The Power Of Prayer

Newsweek Web Exclusive

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 11:38:10 AM

    HEY ! HORRIBLE B.

    YOU SAID EARLIER YOUR WIFE CALLS YOU A HORRIBLE BASTARD.

    IS YOUR WIFE A WOMAN OR A MAN ?

    THE GAY LIFE TAKES A BEATING; BECAUSE, OF VILE EXTREMIST GAYS FLAUNTING THEIR OBSESSIONS.

    CONSTITUTION IS BEING TWISTED BY GAYS.

    THE WHOLE IDEA OF GAY MARRIAGE IS A PRETEND SITUATION.

    GAYS WANTING TO BE WHAT THEY ARE NOT.

    THE AMERICAN PUBLIC CAN THANK GAYS FOR THE HEALTH PROBLEM OF AIDS.

    THE GAY LIFE STYLE CAN BE AS PERVERTED AS THOSE IN THE STRAIGHT LIFE STYLE; TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT.

    GAY RIGHTS DO NOT EXIST; EXCEPT, IN PERVERTED MINDS.

    TWO MEN LIVING TOGETHER AS FRIENDS ---- SO WHAT.

    TWO MEN LIVING TOGETHER IN A PRETEND MARRIAGE -------- STUPID.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:30:22 PM

      "THE AMERICAN PUBLIC CAN THANK GAYS FOR THE HEALTH PROBLEM OF AIDS."

      Well, now. Is marriage more likely to speed up or slow down the spread of AIDS?

      • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 4:49:03 PM

        WE CAN THANK GAYS FOR AIDS.

        • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 5:02:03 PM

          That is a completely absurd comment, the workk of one whose mind is obviously racked by dementia.

          AIDS was not created by gays.

          • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 6:08:34 PM

            CREATED BY GAYS NO !

            SPREAD BY GAYS YES !

            • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/29/2008 11:28:41 AM

              Answer the question.

            • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/24/2008 6:57:59 AM

              So what.

              It is now spread by everyone.

              Also If you want to be taken seriously stop using all caps. Only completel fools use all caps. It is shouting onthe web and no one takes shouters seriuously (not that anything you have said could be taken seriously by intelligent people.)

              • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/24/2008 10:29:30 AM

                ONLY " COMPLETEL " FOOLS USE ALL CAPS.

                NO ONE TAKES SHOUTERS " SERIUOUSLY.....

                YOU ACCUSE ME OF NOT BEING INTELLIGENT ?

                IF I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SPELL A WORD OR I QUESTION ITS SPELLING------- I USE A DICTIONARY.

                GEE ! WHAT AN INTELLIGENT THING TO DO.

                • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/29/2008 8:45:04 AM

                  "YOU ACCUSE ME OF NOT BEING INTELLIGENT ?"

                  I accuse you of being nuttier than a Christmas cake.

                • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/24/2008 12:27:16 PM

                  Typos happen when one is writing on a blog or board. If I catch my typo, I correct it, but I still never use all caps. BIG Difference.

                  Of course in general your posts are pretty mindless and idiotic so all caps is just one more example of your complete idiocy.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:28:56 PM

      "IS YOUR WIFE A WOMAN OR A MAN ?"

      Yes.

      "THE GAY LIFE TAKES A BEATING; BECAUSE, OF VILE EXTREMIST GAYS FLAUNTING THEIR OBSESSIONS."

      No, because pinheads and bigots insist on interfering with their private lives.

      "CONSTITUTION IS BEING TWISTED BY GAYS."

      Just because your constitution says things you don't like, does not mean it is being twisted. What's twisted is people like yourself who believe they have the duty to deny rights to law-abiding citizens of your nation.

      • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 4:53:38 PM

        I BELIEVE YOUR "YES" MEANS YOUR MATE IS EITHER AN HERMARHRODITE OR A TWISTED PRETENDER.

        • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/29/2008 8:45:41 AM

          "I BELIEVE YOUR "YES" MEANS YOUR MATE IS EITHER AN HERMARHRODITE OR A TWISTED PRETENDER."

          What you believe is, as always, irrevelant.

  • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/24/2008 10:54:07 AM

    A GAY MAN INFECTED WITH AIDS VIRUS INTRODUCED THE GAY DISEASE TO ALL HIS LOVERS.

    THOSE LOVERS SPREAD IT TO THEIR LOVERS.

    SO FORTH AND SO ON.

    WOMEN WERE VICTIMIZED, AND CHILDREN WERE INFECTED TOO.

    HOW DO YOU SPELL SELF CENTERED ACTS BY RADICAL PEOPLE --------- HOMO SEXUAL.

    THIS IS NOT A CONDEMNATION OF GAYS IN GENERAL.

    I REGRET THAT AIDS EXISTS ---------- REALLY !

    THE SEX THING-------------- GOOD IN A REAL MARRIAGE, BAD IN A PRETEND MARRIAGE.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/29/2008 8:42:47 AM

      "A GAY MAN INFECTED WITH AIDS VIRUS INTRODUCED THE GAY DISEASE TO ALL HIS LOVERS."

      Is Gay marriage likely to speed that up, or slow it down?

  • Posted By: Richard Z @ 12/28/2008 3:44:41 AM

    As a gay Latino Roman Catholic and a centrist Democrat, I am disappointed at the selection or Rev. Rick Warren to provide the invocation. But, as an American I applaud the selection of the minster by President Elect Barack Obama. Our world is experiencing tremendous challenges, our economy is in peril and our nation will have an uphill struggle. But, we as a nation elected Senator Barack Obama to lead us during this difficult time. i know that President Elect Obama is pro gay and most importantly I know that he truly wants to bring this nation together. He will be a great president for all of America like he promised. But we have to give him a chance.There is enough room at the table. I also believe that he will overturn the Don't; ask Don't tell policy because he committed to this.

    As a Latino, I never remember the leadership complaining greatly about Rev Oral Roberts for his position on Immigrant Rights.or Asian Americans or Native Americans complaining to that degree.

    Lets give him a chance, to improve the economy, protect our nation and to keep all of the promises he committed to...as one nation....

    Richard Z

  • Posted By: thinkotsdbox @ 12/27/2008 6:25:07 PM

    "civil unions" are not "Gay marriage" see CT Supreme Court ruling.. would it win a vote?

    http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethinkhttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

  • Posted By: thinkotsdbox @ 12/27/2008 6:17:21 PM

    http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    PRESS OBJECTIVITY is A MYTH. Google the reports like I did.

    Newsweak = Newspeak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

  • Posted By: JohnWB @ 12/26/2008 5:31:25 PM

    'Scuse me, but I don't think there should be an invocation at all. It's another virtual "only in the USA".

  • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/25/2008 9:16:46 AM

    MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL AND TO ALL HAVE A GOOD DAY --------- REALLY !

  • Posted By: skeetchamp @ 12/24/2008 11:23:24 PM

    Another hate-monger attaches himself to the President-Elect. Why can't BHO pick a good pastor? Well, at least this one isn't his pastor, and will never be, but still. BHO should put out a list of names of possible pastors and let the public vet them for him for a few months before deciding. Clergymen are his Kryptonite,.

  • Posted By: charlott234 @ 12/24/2008 2:59:15 PM

    only animals only purpose is to procreate, human beings are supposed to think.

  • Posted By: charlott234 @ 12/24/2008 2:57:54 PM

    only anmals purpose of life is to preocreate, human beings are supposed to think.

  • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 7:23:36 PM

    HARLEY IS WRONG !

    NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT WOMENS RIGHTS OR BLACKS BEING EQUAL; IF THAT WAS THE CASE , I WOULD BE FIGHTING FOR THEM ( HAVINGS DAUGHTERS AND A WIFE ) AND BLACK FRIENDS.

    WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED IS GAY MARRIAGE --- THE PRETEND MARRIAGE.

    GAYS HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE PERVERTS.

    YES ! THERE ARE GAY JUDGES AND GAY LEGISLATIVES THAT FIGHT FOR GAY RIGHTS----

    THE GAY LIFE STYLE CAN BE ALMOST THAT OF FRIENDS LIVING TOGETHER ; HOWEVER, THE RADICAL ELEMENT WANTS MORE ------- ALWAYS MORE !

    GAYS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME SHAME SHARED BY STRAIGHT PEOPLE.

    PEDOPHILES CAN BE ONE ELEMENT OF BOTH GROUPS ( GAY AND STRAIGHT ).

    WHEN HARLEY TALKS OF IGNORANCE, HE ATTACKS THOSE WITH A DIFFERENT VIEW ----- VERY INTOLERANT MINDSET.

    HOMOPHOBIC PERHAPS ? IGNORANT I DOUBT IT.

    SO HARLEY AND FRIENDS ATTACK OTHERS AS IGNORANT.

    WE WILL STICK TO THE MORAL ISSUE " GAY MARRIAGE IS PERVERTED AND WRONG ".

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/24/2008 12:33:22 PM

      "WE WILL STICK TO THE MORAL ISSUE " GAY MARRIAGE IS PERVERTED AND WRONG ".

      Opinion not fact. You are welcome to your opinion but have no right to make your opinion into law, especially when it is a clear and absolute violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Us Constitution.

      And there are many people (many of them straight such as myself) who think that Same-Sex marriage (since it is not jsut gays who want to marry, lesbians do too) is perfectly "moral".

  • Posted By: Texas Jake @ 12/24/2008 8:33:48 AM

    THE POWER OF PRAYER - Tranquilization. Well, sitting around talking to your invisible friend solves nothing. You didnt actually do anything but verbalize your whishes. Yet you think you've evoked the Gods to fix a problem for you, and that you're now part of the solution. You have done nothing. It it wern't for prayer, you would take real action to cause a change. Instead, you are tranquilized, and a threat to no one.

    So, I would rather not watch a guy talk to his make-believe buddy when there are some very real problems for Obama to address. Here are a few:

    America???s credit rating may soon be downgraded below AAA
    Fed refusal to disclose $2 trillion loans, now the new "shadow banking system"
    Congress has no oversight of $700 billion, and Paulson???s Wall Street Trojan Horse
    Henry Paulson flip-flops on plan to buy toxic bank assets, confusing markets
    Goldman, Morgan lost tens of billions, but planning over $13 billion in bonuses this year
    AIG bails big banks out of $150 billion in credit swaps, protects shareholders before taxpayers
    American Express joins Goldman, Morgan as bank holding firms, looking for Fed money
    Treasury sneaks corporate tax credits into bailout giveaway, shifts costs to states
    State revenues down, taxes and debt up; hiring, spending, borrowing add even more debt
    State, municipal, corporate pensions lost hundreds of billions on derivative swaps
    Hedge funds: 610 in 1990, almost 10,000 now. Returns down 15%, liquidations up
    Consumer debt way up, now at $2.5 trillion; next area for credit meltdowns
    Fed also plans to provide billions to $3.6 trillion money-market fund industry
    Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are bleeding cash, want to tap taxpayer dollars
    Washington manipulating data: War not $600 billion but estimates actually $3 trillion
    Hidden costs of $700 billion bailout are likely $5 trillion; plus $1 trillion Street write-offs
    Commodities down, resource exporters and currencies dropping, triggering a global meltdown
    Big three automakers near bankruptcy; unions, workers, retirees will suffer
    Corporate bond market, both junk and top-rated, slumps more than 25%
    Retailers bankrupt: Circuit City, Sharper Image, Mervyns; mall sales in free fall

    Regardless of your sexual rat, we are all part of the grassroots movement to survive.

  • Posted By: AcePilot101 @ 12/24/2008 1:56:16 AM

    Can we please just stop talking about gays and lesbians? It's the cultural version of cheeseburgers.
    Gay is NOT the new black. Now get off my Internet.

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/24/2008 6:55:01 AM

      "Can we please just stop talking about gays and lesbians?"
      As soon as they get equal rights and stop being discrimniated against. Until then they are a valid iissue.

      " It's the cultural version of cheeseburgers."
      That makes no sense.

      "Gay is NOT the new black."
      Not exactly but they ARE the current hot topic disscriminantion victim.

      " Now get off my Internet.""
      You are Al Gore????
      Oh, no, you are not and it is not your internet it is everyone's. If you don't like it then go back to paper and pencil, or wax tablet and stylus.



  • Posted By: Vergil A Goodman @ 12/24/2008 3:07:05 AM

    Enter Your CommentR

  • Posted By: it's about the future @ 12/22/2008 2:05:22 PM

    In my view, bringing all sides to the political table is a courageous and wonderful and entirely necessary approach, but mixing politics with religion should be avoided.
    Religion is very personal and not necessarily rational!
    Churches and pastors are in a position to decide about marriage, whereas politicians are not.
    In a multicultural society we must stop pandering to one religion and its social mores.
    Let's keep religion out of government affairs!
    Choosing a citizen (Warren) and forwarding his retro ideas to the world on this global stage, is not America's best foot forward into the 21st century.
    Opinion from non-LGBT participant. Thanks.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 4:33:22 PM

      "Churches and pastors are in a position to decide about marriage, whereas politicians are not."

      By that standard, no Hindus, etc, will be permitted to marry. Or Atheists, Agnostics, etc.

      • Posted By: it's about the future @ 12/23/2008 2:10:34 PM


        PE Obama is a Constitutional scholar who is uniquely positioned to fix the damage done to our Constitution over the last 8 years. He supported civil unions very strongly from the beginning, promising to get in place the 100 plus laws needed for civil equality.

        Obama believes in equality and unity and that is key.
        He has demonstrated a fierce determination to work through every issue with gusto. As president in 20009, he has a tremendous number of super-complex domestic and global issue to address and it is clear that this guy will work with his teams to light up the show.

        My point earlier was that Warren can and of course will, take a position on the Church that he himself is affiliated with. OK, one guy, one church.....are there not lots of other churches who are in support of religious marriage?
        Was whining a bit about Warren speaking at the Inauguration, and now feel that it is not that big of a deal.
        Thanks.

        • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 2:56:45 PM

          "PE Obama is a Constitutional scholar who is uniquely positioned to fix the damage done to our Constitution over the last 8 years. He supported civil unions very strongly from the beginning, promising to get in place the 100 plus laws needed for civil equality. "

          If there was equality involved, there would be no reason for a different name.

          • Posted By: it's about the future @ 12/24/2008 12:56:06 AM

            PE Obama is "dancing as fast as he can", and is not the President yet.
            He is a long time Civil Rights lawyer and has been looking out for the likes of you and me for lots of years.
            Good thing selective amnesia is not fatal.

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/22/2008 3:29:20 PM

      "Churches and pastors are in a position to decide about marriage, whereas politicians are not."

      Churches and pastors are in a positon to decide ONLY about religious marrige. They have no right or standing to decide about civil marriage which is an entirely separate entity. Even the citizenry have no standing to decide about civil marriage. Only the courts have a right to decide about civil marriages.

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/22/2008 4:50:05 PM

        Hello old friend, I see that you are still posting from and atheistic point of view. Now let me correct you on one thing and that is the courts are not to decided anything they are there to carry out the law of the land. Judges who legislate from the bench need to be removed from office. This is why we have such a mess in California right now. The will of the people have been brought to the forefront twice and now we see that the courts are still trying to thwart the will of the people.

        Just imagine if Prop 8 would have been defeated there would be a outcry that it is the will of the people and now that it hasn't it is deemed racism....LOL... unbelievable!

        • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 5:02:54 PM

          "Now let me correct you on one thing and that is the courts are not to decided anything they are there to carry out the law of the land. "

          And the law of your land is the US constitution, to include amendment XIV. Therefore, the judges will be quite correct in striking down proposition 8, as your constitution does not allow the voting away of individual liberties or equal protection under law.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:12:03 PM

            That is your interpretation of the Amendment and Prop 8 doesn't take away a individuals right to marry it just describes what is acceptable as marriage. These individuals still have the right to marry but wanted to marry that which is outside the normal .... what happens when a person wants to marry their cousin, father, mother, brother , sister or close relative? Are we going to change the law to accomodate them as well? Quit trying to redefine what marriage is through perversion and stay within the guidelines of what is reasonable in the sight of God, people, and common sense! Gessshhhhh perversion is not normal people!

            • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 5:13:51 PM

              "Quit trying to redefine what marriage is through perversion and stay within the guidelines of what is reasonable in the sight of God, people, and common sense!"

              No. When the definition violated the US Constitution we MUST redine is as it is only a man-made idea (civil marriage that is). It is only preversion in your view. Waht some deity may or may not want is of no relevance to US law. And wht the peoiple want is also irrelvant. The majority has no right to deny equal rights to anyone. And common snese actually supports same-sex civil marriage

            • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:34:00 PM

              "Quit trying to redefine what marriage is"

              No.

            • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:33:23 PM

              "That is your interpretation of the Amendment "

              No, that is your Supreme Court's interpretation, as per Brown v Board of Education.

        • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 7:43:30 AM

          No, I am posting from a Constitutional point of view. Judges are to uphold the US Consitutio and Prop 8 is a clear violation of the Equal Protection clause. Remember in the 1950's the will of the people was to deny interacial marriage rights (and most ofthem used the bible as thier jsutification for that bigotry), and the Court, in Loving, effectively said that the people be damned (that they were mindless ignorant fools), and that interracial marraige was a right and they based that mostly on the XIV Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause. That is EXACTLY the same thing with Prop 8. The will of the majority (since it is NOT the will of ALL the people and in a couple of years enough of "the people" will be against Prop 8) is NEVER a valid reason in the law.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:06:23 PM

            Is it equal protection or exclusive rights to individuals with special behaviors? This is the law to not discriminate against male or female or any race....so how does one input homosexaul behavior in this clause? They are either male or female and they are not being discriminated against because they are allowed to marry. Now when they try to redefine what marriage is and using this amendment it becomes a stretching of the law to try to include a group that behave a different way than the norm and says that it covers behavior as well.

            No matter how they want to call themselves and if they think they were born this way it is not feasible to have laws saying you have to accept someone behavior as legitimate in order to not discriminate against that person. Next thing you know we will have all sorts of people lining up wanting the law to protect them because their deeds / actions / behaviors are not accepted by society.... I don't think the founding fathers wanted this law to be interpreted that way....

            • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 5:11:37 PM

              "Is it equal protection or exclusive rights to individuals with special behaviors?"

              There is no exclusuive right involved it is purely an equal right and equal protection.

              "This is the law to not discriminate against male or female or any race....so how does one input homosexaul behavior in this clause?"
              It defines marraige as a basic civil right.

              "They are either male or female and they are not being discriminated against because they are allowed to marry. "
              Of course they are being discrimihnai9ted against. Any first year law student can see that.

              "Now when they try to redefine what marriage is and using this amendment it becomes a stretching of the law to try to include a group that behave a different way than the norm and says that it covers behavior as well. "

              The definitionof what marriage is has chagned over time and the government has the right to redefine it if need be to make the defintion fall into line with the Equal Protection clause.

              "No matter how they want to call themselves and if they think they were born this way it is not feasible to have laws saying you have to accept someone behavior as legitimate in order to not discriminate against that person. "

              That may be true about individuals (although even there there are liimits) but not about governmetns. The governmen t has no right to violate the Equal Protection clause.

              "Next thing you know we will have all sorts of people lining up wanting the law to protect them because their deeds / actions / behaviors are not accepted by society."
              And if their actions are proven to to harm others or society (and only a fool would say that same sex marriage in any way hamrs society) they may be enetiled to said protection.

              "... I don't think the founding fathers wanted this law to be interpreted that way....""
              Actually, I am fairly sure that if they were alive today, and had the science and medicine info to study, , they would.

            • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:32:25 PM

              "Next thing you know we will have all sorts of people lining up wanting the law to protect them because their deeds / actions / behaviors are not accepted by society.... I don't think the founding fathers wanted this law to be interpreted that way...."

              Of course they did. Did you think, for example, that they included freedom of speech to protect popular speech? No, it was to protect people saying unpopular/unaccepted things. Popular speech needs no protection.

              That's just one example. There are plenty of others.

  • Posted By: PatrickH45 @ 12/21/2008 6:37:25 PM

    Honestly, as soon as we as a nation realize that there is no God, everyone will be much better off.

    • Posted By: jerry537 @ 12/22/2008 7:52:51 AM

      Then who made the earth

      • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/22/2008 10:55:12 AM

        IT WAS NOT MADE BY TWO MEN-------- THATS FOR SURE.

        • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/22/2008 2:05:38 PM

          How can you be sure.

          Aa a gay Methodist Miunster I know jokingly said, since it was a beautiful design originally, maybe it was designed by two gay creators.

          Actually one cannot know what if anything actually designed it, but if there really was a design process, god is not the only valid possibility.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/22/2008 5:15:23 PM

            Then who besides God was the original designer? You give credit to others yet you deny or refuse to attribute thing to God ....yet you haven't proven that God doesn't exist yet you speak as one should heed your words as one speaking with authority.... So tell us Ghost what evidence did you find or what circumstances lead you to declare that God doesn't exist. Let us examine the brilliant mind of the Ghostmasser and find enlightment in your research .... or is it God cannot be control by your thoughts and actions that you have to feel like you are to attack His existence.... Ok then we are listening to what you have to say about how or who created the world! So speak Ghost, Speak!

            • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 7:48:17 AM

              "Then who besides God was the original designer?"
              It really does nto matter, and we problably will never know.

              "You give credit to others yet you deny or refuse to attribute thing to God ....yet you haven't proven that God doesn't exist yet you speak as one should heed your words as one speaking with authority"
              I CANNOT attribute things to something that does not exist outisde of the indvivuda human imagination. And as I have pointed out before the burden of proof is that god exists not that he does not (And I have said that over 100 scieintists, ost of them believers in God have affirmed that that is the way it is).

              • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:46:19 PM

                You are a copout Ghost???if it really doesn???t matter then give credit to God! This matter to you because you don???t believe in Him! You probably will continue to deny this but for those who have their mind made up we already know!

                We are back to the old argument my friend???in order to not explain your findings you say that scientist (refers to any person that engages in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge) can make a claim without basic facts to back them up???.. this my friend is a theory (speculation or conjecture) not science (careful study of something carried out according to a developed method)??? to dismiss without facts, findings and knowledge goes contrary to those whose whole purpose is to provide these things so that they can be studied, verified and validated???.not very scientific of the scientist if I do say so myself???.Selah!

                • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/23/2008 5:17:58 PM

                  "You are a copout Ghost???if it really doesn???t matter then give credit to God! This matter to you because you don???t believe in Him! You probably will continue to deny this but for those who have their mind made up we already know!"

                  You only think you know. I will not give credit to something that does not exist.

                  "We are back to the old argument my friend???in order to not explain your findings you say that scientist (refers to any person that engages in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge) can make a claim without basic facts to back them up???.. this my friend is a theory (speculation or conjecture) not science (careful study of something carried out according to a developed method)??? to dismiss without facts, findings and knowledge goes contrary to those whose whole purpose is to provide these things so that they can be studied, verified and validated???.not very scientific of the scientist if I do say so myself???.Selah!"

                  Given the number of scientists (many of them world renowned and highly respected in their fields of study) I'll take their analysis/interpreation of burden of proof over yours any day.


                • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:45:15 PM

                  "???if it really doesn???t matter then give credit to God! "

                  Why?

                  • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 3:15:32 PM

                    Horrible do you make it the practice of answering for others? It is like I slap one monkey and then the other one screams with you!

                • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:45:51 PM

                  "this my friend is a theory (speculation or conjecture) not science "

                  LOL. Ignorant colonials.

            • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 11:21:56 AM

              "Then who besides God was the original designer?"

              Krishna.

              Prove me wrong.

              • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:31:38 PM

                Too easy...Krishna never himself claimed that he was the Creator or designor of the universe or world....

                Traditional belief based on scriptural details and astrological calculations gives the date of Krishna's birth, known as Janmashtami,[29] as either 18 or 21 July 3228 BCE.[30] Krishna belonged to the royal family of Mathura, and was the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva. Mathura was the capital of the Yadavas (also called the Surasenas), to which Krishna's parents Vasudeva and Devaki belonged to. The king Kamsa, Devaki's cousin,[31] had ascended the throne by imprisoning his father, King Ugrasena. Afraid of a prophecy that predicted his death at the hands of Devaki's eighth son, he had locked the couple into a prison cell. After killing the first six children, and Devaki's apparent miscarriage of the seventh, being transferred to Rohini as Balarama, Krishna took birth.

                Since Vasudeva believed Krishna's life was in danger, Krishna was secretly taken out of the prison cell to be raised by his foster parents, Yasoda [32] and Nanda in Gokula. Two of his other siblings also survived, Balarama (Devaki's seventh child, transferred to the womb of Rohini, Vasudeva's first wife) and Subhadra (daughter of Vasudeva and Rohini, born much later than Balarama and Krishna).[33] According to Bhagavata Purana some believe that Krishna was born without a sexual union, by "mental transmission" from the mind of Vasudeva into the womb of Devaki.[29][34][35]

                • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:44:50 PM

                  "Too easy...Krishna never himself claimed that he was the Creator or designor of the universe or world...."

                  Well enough. Then the Greek Titans did.

                  • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 3:08:57 PM

                    To be ascribe a title is not the same as being one who created the universe...as stated before Krishna did not attribute anything towards himself that others have placed on him through vain worship of a man

      • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 11:24:41 AM

        The Flying Spagetti Monster, of course.

    • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/21/2008 9:15:32 PM

      DOING WHAT EVER THEY PLEASE ?

      • Posted By: PatrickH45 @ 12/22/2008 4:14:04 AM

        Of course not. In general, people don't murder other people and the reasons are many, not simply that they fear eternal damnation. The same is true of most other things that we consider to be immoral and the fact that some actions would not be condemned if not for religious superstition only shows that we need to rethink our ethical bases. The main point is that we make social contracts because we could live in no other way. Perhaps before the leisure time for rational thought, we needed gods for justification but those times are long gone and we are left with dead gods that we need to finally bury.

        • Posted By: jerry537 @ 12/22/2008 8:13:19 AM

          The Lord Jesus Christ is alive.

          • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 4:34:04 PM

            Then why do you feel you need to speak for him?

            • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:47:51 PM

              It is Jesus Christ who commands us to speak His word in season or out of season so that men like yourself will have no excuse standing before God.......

          • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 12/22/2008 3:30:37 PM

            ONLY in your imagination. Which is fine. He belongs there.

  • Posted By: souza @ 12/22/2008 12:33:08 PM

    Church and State are separate. Everyone should be under the title of Civil Unions as far as the Government is concerned. If you want to call your Civil Union a Marriage based on you r religious belief then that is your right. I was born gay and cannot change who I am. I will not be in the closet anymore because people do not understand nor have the right to judge me.

    • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/22/2008 4:57:57 PM

      There is no such thing as Separation of Church and state in the U.S. Constitution.. as far as you being born gay....NOT!

      • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 5:05:26 PM

        "There is no such thing as Separation of Church and state in the U.S. Constitution.. "

        Yes, there is. The exclusionary clause. Please read your constitution before spouting off; You will not look so much of a jackass.

        "as far as you being born gay....NOT! "

        Your proof of this? Oh, yes. You have none. You are merely, in your ignorance, repeating what Hannity and Limbaugh have spoon-fed you.

        • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:26:33 PM

          Ok???show me or even post where at in the Constitution does the WORDS SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE APPEAR! You will not find this and the exclusionary clause that you are talking about is not saying this but talks about illegal search and seizures! Get real dude if you are going to call me names then post your findings and not your opinion or twisting of what you think the Constitution says when it clearly doesn???t say this!

          As far as the being born gay comment???.When a doctor tells a mother or father that they newborn baby is a boy or a girl I didn???t know they describe their behavior as well! So now we have a class of birth that describes behavior???.hmmm so a murderer, rapist, thief, can all say they were born this way not! All are born into sin and all will commit sin but it through the choices we make in our lives that decide what sin is prevalent in our lives. It is simply a choice in the lives of those who call themselves homosexuals. If anybody says otherwise then it is up to them to prove that they were born this way!

          Your proof of them being born this way is burning up the blog and I???m overwhelmed by the evidence that you have provided..NOT!

          • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:37:13 PM

            "Ok???show me or even post where at in the Constitution does the WORDS SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE APPEAR! You will not find this and the exclusionary clause that you are talking about is not saying this but talks about illegal search and seizures!"

            Apologies, I meant to say "establishment clause". The wording is different, but the result is the same. Of course,what do I know? I am only going off of Jefferson's explanation, and 200 years of rulings by the US Supreme Court. You, on the other hand, have Pat Robertson and Sean Hannity.

            • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 3:00:47 PM

              Your going on ignorant laws that have nothing to do with what is written in the Constitution.... as I stated there is no such thing as Separation of Church and State in the Constitution period it is Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist church that have spawn off invalid interpretations of what was a State issue into a National issue that is not covered in the Constitution.... So I take it that you are conceding that you were wrong in stating that it is in the Constitution?

          • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:37:53 PM

            "All are born into sin and all will commit sin but it through the choices we make in our lives that decide what sin is prevalent in our lives."

            What does sin have to do with US law? Oh, yes. Nothing.

  • Posted By: buddaman71 @ 12/22/2008 1:19:09 PM

    "A big part of (small "o") orthodox Christianity is the understanding that God loves us all too much to leave us as we are, which is broken creations in a fallen world."
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    This is why I am a FORMER Evangelical "child of God". So...God created a perfect world filled with perfect creatures, but the FIRST pair of "perfect" creations, created in HIS own image, ruined it for all of us for all ETERNITY!!! I know, I know...FREE WILL...That doesn't explain it. A "perfect" creator would only create a "perfect" creation, incapable of making bad decisions, regardless of "free will". Either the creator or the creation is flawed. Either way it nullifies God's perfection. Without the supposition of God's infallibility, nothing else about Christianity can be accepted.

    Evangelicals (all Christians really) are taught that God is ultimate love, yet unless we say a few sentences before death, we are destined to burn in the fiery pits of Hell for eternity. Really?? You get 40-80 years , an insignificant speck of time to perfect yourself spiritually, and if you don't you burn FOREVER?!?!?!? I'm not talking serial rapists here; I'm talking honorable moral humans who simply don't conform to the myths they are fed as children.

    If you are a parent, ask yourself if there's ANYTHING your child could do, so evil that you would, knowing that they wouldn't quickly die but burn in torment for infinity, walk them to the rim of a volcano and not only push them in, but hold them down screaming forever? The Father of infinite mercy and love? I think not.

    Christ was about Love, Compassion, Humility, Non-Judgment and forgiveness. Modeling oneself on the template of Christ IS a noble endeavor, however I find VERY little of Christ reflected in the modern church. Until then, I cannot accept ANY of the debate.

    If God created all things, then God created Gay people. Period. End of story.

    • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/22/2008 4:53:45 PM

      You have only justify your own opinions in your own eyes therefore judging God just to justify oneself is not accepting the God of the bible or His love!.....Selah!

      • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/22/2008 5:03:26 PM

        This, of course, applies to you as well.

        • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 12:13:31 PM

          Horrible, When did I judge God? Quit being so quick to respond without having substance or common sense in your statements!

          • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 1:35:02 PM

            Well, you seem to have no problem putting words in his mouth, mate. Last I checked, that is refered to as "taking the Lord's name in vain", and is a sin. Repent.

            • Posted By: bojack27 @ 12/23/2008 2:51:48 PM

              Just as I stated above ....NO Substance with your posting just confrontational.....

              • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 2:57:29 PM

                Translation: You have no response, so it's ad hominem time.

                I accept your surrender.

  • Posted By: seabiscuit @ 12/23/2008 12:42:50 PM

    http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/107914679?z00m=18704475
    Obama condones discrimination. The irony of it is that both Obama and Rick Warren are unchristian.


    Jesus went to the outcasts first and made it very clear that he did not condone the priests who banned from the temple, the blind, the deformed, the sick and disabled, gays, prostitutes, simaritans and Romans, it is written Jesus reached out first and foremost to all those who were banned from entering the temple and outcast.

    It was true then and it's true now, we are the new untouchables/impures to persecute. Obama seems to enjoy discriminating against certain groups.

    He has already reversed his promises to women, environmentalist, the democratic party, his liberal constituents and now the gay community who mobilized 90% of their votes for Obama.

    I am so proud I voted for Hillary and then for Nader! I saw Obama's true colors from the beginning and could not in good conscience vote for a compulsive liar who's record showed the opposite from what Obama professed to be. His record has proved me right.

    He's divided the party and now will divide the nation and he's not even inaugurated. No leadership, no great dispenser of hope that he professed to be. How quickly "yes we can" has vanished. It's up to us now to petition for justice and volunteer for equality to create the change that Obama has betrayed and abandoned. Remember, people like "tired and old" can vote. Do we really want such an ignorant and hateful person to dictate the world our children (gay, straight, loving, innocent children made in the image of God)? If we don't act, children will grow up to be like this poor wretched soul. You can make a difference by clicking on the link above and signing the petition. God Bless the outcasts and God Bless the tolerant and compassionate and God bless the wretched "old and tired."

  • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/23/2008 10:57:56 AM

    WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION DOES IT SAY THAT PERVERTS HAVE A RIGHT TO BE PERVERTS ?

    NEXT ! PEDOPHILES WILL DEMAND TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN.

    THIS COMMENT MAY OFFEND GAYS; HOWEVER, IT IS MEANT TO SHOW THE INSANE POSITION OF GAY RIGHTS ISSUE.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/23/2008 11:19:50 AM

      "WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION DOES IT SAY THAT PERVERTS HAVE A RIGHT TO BE PERVERTS ?"

      Amendments IX and XIV, in the case of gays.

      "NEXT ! PEDOPHILES WILL DEMAND TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN.

      THIS COMMENT MAY OFFEND GAYS; HOWEVER, IT IS MEANT TO SHOW THE INSANE POSITION OF GAY RIGHTS ISSUE."

      No, it simply shows that you are too thick to understand the concept of "consenting adults".

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse