News Mar 15, 2010 at 9:14 am

Comments

1
I love this description of bigoted fundamentalist Christians who claim that tolerating people/ideas that make them uncomfortable is a violation of their "rights":


What happens is that some Protestants cherry-pick edicts out of the Bible that support their prejudices and then, in a neat bit of mental judo, spread their arms wide and claim their religion is under attack if anyone contradicts them. "What about tolerance for ME?" they cry. It's as if I seized a copy of the Bible and began beating someone over the head with it and, when you try to stop me, I accuse you of failing to respect my faith.
2
It's quite disingenuous that precisely a group full of anti-Catholic ( and anti-Christian in general ) hate and which has had no problem with employing racist tactics against the African American community has now the temerity of saying that their history and moral values are the same as those that they are currently seeking to silence and intimidate. Speaking out against the demands of societal approval and the creation of special laws for behaviors that are contrary the religious and moral beliefs that one seeks to instruct to ones family and preserve in ones community is not bigotry but doing what homosexual activists are doing today most certainly is.
3
Uh-oh - looks like Loveschild's drunk again.
4
@2 I'm extremely prejudiced against bad grammar and garbled syntax.
5
This follows in the fine Southern tradition of clinging so tightly to old hatreds that, when the rule of law tries to pry your grip away, you prefer to lose your fingers before letting go.


Sadly it's true, although I think the more appropriate analogy for the behavior of most of those Southern good ol' boys who cling to their prejudices is that they're cutting off their noses to spite their faces. I realize the South isn't unique in this respect but it does have long traditions in everything from food to music and literature--things that, I think, we're rightly proud of. What those who hold prejudices and seek to perpetuate them fail to realize, though, is that, without diversity, the food, music, and literature that Southerners should take pride in would either be greatly diminished or not exist at all. Embracing diversity enriches any culture.
6
@2: We aren't seeking to silence the church or the black community, darling.

Check out where the Marriage Equality Bill was signed: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…

And from the Church's website, check the couple married there: http://www.all-souls.org/

And remember that the first few couples were either black couples or mixed couples.

And speaking of being a racist:

I'm happily married. And even if I wasn't, your leader would not even be at the end of my list. Not even if 'he' lived straight and sought females ..... how can I put this delicately ...... 'he' and those that share 'his' most evident genetic trait are not my type of men.


Racist lying closet-case. That's what you are. Portraying black women in the common racist trope of "black women only want to date black men and hate dating outside their race".
7
Indeed Singing Cynic; LC, your awkward handling of language beyond your verbal ability has the effect of suggesting that your homophobic, misandrist, misogynistic, generally bigoted position stems from ignorance.
8
It's kind of amazing how many commentators on the Sun Times site go through all the trouble of "refuting" Steinberg's points that he ALREADY bothered to counter in his original column. Do people read?
9
@8 I was going to say the exact same thing!!
10
"he" ... "his."

I think LC is talking about my gender, BC, not my race. I am lady, I do lady things.
11
Thank you Baconcat, I forgot to mention LC's racism. It wasn't that long ago, too, that LC condoned the rape of people in prison by fellow inmates. LC's position is one of hate.

Intolerance of intolerance is the only acceptable form of intolerance. There is nothing disingenuous about combating the hatred people hold for people who were born with a different set of attributes from themselves.
12
@ 2, I knew you'd bristle. Truth hurts.
13
We aren't seeking to silence the church or the black community, darling

Check out where the Marriage Equality Bill was signed:

@6 You mean the same place where people such as yourself succeded ( regrettably ) in denying the right to vote to the African American community ? Or do you mean the same place where you also succeeded in driving out of business Catholic charities because the DC council chose to service the homosexual lobby instead of the community that it is supposed to represent by not even leaving some room for the charities to function without having to go against their religious beliefs ?

You dear Bacon are nothing more than a racist swine no matter how much you hide try to hide it ( like many with your same proclivities try to do ) behind the veil of homosexual 'rights', and if I were to quote all the bigoted garbage you have posted about African Americans I would take this whole thread. I don't intend to do so.
14
"Intolerance of intolerance is the only acceptable form of intolerance."

I want to have that tattooed on my brain. I believe Karl Popper said something similar, although you've put it much more succinctly. And yet I don't think being intolerant of intolerance really is intolerance, since the reason for criticizing intolerance is that it's contrary to tolerance...

Gloria@8, no, people who cling to unreasonable prejudices generally don't read. They have made up their minds, which may be why they repeat the same refuted arguments ad nauseam.
15
"It's quite disingenuous that precisely a group full of anti-Catholic ( and anti-Christian in general ) hate and which has had no problem with employing racist tactics against the African American community has now the temerity of saying that their history and moral values are the same as those that they are currently seeking to silence and intimidate. Speaking out against the demands of societal approval and the creation of special laws for behaviors that are contrary the religious and moral beliefs that one seeks to instruct to ones family and preserve in ones community is not bigotry but doing what homosexual activists are doing today most certainly is."

Thank you for the distraction, Loveschild. I can always count on you. I'm stuck here trying to solve how to bring the one I love home to die as she wishes. And, thought Slog is perfect to help me stop banging my head on a wall with a problem I don't know how to solve, if I walk away sometimes directions arrive. G-d love you, Loveschild, your unique way of phrasing things and continued blindness to your own bigotry and hatred is a constant source of distraction. But, my predetermined amount of "distract me" time is up now. Here's hoping the scales fall off of your eyes soon, Loveschild, your heart has to be better than this.

I'm going to play ping-pong. Not really, but you know what I mean.
16
Furthermore unlike you just because certain type of men don't do it for me that doesn't mean that I think that one race of people is superior or somewhat better than another. I like men of my own race that's it, doesn't mean that I think that white men are inferior or look down on them.
17
Dan Savage,

You're not a lady. Not at all. You're a man and a good one.
18
The fundie Cristians need to get used to the fact that they will no longer call the shots for the rest of us. This is not now and never has been a Chistian nation. This is a secular nation based on secular traditions and values.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/f…
19
Lovechild, um...

Other data released last month showed the percentage of unwed mothers differs from race to race. While 28 percent of white women gave birth out of wedlock in 2007, nearly 72 percent of black women and more than 51 percent of Latinas did.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/wayoflife…


You are just so cute LC.
20
@2 - Every person gets equal treatment under the law. Why is this so hard for you?
21
@2 - Loveschild - Prove your statement that there's a giant gay and lesbian agenda against any given race. Kthanx.
22
@13 - I have never seen Baconcat say anything racist towards you ro anyone.
23
Loveschild, you claim that "the African-American community" was denied the right to vote on the issue, but what I think you may have meant was that the residents of D.C. weren't given the chance to vote on the issue. While African-Americans may be a majority in D.C. not all residents are African-American. Besides, does the difference between representative and direct democracy--and the unfeasability of the latter in large communities--need to be explained to you again?

As for Baconcat's supposed racism, you don't have to quote "all the bigoted garbage". One or two examples should suffice--assuming you can find that many.
24
@13: You don't have anything racist I've said beyond me calling out your bull about having a cherokee princess or something in your family. You're about as native american as you are black, and that's not at all.

I believe there's nothing I've said that's as disgusting as a white male such as yourself parading around these blackface pantomimes you so eagerly cling to. When the discussions have turned to social issues of family structure, you've variously expressed high morality by saying you were a single mom and unmarried before switching tracks to saying you were married and that your kids knew their father. When we've discussed how gay marriage would harm you, you've quickly delved deep into an uncharacteristically methodical rationale for institutionalized homophobia, as if to give yourself some kind of cred for speaking the unspoken.

You also very quickly begged off any confrontations with riz and kev when probed about your supposed fundamental self, going so far as to turn on people like riz, claiming he wasn't black (when google would lay a hurting on you pretty quickly).

You may be highly delusional about this issue and your sexuality, but nobody should have any question about your gender or cultural background and why it's high-larious to have you around. I normally chafe at the idea at confronting someone's gender identity in any negative way, but sometimes you've got to reveal the clowns.

As to the topic at hand, a point of clarification and correction: the african american community overwhelmingly supported the Human Rights Act, which forbade putting this issue to vote. There was more than enough time for voters in the District to raise their voice in expressly stating this was not an issue that fell under the Human Rights Act, but with only two councilmembers (including the fabulous Marion Barry) and out-of-District residents led by non-resident Harry Jackson expressing dissent, and the courts dismissing this, the law rightfully went forward.

Furthermore, the current makeup of the D.C. Council shows that African Americans are well-represented, holding the majority of the voting and procedural power in the Council.

In terms of the Catholic Charities, nobody has explained how maintaining services in the District when all are equally able to marry would go against their principles. Nobody has explained how they'd condone marriage equality by extending services to the District.
25
Excuse me, LC, but you seem to be under the impression that all black people are as homophobic as you are. That if the black community of DC had their vote then they would come out in droves against what they think is "wrong." Step back, woman. We aren't all so terrified of the gays as you are.
26
@13: Oh Loveschild, you guru of gormlessness, you high lama of hokum, you bwana of bullshit, thank you for bringing your inane reasoning to us all here at SLOG.
You do realize that nobody denied the vote to blacks? It's not like only white people got to vote on the issue. Everyone was properly and justly represented.
Old-timey wisdom:
See, we in this here contry live in whut we lauk to call a "reppersentative democracy". Don't mean that ereboddy get to vote on evry lil last thing. Whut we do is we vote fer a feller who we think thinks bout the same way we do. And then we send him off ter Washintin, an' he makes the decishuns bout importint things so that we ain't gotta get ereboddy together fer a vote evry taum we wonna get somethin done. An' it done werked fer us real good so far, an' we ain't fixin to change it.
/Old-timey wisdom
See, as my grizzled and flinty-eyed alter ego explained, the right to vote does not mean the right to vote personally on everything. Rather, it means that you have the right to vote for a representative, who will make decisions on your behalf. IF the people of the District of Calamity really hate gay marriage (even though people coming in from out of state to get hitched will provide an estimated 700 jobs), they'll kick out the people who voted for it at the next election cycle. Quit bitching and moaning, you CWB.

Backing up my jobs claim: http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitut…
27
19 if you shaved your head you could look the part and not just act it....
28
27, Facts and reality are so racist!
29
@27: Pointing out that certain ethnic groups are more prone to certain problems isn't racist; what is racist is when you blame it on their race (unless of course, it's something genetic like sickle-cell anemia, which people of African extraction are at a higher risk of regardless of circumstance). Acknowledging a gap between different races according to some criterion is the first step to closing that gap. It's a well-known fact that blacks and Latinos score lower on standardized tests then whites, due to minorities generally being poorer or otherwise less privileged than the majority in this country. What is the reaction? Institute outreach programs to close this gap. See?
¡Vaya!, tu idiocía hace que mi cabeza me duele.
30
And who wants the Catholic church to be wheeling and dealing with the lives of children anyway?...

31
@15 Your insults aside, I hope everything works out for you and that the Spirit guides you into making the best decision for you and your loved one. Is it your mother or grandmother ? I know how tough that can be. Whoever it is I will be praying for you and her so that our Lord works the wonders and miracles that only He can do. In God's Love.
32
I certainly wouldn't let my kid swim with a Scotsman.
33
@32: Wow, I hope to god you got perfect grades in your logic classes.
34
Just a note in the midst of all this vitriol - Kim, I'll be thinking of and praying for you and your loved one. End-of-life decisions...well, they suck. There's no better way to put it, having been in those shoes.

I hope you can get in touch with a hospice in your area - they do remarkable things, both for the person dying and the caregivers.
35
My condolences as well, Kim. I recently lost a loved one in a similar situation, and we all feel for you.
36
@ 15 - Wow, I'm so sorry Kim. That sounds really awful. Please take care of yourself and know we're thinking about you~
37
@2, Loveschild, on the off chance that you can open your mind a little, here's why your statements make little or no sense.

You say that gay people are anti-Christian. You probably don't realize this but most of America is anti-Christian in terms of the Christianity you seem to believe in. Fundamentalists like yourself make up a scarily large number of people in this country, but it's far from a majority. Last I heard it was around 30%.

I would argue that gay people, more than straight people, question religion because religion has been systematically used in this country to promote hatred against us. This is not to say most gay people are atheists. We're not as drawn to organized religion (thought I believe this is changing as organized religions are becoming more accepting of us), but most gay people believe in God because most people believe in God.

You say that gay people have "had no problem with employing racist tactics against the African American community". I assume you're referring to the fact that proportionally more black people in California voted for Prop. 8 than white people. Gay people were angry that a lot of straight black people couldn't see the similarities between their struggle and ours but I'd hardly call pointing out the Prop 8 statistic racist. Definitely, some gay people are racist and said unforgivable things. But, you'll find, Loveschild, that some straight people are racist, too. Lumping all blacks together as homophobic is racist but it's homophobic to say all gays are racist. Both aren't true.

The rest of your post was quite rambling. But I'd like to ask you, on what grounds do you find gay people immoral? I mean, obviously you're quoting Leviticus in your head. What I mean is, do you honestly believe gay people behave more immorally than straight people? Do we steal more? Kill more? Of course not. Your one definition of morality is fixed on Leviticus, and you ignore the whole spectrum of real life. What is more immoral, a man having sex with another man or a man who masturbates, even once? Or a man cursing his parents? According to Leviticus, they are all deserving of the death penalty. (Leviticus, chapter 20, King James Version)

But you know all sins are not equal. And though it says in 20:09, "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death," you would not support the execution of your neighbor's child if you heard him say, "Fuck you, Mom!"

You've masturbated. Even though you think it's a sin and you should be punished, do you think you should be put to death for it? Is that punishment equal to that crime?

In fact, you're not even a fundamentalist. You, I hope, have too much of a soul to be a real fundamentalist, like some folks in Uganda. If we lived in a theocracy, would you support the death penalty for all the sins God clearly named in Leviticus?

I doubt it. You are hiding behind your rationalizations. Take a good look at these verses and ask yourself if this is what God wants.

Or, is it possible that men wrote down what they thought God wanted, influenced by time and place? That some laws in the Bible sound ridiculous because they originated in societies so long ago and different than ours, that they are impossible to translate to today? That human society has an evolving relationship with God as we understand more about the world and human nature. That a lot of the laws and guidelines in the Bible remain true today but not all.
38
Mine as well. I haven't lost any loved ones, but I've come close once or twice myself, and I wory more for those left behind.
39
@ LC, why are you even pretending to care about Kim? Just stop.
40
@ LC, indeed, we have all seen the vitriol you have directed at Kim.
41
Kim, I know it's late, but, having been through the same thing more than once, I want to offer my sincerest condolences. It's never easy to lose someone you love, but it's a true sign of how much you love them when you do all you can for them.
42
39, 40, Lovechild is trying to change the subject because she's knows she doesn't have a real argument here.
43
my thoughts are with you Kim.
44
@29 - I liked what you had to say right up until your "solution"; I think the economic and privilege gaps for people of color needs a much more substantive solution than white people occasionally, grudgingly, throwing a crappy "outreach" program at them. That kind of shit is ineffectual, patronizing, and smacks to me an awful lot of what Malcom X referred to when he said, "You can't stick a knife six inches in a man's back, pull it out two, and call it 'progress.'"
45
@32 - I wouldn't let my Scotsman swim with a kid.
46
@44: My apologies if you misunderstood. I by no means advocate outreach programs as the only way of solving such problems, and perhaps I should eat my (hastily-typed) words to some extent here. That is the reaction of some agencies, but not my ideal solution. Coming as I do from a high school with a large proportion of poor and minority students, I can tell you that offering free tutoring services, subsidized breakfast and lunch for poor students, and well-funded extracurriculars is a much better policy.
Excellent quote, by the way.
47
@37 I'm a firm believer in the living Word of the Scriptures and I know that Jesus came to make a new Covenant with humanity. I don't believe therefore that the death penalty has to be carried out. Like you said it had it's time and place and the New Covenant came to do away with such physical sentences but I pay special attention to what was said after the establishment and it is very clear. Romans 1: 24-27

Seeing the current state of the world and the exact behavior talked about in the Bible it gives me chills when I read the last verses.

Romans 1:32 :

"Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

I believe that it speaks of self-induced physical death ( illness: Aids and such ) and the spiritual death of forgoing what's natural and the family. It is the behavior that is clearly admonished not the people. We are commanded to Love and care for one another and that includes the homosexual but not the behavior ( homosexuality ) .

I don't buy your 30% figure because this is still a God fearing Christian nation, it may be true that given the assault we currently face more are not proclaiming their faith as openly as it has been done in previous years. But we are still the majority, and precisely because we have shown great tolerance of those that despise religion people of faith have let the doors open for the taking and we are not the ones who control the media and the images shown across the land. And as you well know those that are able to do so are the ones that control the narrative and influence policy making. And it is precisely due to such that groups promoting homosexuality and their allies have successfully vilified and intimidated people of faith who actually live by Christian tenets. The vitriol exhibited by advocates of homosexuality against the African American community ( and other groups ) should not be in my opinion diminished by simply saying it was just them throwing a fit because they didn't get what they wanted. First of, if you believe such then you're actually saying that harassment and intimidation are excusable when one group doesn't get what it demands. I for one don't believe that should be excusable. Second, had those feelings not been there to begin with nothing would've made them come to the surface. And as has been shown in the denial of fundamental rights ( the right to vote ) of a majority African American population like DC, those feelings are still fresh and can prove to be very harmful for the African American community.

Outside of this nation I do not believe that neither your side nor mine have any right to dictate on the cultural and moral norms observed in sovereign nations with age old customs ( Christianity has been practiced in Africa long before it arrived in western europe ) and to people that in many cases have a more clear and purer understanding of Christianity than those in the west. I've only involved myself when I've seen the attacks on them by groups that promote homosexuality and those that assist them.

But besides the clarity of the Bible concerning homosexuality, even if I didn't have the Scriptures to guide my comprehension about that I have thousands upon thousands of years of human history to lean on and to know that the practice of homosexuality is not something that is natural to human existence. The most obvious reason being that it cannot give life, which is something that heterosexuality ( the union of female and male ) can. Aknowledging that does not mean hating homosexuals. I now ask you to do the same which you have ask of me and open your mind and heart a little to recognize that the hate you attribute to us is not only misleading but hurtful. We disagree on some things but I anyways enjoyed reading your comment .
48
@37 And if you needed further proof look @29.
50
@48: What is my post supposed to prove? Also, there is no assault on the evangelicals going on in this country. Every measure taken against the power of religion is in self-defense of the state; religion has no place in politics.
52
@Kim

This is way late, but I just wanted you to know you'll be in my thoughts and prayers. This sort of decision making is so exhausting and heart-wrenching. You've been such a great force for good in the slog community, and I always appreciate your insights. Hoping for a clear path for you to be able to bring your loved one home as she wishes.
53
I for one am very happy for you, and I mean this most sincerely, Loveschild. I am glad that you have found meaning and comfort from the Bible. Still, you need to stop trying to enforce your personal interpretations on the rest of us and using your personal interpretations as justification to deny individuals full rights and protections under the law. While, you clearly benefit from your interpretations you forget that there are limitations to your own personal understanding, just as there are limitations to us all. Everyone interprets something different, everyone has a different perspective, thus everyone hears things differently. And, it is important to remember that not one of us hears the whole message or the only message, and it is easy to because of our limitations to misinterpret Scripture and to draw the wrong conclusion. The Bible is not a rule book, nor is it a set of instructions. If G-d had wanted a rule book, then a much better one could have been provided, and we would still be stoning disobedient children (Deuteronomy 21:18-21), instead it is where we go to understand who G-d is via the experiences of others. What we call the Bible is a collection of books and letters, that were agreed upon sometime in the 1500 CE, and many books and letters exist that were not deemed worthy of being included or because they contradicted those chosen books and letters. That collection which you call the living Word is comprised of ancient traditions and stories that cover about 2100 year (give or take), written over the course of approximately 1200 year period more than 2000 years ago, its perspective and instructions are designated to a culture and its social structure that has long since disappeared from the earth, causing many of its perspectives to be outmoded. This is not say that there is no truth, direction, inspiration or comfort to be found, but we can't forget that we are limited in our ability to understand it. So, please stop trying to force your understanding on the rest of us and please stop insisting that your understanding should be the basis by which we make laws and make clear the path of justice and equality in the United States. This country is a representative democracy not a theocracy. The separation of church and state benefits us all.
54
Thank you everyone for your kind thoughts, encouragement and prayers. I appreciate it. This is a very hard time for my family, the DNR is in place, and decisions concerning hospice care are being made. I am so sorry to have hijacked the thread to some extent, it was not my intention. You all have been an incredible gift to me, your thoughts, opinions and wit. I'll be in and out as life permits. Thank you again. Take care.
55
the other thing that is similar is that they are all socially constructed.

what constitutes being black? how many white/black/... any race relatives, and how far back on a family tree do they have to be? do you have to go to mass every sunday to be catholic? what if you were confirmed, but don't believe any more? how many times do you need do have sex with, or want to have sex with, someone of your same gender (or should it be sex?) do you have to have to be gay?

the point is: they are all socially constructed. of course, there are different histories of discrimination, and those differences aren't trivial.
56
I couldn't finish it. It seemed to defend Catholics.
57
LC, if the people of DC do not want marriage equality, then the next time they elect representatives, they won't elect representatives that do not represent their views on marriage. No one has taken the right to vote away from the people of DC. Popular opinion though, especially on the coasts, is moving in the direction of favoring marriage equality, so I doubt you will see anyone lose the right to marry or the validity of their marriage licenses.

On to your bible thumping. Your suggestion that people are afraid to proclaim their faith is patently absurd (or perhaps you are suggesting that there is a popular climate of distaste for bigots, but oh, that would discount your belief that proponents of human equality are The Rarest Rainbow Unicorns). Christianity is not under siege by the seething orgiastic mass of barbarians encroaching from the coasts. In America we have this concept called self-determination. That means you can practice your own cherry picked mysticism however you want LC. And your beliefs really are cherry picked. Separate traditions of Christianity may have arisen in Africa long before introduction in Europe, but that does not make them better as you imply by your reference to their 'purer understanding of Christianity'. These branches of Christianity represent separate traditions in separate cultures and neither is implicitly better or worse, they are simply different, offering different ways of living to different peoples that fit them and they were able to fit themselves to. Each tradition is valid.

And while we are on the topic of tradition and culture, lets take a look at your views on things that don't fit your sacred precepts of heteronormativity. You say the bible is clear on gays, sure, well it's clear on shellfish, and children who curse their parents. But I somehow doubt you sweat the oysters, and you are strangely silent on the stoning children thing, or stoning of women who are not virgins on their wedding day. Some pretty clear cut rulings in the bible are a little more flexible than others? Hypocritical much? You mention the thousands upon thousands of years that prove the unnaturalness of homosexuality, its failure to create new life. Well if it's unnatural why do we see homosexual behavior in so many other species? Oh, we're humans and can rise above our nature? Well then not freely expressing our sexuality would appear to be the unnatural human construct. Somehow homosexuality has remained a part of human culture for all those thousands of years despite its unnaturalness. Society has disapproved of homosexuality since the dawn of humanity? Bull Shit. We all know about the Greeks take on homosexuality (even women got to participate, if they were wealthy types like Sappho). And we've tangled over numerous cultures understandings of a 'third sex'. But they didn't marry! Well that's not the point, numerous cultures have been accepting of more fluid sexualities than you allow for, even putting them in positions of power. But that's not our culture! Well even in our culture for the last eight-hundred odd years, at least, we have had popularly accepted things like blood brotherhood, bury us in the same grave facing each other 'brotherhood'. Besides, 'more pure' African traditions of Christianity sound so much more superior to other traditions the way you put it.

Well now it's even looking more and more culturally acceptable to more and more people in the US for an adult to marry any other consenting adult they choose. And this is America where we have self determination and practice any kind of culture we want while hurting as few people as possible (simply by virtue of living in the Western world even you, LC, are trampling someone's back). And remember no culture is implicitly better or worse than any other. If homosexuality is only cultural, well then you should treat it and respect as such. But you are setting your rights to self determination on an altar above everyone else, and demanding that everyone live as you have determined yourself. That is bigotry. Where is your cultural awareness and acceptance? All that is asked of you is simple tolerance, and a willingness to let people be the people they are.
58
Come on LC, where's the love in your words. Casting people into hell for how they were born or forged by their culture, when those people harm no one, strikes me as hateful.

Intolerance of intolerance is the only acceptable form of intolerance. Cut it out, LC.
60
@40: LC believes that praying for someone she hates absolves her of that hate, just like she believes calling herself a Christian makes her one. Both fly in the face of her words and actions. She's not a Christian Jesus would recognize.
61
Indeed LC, the Abrahamic tradition you are so fond of tells us we are all made in God's image, both body and mind. Well, lacking knowledge of good and evil, people like you came up with that concept.
64
Am I the only person who thinks that someone may have hacked into/otherwise sneakily accessed Loveschild's account?
Over the past few hours, we've seen posts from him/her on several threads conceding big points, and we all know that admission of defeat is a trait historically unobserved in Loveschild. This last post especially raises red flags; I think that the real Loveschild(s) would not have said anything about Jesus creating people, when in the Abrahamic tradition it is God who makes people.
So yeah, I'm not sure we're dealing with the same animal we were before.
But on the other hand, it's kind of an improvement.
65
Oh, isn't it cute, the LC is out of arguments and has fallen back on passive aggressive faux-apologetics. Maybe that's a bit ad hominem. But who cares, I support the militant Libertine Homo-Fascist complex.
66
Of course Venomlash, it could just indicate another burgeoning facet of LC's notoriously split personality, a far more childish facet.
67
@63: Really, of all the horrible things you've said about gay couples in DC, California, those seeking to better themselves their families and their communities, Dan and Terry, me and my partner and, in general, of all gay couples in the country, under the guise of "oh, I'm only preaching the word"?

You have to pay attention to the words you've obviously very carefully chosen. The Bible itself makes it very clear that some are chosen by the word to live for the word, but some choose the word to live for themselves.

That's a very fundamental fact of the religion you claim to preach.

If you wonder why people doubt your very persona, look no further than the vain proselytizing you do.
68
@64: The real Loveschild is about to be revealed.

And it's about time.
69
Kim, all my best to you and your family. I was there not long ago with my late, really great brother. Take good care.

Baconcat, Venomlash, Samktg, and everyone who contributes regularly to SLOG, maybe being the voice of tolerance and reason is paying off. For LC's sake I hope so.

Loveschild, this is a great start. Noone really wants to believe you are as hateful as you sound but you make it really hard to think otherwise. Tonight I'm starting to think maybe you do have a heart.

70
LC is posessed by a demon, apparently. And its an improvement.
71
Perhaps LC forgot the health benefits associated with a balanced diet and regular exorcise?
73
Damn! I bet Loveschild is Dan Savage!!!!
74
To Kim,

My thoughts are with you in these trying moments
Christian
75
What is a joke? Slandering peoples characters? Dismissing peoples relationships and families? You've chosen to have posted some incredibly cruel statements and advocated some horrible things. So, what is the joke and what are you sorry about, Loveschild?

I hope you are okay.
76
To Chaya760,

Thank you. It is good to read you, as I think of you often. I hope you have peace and joy.

To Linda with a Y,

Thank you, too.
77
49 51 59 62 63 72 is an impostor people, my last comment here till now was 48. Not that this is the first time Slog has allowed a troll to hijack my image but this is the fist time it has allowed the exact name to be hijacked. I thought that was supposed to be prevented with registration ?

Or is it because Slog and it's administrators don't like different views ? They certainly have not allowed a troll to hijack the names and images of others.
79
Not buying it. They all link back to the same place. You either had a conscience yesterday, or you are a group project and one of you has broke rank. Either way I don't have time for this. I only checked back to see if you were okay. "Distract me" time is over.
80
@77: I've been spoofed, so save your woe is me for someone who isn't fooled by your constant barrage of lies.
81
Ahahahaha...
Loveschild, either you are a group project gone awry, or somebody has found out your password and decided to screw with you. If you want to continue subjecting us to your insane and bigoted ideas, you'd better change your password before whoever hacked it does.
LOLLERSKATES.
82
@80 Whoever it is that is doing the hijacking did so gradually. But you know what ? whoever it is that's the Slog's administrator could take care of it if he/she really wanted. Because I was registered long before the troll took my name.

But fret not dear, you're safe from such because Slog doesn't allow this to happen with commenter's with whom they agree with.

78 impostor.

84
@82: Typically, administrators won't intervene unless the owner of the account asks them to. Change your password and if that still doesn't work, contact an admin.
Stop trying to make a martyr out of yourself.
85
@84: Please.

They're the same person.
86
Wow, fool me once my fault. Is this going to turn into another Sybil right before our eyes? I wonder what the trigger was?

Cue the "Twilight Zone or Outer Limits" theme song.
87
Damn, she was hacked.

I really wanted to watch as Sybil emerged although I was worried for her kids.
88
87: But the most interesting thing to come out of it was the anon post on another thread that said "Loveschild posts as several different people (at least a couple registered and sometimes unregistered) trying to stir up shit."
89
73ftw
90
Dammit, I can't believe I missed the posts from LC everyone is talking about!
91
I see, Loveschild, that you will not change your mind. It saddens me but does not really surprise me. Here are some counter points to what you argued @47:

You assume, like most Christians, that Jesus' sacrifice makes all the laws of the Old Testament null and void. Where in the New Testament is this said? It's your misfortune that we started this discussion while I'm reading an article entitled "Jesus and the Law" by Tikva Frymer-Kensky ("Studies in Bible and Feminist Criticism", pages 119 - 131) so I know that Jesus never said the laws of the talmud should be abolished, and he never breaks one of those laws himself. He does go against the Pharisees, who were the fundamentalists of their day, for obeying the letter of the law over the spirit. And, therefore, one can make an argument that Jesus was anti-fundamentalism and would disapprove of such believers today.

You quote Romans but do not answer my argument that since that verse was written nearly 2,000 years ago, it was influenced by that culture and time. That men wrote down what they thought God wanted but were invariably human and wove in their own ideas and their culture's beliefs. Not to mention that the Bible has been translated so many times; those translators were human, too and made mistakes and influenced the Bible.

God, you believe people that get AIDS are suffering because of God's wrath. There are many counter arguments I could make. Here's one: lesbians have the lowest rate (compared with straights and gay men) of getting AIDS. Does that mean God hates us less than he hates gay men?

As to how many evangelicals there are in this country: "The study categorizes white evangelicals, 26.3% of the population, as the country's largest religious cohort;[2] another study estimates evangelicals of all races at 30–35%." - Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianit…

Yes, 76% identify as Christian but 25% of that number is Catholic. That leaves 51% who are Protestant. How many of those do you think are fundamentalists? If it's not all of them, you don't have a majority.

Then there was a lot of pretty nonsensical ranting until your last paragraph. Take it from a Jew, being hated for millennia does not mean you're wrong. Religious Jews and Christians in fact take it to mean they are right. Jews believe we're the chosen people. Christians glorify martyrs.

Your last comment is simple biology. Sex with someone of the same sex does not produce babies. So? What's wrong with that? I think, and have thought this obvious since I first came out in high school, that it makes sense that gay people exist, biologically. Population control. With 95% of people reproducing, the human race has never been in danger of dying out.

It's been a pleasure arguing with you.

92
Best wishes to you and your family, Kim. I'll be thinking about you and wishing you love, grace, peace--all that good stuff. Warm regards.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.