long instead of 24 hours? Would we even notice? I humbly suggest what you perceive as "order" is actually "familiarity".

As for the oceans, lakes, and mountains, science does a pretty good job explaining the formation of all three. Mostly, mountains result due to tectonic shifting of the Earth's plates. You can see mountains being formed in Hawaii due to the flow of lava.

Who is the fool?

Is this a trick question? It's Bob.

Anonymous said...

Cat pjs God lead the israelites in battle/war all thru the Old Testament. he commanded The amelikites to be wiped out by king Saul and his army. God empowered Samson to kill thousands of phillistines, God allowed the red sea to swallow up the egyptian army in the exodus, The israelites sang about king David Saul killed his thousands but David his 10,000s. Stop trying to make God a wimp.

Anonymous said...

Jeff: I don't claim to be a scientist. In fact I'm not even that smart. But, when I refer to perfect order I am referring to Earth compared to other non inhabitable planets. In my opinion, the earth is very orderly. I don't think it matters 23 hour day or 24. I think you said science backs up your argument against intelligent design. Please share that so called evidence with me. I say the God who made the heavens and the earth was mr. Science. As for young earth vs old, I have no clue.

Anonymous said...

The reason gay marriage should be illegal is that homosexuality is considered an "abomination" in the eyes of God. A man putting it up another guys butt is gross. I mean if you really think about the mess afterwards. I don't care what anybody does, but to condone this gross practice and compare it to the sanctity of marriage is just wrong. To call this gross practice marriage would be just sickening.Gay and lesbian behavior is just plain wrong. These confused people should check themselves out after a shower. They might figure out where things are supposed to fit.

Jeff said...

I think you said science backs up your argument against intelligent design. Please share that so called evidence with me.

I never said anything about "intelligent design". How can you possibly think I did? I simply stated that there is too much evidence to discount that the Earth and the Universe were only 6000 years old.

As for the theory of "intelligent design", I can tell you this. It is not science.

[W]hen I refer to perfect order I am referring to Earth compared to other non inhabitable planets. In my opinion, the earth is very orderly.

I see where you're coming from. But why did God make those other (inhabitable) planets?

As for young earth vs old, I have no clue.

Well, I know. It's old. Real old.

The reason gay marriage should be illegal is that homosexuality is considered an "abomination" in the eyes of God. A man putting it up another guys butt is gross. I mean if you really think about the mess afterwards. I don't care what anybody does, but to condone this gross practice and compare it to the sanctity of marriage is just wrong. To call this gross practice marriage would be just sickening.Gay and lesbian behavior is just plain wrong.

So you don't think same sex couples who love one another and are committed should be able to legally marry because you find gay sex "icky" and you think God doesn't like it either? I can see that logic and reason aren't going to work with you. Oh wait, you already told me that when you stated that you weren't smart... Why do I bother?

Anonymous said...

" So you don't think two gay people who love each other should be able to marry? NO. I don't You think gay sex is icky. No I believe I said it was gross. Why do homosexuals desire legitimacy in a world where we know it is not legitimate.You said I think God doesn't like gay sex. 1 corinthians 6:9 Makes it clear God does hate homosexuality as does deuteronomy 23:17, 1 kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46 etc. etc. I do NOT HATE homosexuals. Homosexuality is a sin just as committing adultery for straight people is a sin. But that does not justify gay marriage. You said I could not be reasoned with. That is not true I am reasonable but on this issue I am right, and yes God makes it clear in his word that I am right."In God we trust" It's on our money should be in our hearts.

djtyg said...

Anonymous, telling the government they need to intervene to make sure that churches do the right thing in terms of marriage shows a severe lack of faith.

If gay people were allowed to get married, I wouldn't worry because I trust my church to do what's required in our faith.

Jeff said...

Anonymous,

You're more than welcome to believe that God hates gays and that sodomy is a sin, etc. But as DJ alluded to, it is sad that you need to use the power of the government to enforce your religious beliefs. But this is precisely what you (and Dutko) want to do.

It wasn't very long ago in this country that most states made it illegal for interracial couples to marry. Of course, the will of "God" was used as an excuse to continue these anti-miscegenation laws. The Supreme Court wisely struck down the last of such provisions in 1967.

I prefer to use logic and reason in my decision making. Just as there is no logical reason to prevent interracial marriage, there is no logical reason to prevent same-sex couples from marrying.

I think that you (and Dutko) share the same fear: that if same-sex couples were allowed to marry, the general public would soon realize that it does not effect them in anyway. No churches would be forced to sanctify same-sex marriages. But more importantly, the sky will not rain fire and blood and the World will not end.

You said, "'In God we trust' It's on our money should be in our hearts." That sounds like a fine plan...for you. Go ahead and put it in your heart but take it off our money. After all, the phrase didn't appear on any U.S. currency until 1864, almost a hundred years after the American Revolution. Apparently, the Founders didn't find it necessary.

kdog said...

Comparing interracial marriage and the struggle for equality because of the skin color of a race of people with gay marriage is ridiculous. It is like comparing apples and oranges. interracial marriage was still between a man/ woman not man/man, woman/woman. There is no comparison between interracial marriage and deviant sexual behavior. You said the phrase "In God we trust" should come off of our money. the overwhelming majority of Americans claim to be Christians in every nationwide poll. Why then should this phrase come off of our money? Maybe it shouldn't. I showed you scriptures that proved God detests homosexuality. Why did you not rebutt these scriptures? You said I say God doesn't like homosexuality, I backed it up with scripture after scripture. You said I share the fear that gay marriage would not be harmful. I have a right as an American to say that homosexual marriage is wrong because the Bible says it is wrong. Homosexuality is deviant behavior. I am not afraid of homosexual marriage, I just believe it is wrong. I am not alone. Homosexuality, pedophilia, and all other deviant sexual behavior is wrong and disgusting.

Jeff said...

There is no comparison between interracial marriage and deviant sexual behavior.

Sure there is, because not so long ago interracial sex and marriage was deviant behavior. In fact, I would argue that many people still feel the same way.

I showed you scriptures that proved God detests homosexuality. Why did you not rebutt (sic) these scriptures? You said I say God doesn't like homosexuality, I backed it up with scripture after scripture.

Yes, yes, we get it. You think that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. You can quote the Bible all day and night until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't "prove" anything! The Bible is a collection of stories that have been transcribed, translated, censored, altered, transcribed again, and translated over and over such that I can't understand how anyone who picks up a copy of the Bible today can think that they're reading God's absolute word. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of good stuff in the Bible, but to believe it is without fault is foolishness.

Therefore, I'm not going to attempt to rebut the teachings of your Holy Book, because I don't care what it says. The Bible is simply not the basis for the laws in the United States. As I've said before, my belief system is based on reason and logic, not a 2000 year old collection of stories.

I have a right as an American to say that homosexual marriage is wrong because the Bible says it is wrong.

Who ever said that you didn't? In fact, I've generously permitted you and others to comment on this blog to make such inane statements.

But why don't you try this as a challenge. Make a reasoned, rational argument against same-sex marriage without basing it on God's Law or the Bible.

You said the phrase "In God we trust" should come off of our money. the overwhelming majority of Americans claim to be Christians in every nationwide poll. Why then should this phrase come off of our money? Maybe it shouldn't.

First, the religious preference of Americans is unrelated to whether usage of "In God We Trust" is an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment. I contend that it is unconstitutional, because it is governmental endorsement of a deity, and thus endorsement of a religion.

Second, doesn't it seem a little strange to you that money is used to deliver this phrase? Would Jesus, who denounced the rich and the moneychangers, approved of honoring him on money? Theodore Roosevelt and countless others felt that it was improper to use the phrase on money.

Third, the phrase isn't true. Every American does not believe in God. Therefore, "we" do not trust in God.

Finally, my question to you is why do you need "In God We Trust" on the money? Why do you need the power of the government to promote God and your religious message?

kdog said...

I think you are conflicted: You insult the bible calling it a book of stories, censored rewritten, then you talk about Jesus what he would do etc. Jesus is the word. Jesus is the word made flesh. I would ask you how many science journals have been written rewritten about evolution? Which scientist got it right? How can you possibly know which science journal is correct? You won't attempt to rebut the teachings of my holy book because you can't. You challenged me to make a sane reasonable argument against gay marriage. Ok, the majority of Americans in every poll taken are Christian. As you know in the bible homosexuality is called an abomination, detestable. So if the majority of people are Christian, and Christians view homosexuality as deviant, why would gay marriage be legal? Why should the masses change for the unsilent minority of deviants such as gays pedophiles, etc. As Americans gays already have the right to live together. I work for Ford Motor Company and my company offers same sex insurance. But to go all the way into gay marriage endorses deviant behavior. That would basically say we the people accept deviant behavior. Speaking of the people, should we have the phrase "in God we trust"on our money? You said it is funny money is used to deliver this phrase. Jesus did dennounce the money changers for conducting secular business in the church. But Jesus never dennounced the rich. He only dennounced putting money before God. When asked about paying taxes to Rome Jesus said, "render unto Caesar what is Caesars, and render unto God what is Gods". Never did Jesus dennounce the rich. Jesus was buried in the tomb of Joseph of arimathea a rich man. So in America a Christian nation it is appropriate to have "In God we trust" on our money. Now about your claim that the phrase on our money is unconstitutional, aren't we endowed by our "CREATOR" with certain unalienable rights? Isn't the constitution putting one God above all others? Would you consider the constitution unconstitutional? if God didn't endow us with these rights, then who did? Darwin? I think not. In Darwin we trust? no. So if gay marriage were legal what about people marrying animals 10 people getting married etc. I think not..

Jeff said...

I think not.

That much is for sure.

kdog said...

That's it Jeff? That is your comeback? You respond with an immature I know you are but what am I? I thought you used logic and reason not petty insults. When someone is losing a debate they often resort to childish insults.

Jeff said...

Sorry kdog, it was late and I couldn't believe all the ridiculous errors you made in your "reasoning". Let's begin.

[T]he majority of Americans in every poll taken are Christian. As you know in the bible homosexuality is called an abomination, detestable. So if the majority of people are Christian, and Christians view homosexuality as deviant, why would gay marriage be legal? Why should the masses change for the unsilent minority of deviants such as gays pedophiles, etc.

Let's first look at all your mistaken assumptions. (1) When you say that the majority of Americans identify themselves as Christian. That may be true. However, it does not mean that these self-identified Christians have a uniform belief system, particularly when it comes to same-sex marriage. In fact, a majority of Americans believe that same-sex couples should be able to marry or form civil unions. (2) You are incorrect in your assumption that the United States is a strict "majority-rules" society. In fact, the U.S. and most Western nations, are referred to as "liberal democracies". In a liberal democracy, the government protects the civil rights of the individual, even if they aren't the view of the majority.

Because these two assumptions are incorrect, your "argument" is false. You have failed to prove anything. Besides, my challenge was for you to make a rational argument without using God or the Bible, and you mentioned the Bible for petes sake! Please play by the rules.

Furthermore, your attempt to equate gays and pedophiles is dishonest. Sure, you may consider them both "deviant" if you like, just like many people consider interracial marriage to be "deviant", but they are quite different. Consentual sex among adults, no matter what the gender of the participants, does not involve a victim. Pedophilia does involve a victim, as the child typically doesn't consent or cannot make a rational consent due to his or her age.

You asked why the the masses should change for a minority. First, what "change" would you have to make if same-sex couples were allowed to marry? None. You could still marry an opposite-sex couple or not marry at all. Second, using your logic, slavery could still be in force, because, after all, blacks are merely a minority.

Jeff said...

But Jesus never dennounced [sic] the rich. ... Never did Jesus dennounce [sic] the rich.

Well, I'm no Bible expert. Like I've said before, I don't really care what the Bible says, because I believe logic and reason are the best methods for determining what is right and what is wrong. But when I read this passage, it sounds like Jesus is saying that rich men aren't going to get into heaven unless they give away all their money and possessions.

Jeff said...

So in America a Christian nation it is appropriate to have "In God we trust" on our money. Now about your claim that the phrase on our money is unconstitutional, aren't we endowed by our "CREATOR" with certain unalienable rights? Isn't the constitution putting one God above all others? Would you consider the constitution unconstitutional?

First, the United States is not a "Christian Nation". Even Dutko doesn't make this ridiculous assertion. (Instead, Bob typically attempts to "prove" the U.S. has a "Christian Heritage)". The Constitution of the United States is almost completely silent when it comes to God. The words "God", "Jesus", "Christ", "Jehova", and "Creator" are nowhere to be found in the Constitution. The only slightest reference is in the dating of the document as "the year of our Lord". However, I would argue that such a reference was merely a conventional formality.

You're probably confusing the Constitution with the Declaration of Independance, which are two seperate documents. The Consitution provides the legal framework for our government. The Declaration has absolutely no force of law. Interestingly, the Declaration was written primarily by Thomas Jefferson, who was a Deist and not a Christian who believed in the divinity of Jesus. It's also interesting that after declaring that all men had inalienable rights to life and liberty, the white, property owners who signed the Declaration proceeded to allow the enslavement of black men for years.

if God didn't endow us with these rights, then who did? Darwin? I think not. In Darwin we trust? no.

I'm sure we could have a discussion on the origin of rights, but I'd rather not. This whole discussion with you isn't very englightening to me and I'm pretty confident you won't add much to such a conversation.

Jeff said...

I would ask you how many science journals have been written rewritten about evolution? Which scientist got it right? How can you possibly know which science journal is correct?

You seem to have developed a strange idea that I have somehow advocated that science is always right about everything and is never wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth. Science frequently makes mistakes. Scientific theories are always challenged. These challenges can lead to a strengthening or weakening of the theory, based on the evidence.

You see, science is not a religion like Christianity. Scientists don't carry around Holy Book of absolute truths that can't be violated. For example, Newton's Laws of Motion were thought for years and years to be universally applicable to all particles at all speeds. But further research, experiments, and discovery have shown that these laws were not universally applicable, especially with subatomic particles are objects traveling at very high speeds.

So to answer your question, we never know what journal (or scientific article) is "correct" as opposed to "incorrect" just by reading it. Only by experimentation, observation, and re-experimentation, reanalyzing, etc. can we continue to to use science to discover more about the nature of the universe.

Nonetheless, I find it humorous that you're challenging science on an Internet-based blog. If not for the science regarding the laws of electricity, magentism, and chemistry, you wouldn't even have this forum to express your nonsensical views.

kdog said...

Jeff: That was a somewhat better response thank you. We the people are not a "liberal democracy, we are a republic. Yes you are correct, I did mix up the constitution with the declaration of independence. My bad. Jesus told one man who was really wealthy to give away all that he had and to follow him. The reason for that was the man was putting his wealth above his God. How astute for someone who claims to not care about the Bible. Why would the year of our Lord be a formality? what does that mean? So you would say they didn't really mean it? Not very logical. Why would the writers of the declaration of independence put something in the document that they didn't mean? If most of the people were not CHRISTIANS, WHY WOULD THE "YEAR OF OUR LORD BE A CONVENTIONAL FORMALITY? I am astounded that you continue to degrade a race of people by comparing deviant behaviors like homosexuality/ pedophilia with interracial marriage. It is natural for people to meet fall in love, marry and have children as a result of their love making. It is not natural for two men to meet and one guy to cram it up the other guys butt. Or for two women for that matter, which is why gay sex cannot produce children. Think about it even if we did evolve which is an absurd thought, naturally if you just pay attention you can see which combination works. Wouldn't your idea of "natural selection" have wiped out homosexual behavior since The gay way results in the wiping out of the human race. You mentioned slavery which points to the flawed nature of mankind. I see your point about the hypocrisy of the founding fathers. But to say that the majority of America hasn't always been Christian is ludicrous. You claim that the majority of Americans support gay marriage, Why then did so many states vote to define marriage as being between a man and a woman? You said science is not a religion like christianity. I say the idea of evolution is a religion. You have a belief, you have no evidence to support that belief which is why it is known as the theory of evolution, you believe one day science will provide answers to prove your theory. Christians have a belief.We believe the Bible as well as the life, death, and ressurection of Jesus as well as the formation of his church prove our belief. We believe Jesus will return and prove our belief. We have two religions. Creation/evolution. I believe God knows everything about science. I know science journals change frequently, but the Bible stays the same. The dead sea scrolls found in 1947 by a sheppard boy had 13 words different than the account of the book of Isiah in the modern bible. Words like will will not grammatical differences. The point my Holy Book as you call it is infallible. I would like to know where you got the idea that I don't like science? I love science and modern technology. I have no problem with science that is absurd.You have still kind of side stepped my questions. I asked you since America is mostly made up of Christians, and Christians view homosexuality as detestable, gross, and wrong, why should homosexual marriage be legal? When given the chance most states are voting to ban same sex marriage. You attempt to muddy the waters by saying I would support slavery. I would never support slavery. I believe we are made in the image and likeness of God, and we are not merely animals. I know I misquoted it but I am endowed by my creator with unalienable rights.

kdog said...

Meant to write: Why would the writers of the constitution include the "Year of our Lord. Just made a typing error. Many kids in the room being loud. Sorry.You wrote: The bible is not the basis for the laws in the United States. Wrong.
1. Bankruptcy laws hurting our credit for 7 years. In Biblical times if a Jew owed another Jew money, and couldn't pay he could be enslaved to the one he owed untill the debt was paid. But, on the 7th year the debt was wiped free. 2. Thou shall not kill/murder laws
3. Thou shalt not steal/theft laws
4. Thou shalt not bear false witness/ perjury laws
5. thou shalt not commit adultery/ basis for divorce before no fault laws.
So you see we do get most of our laws from the bible.

Jeff said...

kdog,

This will be my last comment to you. You can reply all you want, but I'm all done. Why? Because it appears that you are generally incurious. My guess is you haven't clicked through on any of the links I have provided. Nor does it appear that you have done any research in your replies. You're just typing out the standard Fundamentalist Christian line. I already know the line. I don't need to hear it from you.

We the people are not a "liberal democracy, we are a republic.

No, the United States is both. I know your 8th grade teacher taught you that the U.S. is a republic and not a pure democracy. But I'm not talking about a pure democracy here. If you would have followed the link I provided, you would see that a liberal democracy is defined as “a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities.”

How astute for someone who claims to not care about the Bible.

Just because I don't care about the Bible does not mean I don't have knowledge of it and its teachings. That's because I like to learn things. You should try it.

Why would the year of our Lord be a formality? what does that mean?

It means it was used to differentiate the “A.D.” dating system from other dating systems. In fact, two dating systems are listed on the Constitution, “of our Lord” and “the Independence of the United States”. Besides, this portion of the document was probably added by the caligrapher who was preparing it for signature by the delegates. Do you really think that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention would spend time debating and/or voting on how to write the date out on the final document? I don't. If the delegates really wanted to make mention of God or establish a national religion, why didn't they do so in the main body of the document?

So you would say they didn't really mean it? Not very logical.

Who are “they”? The delegates? The secretary of the convention? The caligrapher? But like I said, my guess is that the delegates probably didn't agree or vote on the form of the date at all, because they had more important things to worry about, like determining what powers the federal government should have and balancing these powers between the three branches.

If most of the people were not CHRISTIANS, WHY WOULD THE "YEAR OF OUR LORD BE A CONVENTIONAL FORMALITY?

Why are you SCREAMING? Why do you repeat yourself so much?

Nevertheless, I never said that all the people were not Christians. I'm sure many of them were! But that doesn't mean they were establishing a “Christian Nation”. On the contrary, the Constitution, as originally passed, forbids the use of a religious test for public office.

I am astounded that you continue to degrade a race of people by comparing deviant behaviors like homosexuality/ pedophilia with interracial marriage.

I am astounded that you accuse me of degrading a race of people. I did no such thing. To say that I did is a lie.

You keep ignoring the fact that not so long ago, people did believe that interracial marriage was deviant behavior. The trial judge in the Loving v. Virginia case stated, "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

It is natural for people to meet fall in love, marry and have children as a result of their love making. It is not natural for two men to meet and one guy to cram it up the other guys butt.

You use quite a bit of sexual imagery when talking about sodomy. Why is that? Did you know that men and women can enjoy sodomy as well? Is oral and anal sex between men and women OK with you and God? Because, I'll tell you what, my wife and I enjoy the heck out of it!

And who made your the arbiter of what is “natural” and what is “unnatural”? Just because a sexual practice doesn't result in reproduction doesn't make it “unnatural”.

Or for two women for that matter, which is why gay sex cannot produce children

Oral and anal sex, no matter what the gender of the participants, cannot produce children. Neither does masturbation. So I can't do any of these? Are you going to make this a law? Are the cops going to bust in my house when I'm masturbating? What a waste of police resources.

Think about it even if we did evolve which is an absurd thought, naturally if you just pay attention you can see which combination works. Wouldn't your idea of "natural selection" have wiped out homosexual behavior since The gay way results in the wiping out of the human race.

The more you write, the more incoherent you get.

Again you make false (and ridiculous) assumptions in your so-called arguments. Why do you assume that gay men and lesbian women are exclusively gay or lesbian? Why do you assume that the children of straight men and women are also straight?

[T]o say that the majority of America hasn't always been Christian is ludicrous.

I never said it wasn't. Why do you continue to lie about what I said? Anybody can simply review my previous posts. I never said that the majority of American's didn't self identify as Christian. But you have to realize that not everybody who says they're a Christian has the same beliefs as you.

You claim that the majority of Americans support gay marriage,

No. I didn't say that. I said the majority of Americans support either same-sex marriage or same-sex civil unions. But I didn't just “claim” it. I backed it up with polling data. Did you bother to read the polling data? I'm not making this shit up!

Why then did so many states vote to define marriage as being between a man and a woman?

Well, I'm going to guess it's because the people who supported such laws ran extremely effective “get out the vote” campaigns to make sure bigots like you got to the polls. But that's just a guess.

You said science is not a religion like christianity. I say the idea of evolution is a religion.

Did you notice who you talked about “science” in the first sentence and “evolution” in the second? Let me ask you these rhetorical questions. Is chemistry a religion? Is astronomy (not astrology) a religion? Is physics a religion? Is geology a religion? Why don't anti-evolution folks like yourself ever compare these scientific disciplines to a religion? When I turn on the lights, they don't come on because I believe they will come on. They come on because I close a switch which allows electrons to flow between the atoms of the metal and through the light bulb. The physics of this process have been discovered and refined over the last 100+ years. If it only took faith, there would never be blackouts.

You have a belief, you have no evidence to support that belief which is why it is known as the theory of evolution, you believe one day science will provide answers to prove your theory.

Nonsense. Here is a handy guide to evidence for evolution. Here's some more. You can find much more on the Internet. Try Googling “evolution evidence”. Or why not go to the library, get a book on the subject, and read it?

Christians have a belief. We believe the Bible as well as the life, death, and ressurection of Jesus as well as the formation of his church prove our belief. We believe Jesus will return and prove our belief. We have two religions. Creation/evolution. I believe God knows everything about science.

Fine. Whatever.

I know science journals change frequently, but the Bible stays the same.

Science journals don't change frequently. Scientific knowledge changes. Nobody goes and scrubs old science journals that have incorrect information. Darwin himself was wrong on several points. But you can still buy and read his unedited works.

The dead sea scrolls found in 1947 by a sheppard boy had 13 words different than the account of the book of Isiah in the modern bible. Words like will will not grammatical differences. The point my Holy Book as you call it is infallible.

The books of the New Testament were written dozens of years after the death of Jesus. Scribes copied, recopied, and translated these texts. Do you honestly believe errors could not and did not occur? I don't have the time to point out the numerous inconsistencies in the Bible. Again, try Google.

I would like to know where you got the idea that I don't like science?

Well, earlier you said that evolution was a religion and that it was wrong. Evolution is science. That's where I got the idea.

You have still kind of side stepped my questions. I asked you since America is mostly made up of Christians, and Christians view homosexuality as detestable, gross, and wrong, why should homosexual marriage be legal?

No, I have answered your questions directly as possible. In fact, I've answered this question several times. I've “answered” this question by pointing out that the premise is flawed. All Christians do not have the same opinion of “homosexuality” as you. You keep inferring that all Christians view “homosexuality” as “detestable, gross, and wrong”. But you never prove it. You just say it over and over. Repetition does not make it true.

When given the chance most states are voting to ban same sex marriage. You attempt to muddy the waters by saying I would support slavery. I would never support slavery.

I was not attempting to “muddy the waters”. I was merely pointing out your assertion that “the majority should always rule” is wrong. After all, the majority of people (the white ones at least) in the Confederacy believed that slavery was A-OK. The majority isn't always correct or ethical.

I believe we are made in the image and likeness of God, and we are not merely animals. I know I misquoted it but I am endowed by my creator with unalienable rights.

Fine.

1. Bankruptcy laws hurting our credit for 7 years. In Biblical times if a Jew owed another Jew money, and couldn't pay he could be enslaved to the one he owed untill the debt was paid. But, on the 7th year the debt was wiped free. 2. Thou shall not kill/murder laws
3. Thou shalt not steal/theft laws
4. Thou shalt not bear false witness/ perjury laws
5. thou shalt not commit adultery/ basis for divorce before no fault laws.
So you see we do get most of our laws from the bible.


Here is the United States Code which is a compilation of the laws of the U.S. Here are the Michigan Compiled Laws. There are thousands upon thousands of laws listed. You've cited five laws. These five laws are not “most" of our laws. Did our Tort laws (negligence, etc.) come from the Bible? How about our laws of Contract? Speed Limits? The law of Copyright?

Nevertheless, merely comparing modern laws to biblical laws does not “prove” that the modern laws are based on the biblical laws. These basic laws may have developed independently from religion. For example, murder and theft are illegal in China, Japan, and India and these countries did not develop under Judaism or Christianity. Perhaps people just make murder and theft illegal without having God to tell them to do so.

As to item 1, debt bondage is not practiced in the U.S. As to item 4, God prohibits lying everywhere, not just when you're testifying in court. Dutko lies all the time and he's not in jail. As to item 5, no U.S. jurisdiction makes adultery illegal.


Well, I'm done with this little opus. I truly hope that you'll come to understand that not all people think like you and that you have no right to use the force of law to impose your way of thinking on others. So long.

kdog said...

Well as for saying adultery was illegal, I didn't say it was. I merely said it was the basis for divorce before "no fault divorce". I am sorry I didn't cite every law I didn't think anybody would want to read them. Are we to believe the founding fathers passed laws after the Chinese culture? That is ridiculous. Oh, I'm sure they had all gone to India and Japan to find out how to run our country. Nobody believes that garbage. Our laws came from the 10 commandments found in Exodus 20. No matter how much that may make you cringe. You bring up the speed limit which is funny I have to give you that. Well you say you are done, and you hope I will come to think not everybody thinks like me. I don't have the right to use the force of law to back up my beliefs. Well believe me every poll that comes out nationwide, as well as the states voting to define marriage as being between A MAN AND A WOMAN proves that the majority of Americans do think like I do. I guess it's ok to pass gay marriage, soften pedophilia laws, and in any other way use the force of law to perpetuate your beliefs right? Who is being selfish? Next time you are in a public bathroom do us a favor, DON'T TAP TWO TIMES.. HA HA

kdog said...

God isn't God because I believe in him. He is God because he is God. In lamely attempting to say the founding fathers got their laws from Japan,China, India, you indicate you are either desperate to prove a point or dumb. Nobody believes that load of crap. Also, the Bible declares "The marriage bed is not defiled" Anal sex and oral sex are fine between husband and wife. I use imagery because I find it so disgusting two dudes together. Evolution is a religion. That doesn't mean I am anti science, it just means I am anti- evolution. You can point to google or any other bull crap website you want, that doesn't change the fact that it's called the theory of evolution. And most people know it's b.s. Just so you know anybody who claims it's ok to be homosexual is no Christian. Have you read 1Corinthians 6:9? Homosexuals will not be allowed in the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven is not for non christians. So to say not all christians think homosexuality is wrong is crap. I notice when faced with facts you can't just push aside, you resort to smug little insults. This changes nothing. Bob Dutko runs from a debate, and youn hate him for it. Now you are running from this debate. Can anyone say hypocrisy?