published Sunday, May 30th, 2010

Veterans Cemetery

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

66
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
ProgressiveInTN said...

This perfectly illustrates the injustice in our armed services when it comes to sexual orientation. Thank you for being brave enough to approach this hot button topic on a related holiday. I hope it makes some people think - because truly the injustice is as gross and as dishonorable as digging up a grave, carting off the remains of a human being and stripping a life's work and service for a reason that cannot be logically or morally defended. Thank you for bringing attention to this issue. Justice passed the House - here's hoping for the Senate to follow in doing the right thing. Children will remember this injustice as we remember segregation. Let's pray progress is made accordingly.

May 30, 2010 at 1:05 a.m.
OllieH said...

Fantastic cartoon, Clay!

I'm always proud to call you Chattanooga's own!

May 30, 2010 at 1:54 a.m.
SavartiTN said...

Perfect!

May 30, 2010 at 2:02 a.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

Clay - your cartoon is right on the mark for proving the point you were trying to make - appreciate the boldness.

ProgressiveInTN: I can agree with you in regards to the controversy over unequal treatment in our armed services, however I cannot stand by and let you make some of the comments you did without respectfully interjecting my thoughts, feelings and convictions. Your comment about the judgement of a person's sexuality not being logically or morally defended bothers me. Logically, the male and female bodies were designed specifically for a purpose and to work together for that purpose, being childbirth. Maybe you've heard the phrase "God made "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" - it's true (Genesis). Morally? Well, I really can't believe we in the world today are questioning the morality of something that is such an incredible perversion of truth and reality. Those children you speak of later in your comment - how will they ever exist to learn about this injustice if they are never conceived through a mother and father? I hope I haven't missunderstood your points and have therefore ranted on and on. I, like you I'm sure, am proud and so very thankful for our soldiers who are serving and have served their country, gay or not. Their lifestyle should have no bearing on how they are remembered - rather, that they served their country courageously and paid the ultimate price. I may not agree with the lifestyle, but I can definitely respect, admire, and if the situation presents itself, honor them as defenders of our freedom.

May 30, 2010 at 2:39 a.m.
alprova said...

Another fine cartoon -- one that is truly topical, truly divisive, and that will truly bring out the best and the worst in people.

It's always easy to spot the people who have never interacted, uh...speaking in platonic terms of course, with those who live alternative lifestyles. Listening to several military leaders speaking on the issue of gays serving in the military, these ignorant people stand out like sore thumbs.

Children are often told that homosexuals are to be feared and condemned for their "abnormal behavior," because all they want to do, (pardon me in advance for this) is to get into their pants.

Quite often, the child will remember that initial introductory perception for life, that is if they do not discover at some point that they are gay. Perceptions are rarely insight into the reality of a situation though.

Anyone who enlists in the military is well aware that the environment will be quite rigid, monitored severely, and that their lifestyles will be required to be shoved to the back burner for as long as they serve.

Do straight men or women join the military because doing so advances their chances of experiencing wild and adventurous encounters with members of the opposite gender? Of course not. If all a gay person has on their mind is to jump from partner to partner, entering the military is about the most unrealistic institution in which to further that goal.

It was proposed the other day by a high ranking military officer that if gays are allowed to serve openly, that separate quarters would have to be provided to them, which is the first sign that the man had never likely known anyone who declared themselves to be gay. However, He's very likely to have known several gay men during his career in the military.

Why? Because the simple fact is that our military has many gay people currently serving our country. They are not in the military for the purpose of carving notches into their headboards. They are in the military for the same reasons that their straight peers are. They are serving our nation in the same capacity and after making the same choices to voluntarily serve our nation.

Casting these people out of the military, especially after years of amassing stellar records of service, when they choose to declare their lifestyle openly, is a tragedy and it needs to come to a screeching halt.

Those that fear and condemn gay people need to trade in their ignorance for a little education to the reality that gay people are not all the same, nor should they be judged or generalized by the more "flamboyant" behavior exhibited by some gay people, whom would be the least likely to even consider military careers.

Everyone and anyone deserves to be considered an individual and judged accordingly.

Oh...and despite charges to the contrary by the bird person, I write this as a happily married man of many years, to a woman of the Homo sapien, female persuasion.

May 30, 2010 at 3:24 a.m.
alprova said...

chattpatriot08 wrote: "Logically, the male and female bodies were designed specifically for a purpose and to work together for that purpose..."


Logically, in the animal kingdom, the same would hold just as true, however, homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 species and the 'phenomenon' has been well-described for 500 of them.


"...being childbirth."


And as we all know to be a 'documented fact,' all opposite gendered couples ONLY close the door, turn out the lights, and enter into a heavy breathing session for the SOLE purpose of procreating.

The arguments are always the same. It will only be a matter of time before those who thump the Bible as the "word of God," crank up their rhetoric.

I have held a theory for decades that homosexuality is God's plan to control over-population of Earth. It's a very simplistic theory, but to anyone who would disagree with it, I ask one simple question.

Why not? Make an argument that does not include a quotation from the Bible.

That of course never settles well with those who hold every word contained in the Bible to be literal and without any instance of errancy, self-aggrandizing motivations or ulterior motives having been involved, or sanctimonious manipulation of any wording contained in the Bible, by anyone who translated the Bible into the English language.

One thing I know is that there is not a soul alive on this Earth who can begin to disprove my unpopular theory, with anything other than their personal belief(s).

May 30, 2010 at 4:05 a.m.
alprova said...

chattpatriot08 wrote: "Those children you speak of later in your comment - how will they ever exist to learn about this injustice if they are never conceived through a mother and father?"


That's a little weak, don't you think?

Documented, scientific studies have shown that homosexuals comprise somewhere between 3% and 10% of the worlds population, hardly an alarming statistic to suggest that there is any threat of an elimination of our species any time soon.

And contrary to popular belief, it is not a fact that prizes are awarded to current homosexuals who recruit others into the ranks.

It is a fact, at least in America, that heterosexuals are not procreating like they once were. They apparently are enjoying the act so much, that they are forgetting to concentrate on the reason they are engaged in the act.

May 30, 2010 at 4:27 a.m.
JohnnyRingo said...

Excellent Clay. This is an angle I hadn't considered, and wonder how long before the far right bring it up in serious conversation.

After all, wouldn't a soldier be stripped of awards and medals gained under what they believe to be fraudulent service? Maybe they'll generously grandfather in the gays who already gave life or limbs in the line of duty.

May 30, 2010 at 4:35 a.m.
woody said...

Clay, as I stated pertaining to Saturday's 'toon', this one was worth the wait.

I would dearly love to say something here which would be prolific enough to be remembered or, at the very least, pondered. However, I know, as does every other level-headed blogger here knows, that is impossible.

The 'lines' were drawn long before many of us can remember, and even farther back than that. Each side has been schooled or indoctrinated as to their respective beliefs, so I believe change at this juncture is not within our 'lifetime' grasp.

If only we could all live our lives without fear of some form of discrimination or hate then maybe we could all take everyone else at 'face' value. The problem, as I see it, is that we only see that which we want to, and not the person within.

If that should ever happen, in my humble opinion, no one will ever again have to ask..they'll be able to tell.

Have a memorable Memorial Day, Woody

May 30, 2010 at 8:39 a.m.
InspectorBucket said...

That would be absurd.

Did the soldier execute his or her orders with alacrity, efficiency, attention, excellence, and honor?

No other question matters, whether from far right or far left.

The vagaries of provincial prejudice or political progressivism are alike blocks to military efficiency.

May 30, 2010 at 9:49 a.m.
dewey said...

Wow, maybe took it a little to far with this one.Most of the time I find these cartoon very interesting. Not so much this time. Really just sad and maybe lacks a little taste.

May 30, 2010 at 10:48 a.m.
OllieH said...

Woody writes, "Each side has been schooled or indoctrinated as to their respective beliefs, so I believe change at this juncture is not within our 'lifetime' grasp."

Sometimes social change is revolutionary and sometimes it's evolutionary. But most of the time, it's a little bit of both.

Certainly, the most profound changes in the unconditional acceptance of gays and lesbians will be, as woody predicts, generational. If you look at polling data on issues related to homosexuality, the younger generation of adults are much more progressive in their views. The generation after them, will be even more so.

But that doesn't mean that we haven't been able to teach an old dog new tricks. When I think about how glacial change seems to be on some issues in this country, I try to think about the changes over my lifetime. The issue a gay rights, when viewed over time, has moved forward steadily and significantly... even if it doesn't seem that way at times.

The 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' law that we find so unreasonable today, for instance, was an vast improvement on how the military used to deal with homosexuality within its ranks. Although DADT is far from perfect, it did put an end to an official policy of inquiring about a recruit's sexual orientation. Formerly, gay soldiers would have to deny their own sexual orientation directly. Under the current law, they simply were asked to keep it a secret.

A flawed improvement, no doubt, but an improvement, nonetheless.

Civil Rights protection for gays and lesbians have seen an evolution, too. Although the Civil Rights Act of 1964, unfortunately, still fails to include homosexuals as a group worthy of protection against job discrimination, more states than not, have enacted their own laws to extend those rights to gays and lesbians.

Of course, gay marriage has seen advances, as well, with the list of states recognizing same-sex marriage growing all the time.

One day, our children's children will look back with astonishment at the days when soldiers were drummed out of the military for simply being gay. They will look back in disgrace at the days when every category of American was protected from discrimination, EXCEPT homosexuals. And they will look back in disbelief that same-sex marriage was not an accepted practice.

That will be a great day. But that great day would never have arrived without the incremental progress that was made during our lifetimes.

The folks who don't see that eventuality as progress, don't really matter in the long run. They're on the wrong side of history, and will be remembered 50 years from now like we now look back on those who opposed sharing the lunch counter at Woolworth's.

These folks may win an occasional battle in the revolution, but they cannot stop the evolution.

May 30, 2010 at 11:28 a.m.
toonfan said...

dewey writes, "Most of the time I find these cartoon very interesting. Not so much this time. Really just sad and maybe lacks a little taste.'

The cartoon is more than fine, dewey. What's sad and lacking in taste is the discrimination that currently exists in our country's military.

May 30, 2010 at 11:47 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

Great cartoon Clay... Thanks.

May 30, 2010 at 12:19 p.m.
EaTn said...

Someday in the not too distant future biological science will explicitly prove whether sexual preference is a choice, a birth trait or another type causal factor. Some will be surprised and others will always doubt.

May 30, 2010 at 1:09 p.m.
rolando said...

Mr. Bennett -- That is the cheapest shot, the most despicable drawing, and the most bigoted product you have drawn to date. If you had any sense of combat camaraderie you would know that.

You, sir, have crossed the line of decency when you draw that kind of trash. You slap the face in insult of not only our honorable military dead -- including the homosexuals whoever they may be -- but our living veterans as well...all of them.

I am a bit surprised you did not also draw something "witty" against the Wisconsin combat vet who was to be evicted for flying the American Flag in his apartment this week end.

Yes, I am irate, angry, and deeply offended by your crass attempt at political humor at the expense of our military -- a favorite target of Progressives...not that my objections matter at all to your sycophants on this thread. I am but a Conservative, after all. A voting one.

P.S. When can we expect your drawing of the two-fold expulsion from that cemetary of the Boy and Girl Scouts who 1) decorate the graves of the fallen with...oh, horrors...the American Flag or 2) because their leaders cannot be homosexual/lesbian? [I notice you did a bit of that on this drawing...adults only bearing flags.]

[Tip of the hat to dewey and InspectorBucket as the only other voices of independent thought and reason hereon.]

May 30, 2010 at 2:12 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

alprova writes in response:

"Logically, in the animal kingdom, the same would hold just as true, however, homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 species and the 'phenomenon' has been well-described for 500 of them."

 Your Wikipedia research (nearly word-for-word) isn't so bullet-proof when you look at the sentence before yours quoted above that states this research is related to "non-human animals".

"And as we all know to be a 'documented fact,' all opposite gendered couples ONLY close the door, turn out the lights, and enter into a heavy breathing session for the SOLE purpose of procreating."

 I'm not sure this (sarcastic) choice of words was necessary to help prove your point - this is obviously NOT always the case.

"The arguments are always the same. It will only be a matter of time before those who thump the Bible as the "word of God," crank up their rhetoric." "I have held a theory for decades that homosexuality is God's plan to control over-population of Earth. It's a very simplistic theory, but to anyone who would disagree with it, I ask one simple question.Why not? Make an argument that does not include a quotation from the Bible. One thing I know is that there is not a soul alive on this Earth who can begin to disprove my unpopular theory, with anything other than their personal belief(s)."

 The arguments ARE always the same because our foundation never changes - it' one thing you can guarantee to stay the same. As for your theory, it's very interesting really. Would you agree that natural disasters and disease fall into that same category of natural population controls? My biggest confusion lies in your insistence and seemingly cocky assurance about your theory that homosexuality is God's way of controlling population. Why do you insist this if you denounce "Bible thumping"? Does this mean you believe in God but not His scriptures? I'm not saying your theory is flawed, but I'm skeptical that God would use something he doesn't condone as a means to control the population He created. As for your last statement,"...there is not a soul alive on this Earth who can begin to disprove my unpopular theory, with anything other than their personal belief(s)." - are you or are you not using YOUR personal beliefs to justify your theory? So what you're saying is that my or anyone else's personal beliefs are not up to par with yours - substandard to yours? You have created a theory that can't be proven or disproven because it is based on God using homosexuality as population control - something no one - not even you, sir, can prove. Yours is a bold statement coming from someone who has no foundation in their beliefs other than "their beliefs".
May 30, 2010 at 2:49 p.m.
casey9490 said...

How is this offensive to the military, Rolando?

May 30, 2010 at 2:54 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

I agree completely with InspectorBucket - do they get the job done? Enough said. I'm sure Clay's intentions were not as cruel and degrading as some here have concluded. Either way, let's not forget the real reason for the celebration this holiday weekend.

With that, I say a huge thank you to our men and women who have and are serving in the armed forces today. You are not forgotten.

Happy Memorial Day to everyone!

May 30, 2010 at 3:01 p.m.
OllieH said...

What's got your panties all bunched up, rolando? This is a GREAT editorial cartoon that should upset only those who would banish gays from military service. And it should only upset them because it perfectly illustrates the callousness and ignobility of there political position.

If you truly believe that the duty of the U.S. military is, first and foremost, to protect our freedom and liberty, don't you think it a tad bit paradoxical that the they do not even practice the very virtues they profess to defend?

You should be insulted, rolando. You should be irate, and even deeply offended. Not at this cartoon, but by the circumstances that make this cartoon such a logical extension of a policy that is so morally and legally flawed.

Frankly, I've been a bit surprised (pleasantly so) at the dearth of outrage in this discussion. I assumed, upon first viewing, that this powerful cartoon would be so jarring that some would succumb to reflexive outrage instead of contemplative analysis.

I should have known you wouldn't let me down.

You couldn't be more wrong about this particular cartoon. It uses logic, exaggeration, shock, and humor- all to great effect. If you are personally offended because Clay Bennett has publicly schooled you and everyone else who shares your backward views on homosexuality, then say so. But please do not profess to speak on behalf of the military, those who have served in the military, or those who have died in its service.

May 30, 2010 at 3:20 p.m.
reaganwasright said...

rolando,

I'm a little surprised by you.

You commonly use exagerration and absurdity to make your points. Why is it ok for you, but not for Clay?

Also, your post hinted at some level of support for gay veterans. What is the extent of that support? Do you have any outrage for the system that will discharge people who serve our bravely but kick them out if they acknowledge they are gay?

Perhaps you just didn't have the time to fully ellucidate.

May 30, 2010 at 3:48 p.m.
alprova said...

Chattpatriot08 wrote: "Your Wikipedia research (nearly word-for-word) isn't so bullet-proof when you look at the sentence before yours quoted above that states this research is related to "non-human animals".


Well now, wait a minute. The argument has always been that homosexuality is contrary to nature. The fact that "Non-human animals" do in fact engage in acts of homosexuality seems to blow that assertion out of the water.


"Would you agree that natural disasters and disease fall into that same category of natural population controls?"


Certainly.


"My biggest confusion lies in your insistence and seemingly cocky assurance about your theory that homosexuality is God's way of controlling population. Why do you insist this if you denounce "Bible thumping"? Does this mean you believe in God but not His scriptures?"


Without question, I believe in God and I do believe Jesus to be his Son. However, I consider the Bible to be a book of religious reference, with not one word contained within it to have been written by God or his Son.

The scriptures were written by mortals, much like you and I.

To refer to the Bible as the word of God or to consider each and every word in it the end-all debate answer to every question regarding man's existence and purpose on Earth, contradicts the purpose of the brain I was endowed with.

If all God wanted was devoted worshipers, who should never think for themselves or should never question or ponder, he or she as the case may be, would have created billions of mindless zombies with puppet strings attached to their extremities.


"I'm skeptical that God would use something he doesn't condone as a means to control the population He created."


How do you or anyone else conclusively know what our Creator condones or does not condone?

People who take it upon themselves to attempt to convey what they think God approves of disapproves of, are in my opinion taking the name of the Lord in vain. No one that I am aware of, has been granted the authority to speak for or on behalf of God.


"...are you or are you not using YOUR personal beliefs to justify your theory? So what you're saying is that my or anyone else's personal beliefs are not up to par with yours - substandard to yours? You have created a theory that can't be proven or disproven because it is based on God using homosexuality as population control - something no one - not even you, sir, can prove. Yours is a bold statement coming from someone who has no foundation in their beliefs other than "their beliefs"..."


I did call it a THEORY. I never presented it as being a fact.

I hate to break this to you, but your using the Bible to substantiate your opinion is the basis of your own belief.

Those most often opposed to homosexuality will never set the Bible aside, because the minute they do it, they have nothing left to support their rhetorical arguments.

May 30, 2010 at 3:57 p.m.
SeaSmokie59er said...

:)

May 30, 2010 at 4:45 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

alprova wrote: "Without question, I believe in God and I do believe Jesus to be his Son. However, I consider the Bible to be a book of religious reference, with not one word contained within it to have been written by God or his Son."

Alprova, let me offer you this excerpt from a Christian apologetic friend of mine:

"...it is very reasonable and logical to believe that Scripture is historically reliable and factual. For example, archaeology has shown Scripture to be historically accurate and reliable on numerous occasions. The finding of Hezekiah’s Tunnel and the collapsed walls of Jericho are excellent examples. Those are just two among many examples we could discuss. Also, the historical documentation we have is extremely strong evidence that Scripture is accurate. We have very early records from both secular and non-secular historians and other sources regarding the events and people of the New Testament. Let me give you an example. I propose a hypothetical scenario: Several friends of mine join me to shoot off one of the most incredible fireworks displays anyone has ever seen this upcoming Independence Day; however, no one brought a video camera that day. Twenty to twenty-five years later, a few of those friends write a document about the incredible display of fireworks that they had seen. Then, 140 years later, their great, great grandsons write about the same display of fireworks they have heard about from their ancestors. I think we could both agree that the document written twenty to twenty-five years after the event would be much more reliable than the document written 140 years after the event, primarily because it was written by eyewitnesses of the events. It is this way with Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ. I am sure that we both agree that Julius Caesar was a real person, and more specifically, a Roman emperor. The first document regarding Julius Caesar’s life was written 140 years after his death. The first document written about Jesus’ death and resurrection, was written only 20-25 years after the events by Paul, a witness of the resurrected Christ. In addition, many critics believe that Paul, Peter, and James first met for the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem in A.D. 35, at which Paul confirmed that he was preaching the correct gospel. The information discussed in that meeting is then referenced by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3 when Paul uses his Pharisaic background to express the accuracy of his transmission of the gospel to the Corinthians. With Christ’s resurrection happening between A.D. 30-33, this puts the meeting of the Jerusalem Council and the confirmation of the gospel message at that meeting only 2-5 years after the resurrection. That exceeds satisfaction in regards to historical literary timeliness."

May 30, 2010 at 6:52 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

alprova wrote:

"...contradicts the purpose of the brain I was endowed with."

That would be the brain God endowed all of us with, giving us the power of choice.


"If all God wanted was devoted worshipers, who should never think for themselves or should never question or ponder, he or she as the case may be, would have created billions of mindless zombies with puppet strings attached to their extremities."

But He didn't, did He? Isn't that great for both of us?! He created us the way we are because He is a wonderfully creative God and desires to have relationships with all of His children. He does demand our worship, but not to the extent of puppets on a string. Come on.


"How do you or anyone else conclusively know what our Creator condones or does not condone?"

For starters, it's called the Ten Commandments. How about "Thou shalt not kill."


"I hate to break this to you, but your using the Bible to substantiate your opinion is the basis of your own belief.

Those most often opposed to homosexuality will never set the Bible aside, because the minute they do it, they have nothing left to support their rhetorical arguments."

And by using the Bible, I have a source - a foundation. It is in fact the basis of my own belief, as well as nearly 1/3 of the rest of the World. What then is the basis of your belief system?

May 30, 2010 at 6:54 p.m.

For someone that has degrees in History and Theology, Chattpatriot is winning this debate in regards of foundation of beliefs. You can't disprove someone's belief of a substance with no proof alprova. which is why Yes, no one can prove you wrong, just as if I said I believed a spaghetti monster created the universe for God, you can't disprove me. I think you are being argumentative just to for the sake.

May 30, 2010 at 8:03 p.m.
InspectorBucket said...

Sorry to disagree. But your friend's comparison seems untrue.

Christ wrote no records of his own life or his own teaching.

As your friend writes, stories about Christ were passed about from believer to believer during generation or generations before the penning of the gospels. Thomas Jefferson famously saw this intermediate period of inter-meddling as the crux of the problem in locating the transmitted truth of Christ:

http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA227&dq=thomas+jefferson+jesus+sophist&ei=4f0CTPOIK4K78gbjhbXhDQ&ct=result&id=i86QueQOSGsC#v=onepage&q&f=false

By contrast, Caesar wrote plentiful propaganda about his own military campaigns (Commentarii de Bello Gallico) and political rivalries (Commentarii de Bello Civili).

http://books.google.com/books?id=348ZAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:civil+inauthor:caesar&lr=&as_brr=1&ei=QP8CTP3aAo_yywSb1OXqDA&client=firefox-a&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

And there are innumerable documents written about Caesar's life and career by major contemporary Romans, Cicero being foremost among them.

M. Tullii Ciceronis orationes http://books.google.com/books?id=tYkvAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA406&dq=caesar+inauthor:cicero&lr=&as_brr=1&ei=bv8CTKmlCoP4yASju7maDA&client=firefox-a&cd=1#v=onepage&q=caesar%20inauthor%3Acicero&f=false

The correspondence of M. Tullius Cicero http://books.google.com/books?id=_cwNAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA332&dq=%22autem+die+caesar%22+inauthor:cicero&lr=&as_brr=1&ei=KwADTOSCHZLKygT_9e24DA&client=firefox-a&cd=1#v=onepage&q=%22autem%20die%20caesar%22%20inauthor%3Acicero&f=false

May 30, 2010 at 8:22 p.m.
una61 said...

Back on point. I can understand Rolando's indignation. Bennett can draw a cartoon satirizing the plight of homosexuals in the military. I don't care. However, our national cemeteries both here and abroad are Hallowed Ground containing the remains of hundreds of thousands of American veterans. Their final resting place should never be politicized. As a 71 year old USAF veteran, I plan to be buried in the National Cemetery in Chattanooga. I have attended military funerals of my veteran friends and when my son and I were in Scouts, we helped plant U.S. flags on the graves in the Chattanooga National Cemetery.

May 30, 2010 at 8:49 p.m.
Humphrey said...

Everybody should be treated equally, with dignity and respect, and on their own merits.

It really doesn't matter what any of you think about whether or not who they want to have sex with is right or wrong.

At least it shouldn't.

May 30, 2010 at 9:17 p.m.
alprova said...

Chattpatriot08 wrote: "Alprova, let me offer you this excerpt from a Christian apologetic friend of mine:

"...it is very reasonable and logical to believe that Scripture is historically reliable and factual. [snip]"


Interesting, but we're not talking about writings that were originally written 25 or 140 years ago. We're talking about writings that were originally written thousands of years ago, but have been changed dramatically over eons of time.

We're talking about writings that were originally translated or created, as the case most certainly is, into English in 1611, going on to be revised and amended in 1629, 1638, 1657, 1762, and 1769.

The last revisions to the Bible that we use today were completed in 1833, undertaken by Noah Webster. His intentions were honest and the changes involved were very subtle, mostly grammatical in nature.

We're talking about a modern day Bible that was seized by a clearly insane King of England, who convened a Court to prosecute his religious detractors, the Puritans, who at the time were members of the Church of England. James assumed command of the Church, took complete control of the translation effort underway at the time by those who were attempting to be literal in their translations, and then dictated what the Bible would and would not contain.

King James instructed translators to word applicable passages of the Bible to reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs in an ordained clergy. The translation that some consider the "word of God" was performed at his behest by 47 scholars, all of whom were "approved" members of the Church of England.

The Bible as we know it was created to instruct man to revolve everything around a centralized Church. You tithe to churches because King James dictated it and included it in the Bible. If you are a Catholic, your local priest is your pathway to and from God, because King James dictated it.

The Bible you read and consider Holy, resembles nothing at all what it would have, had it been literally transcribed from it's original sources.

This self-ordained King of the Catholic Church took control of it and amended it to reflect his own interests.

The Puritans who FIRST made their way here onto these lands that we call the United States of America, were escaping the persecution of the Church of England.

Yet, as we all should know, the Church of England and their influenced writings survive to this day in the form of the modern day, King James Version of the Bible.

May 30, 2010 at 10:34 p.m.
rolando said...

Many replies needed here.

-- Humphrey: Yes, it is most definitely their business, not ours. But none of us need to have it thrown in our faces, as it were. They won their "sodomy" battle in the SCOTUS based on that very concept...they should leave it at that.

The dead aren't having sex with anyone, are they? As several have said here, what they did while alive is not at issue...Bennett brought that to the table with this snide little political jab at high level policy-makers -- it has nothing to do with the dead.

-- casey9490: una61, in his 8:49PM post, said it much better and more calmly than I ever could. Please read his post; your answer lies therein.

-- reaganwasright said: "You commonly use exagerration and absurdity to make your points. Why is it ok for you, but not for Clay?

"Also, your post hinted at some level of support for gay veterans. What is the extent of that support? Do you have any outrage for the system that will discharge people who serve our bravely but kick them out if they acknowledge they are gay?"

Bennett picked the wrong time and place for his jab at our military, rwr. He left himself open to further criticism by depicting adults placing the flags. Be that as it may, Bennett implies official VA policy would force the exhumation of the remains of a soldier simply because he was a homosexual. What a ridiculous premise that should never be used in the fashion in which he used it. These are our honorable dead he besmirched. [Note for alpo: I commonly use the generic pronoun when actual gender is unknown.]

My post was not made in support of homosexuals, rwr. I am ambivalent on the topic of homosexuals in the military so long as they do not flaunt it. Official policy states that is against good order within the ranks; I subscribe to that statement. All we need is for some guy to get a daily erection in a shower full of men. When the guy beside you takes a bullet, his sexual persuasion makes no difference at all...

-- Finally, chattpatriot08: And this is not to be critical of your posting earlier regarding today [30 May] as a day of celebration. Please -- it is a solemn day of mourning for our fallen military...it is not really a day to celebrate, although it has sadly become that in the public mind...and is just another paid holiday. That's why they "celebrate" it tomorrow instead of today.

As another 71-year old career USAF member, I am and have been a strong believer in our military and maintaining their dignity in death. They should NEVER be used to make a political point or be turned into a mediafest photo-op for personal aggrandizement.

rant=off

May 30, 2010 at 10:57 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

Alprova, it's such a relief to me that the KJV translation of the Bible isn't the only one in circulation today. You spent a lot of time focusing on King James, and yes, he did influence "his" translation for certain personal gain - we know that though. Thankfully, we can reference original manuscripts in Latin or Greek for a pure message, long before King James.

May 30, 2010 at 10:59 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

A strong gay gene would make itself extinct, so what gay people do is to some extent a matter of choice, however hard some choices may be. (And if gay were a gene, so would anything else be; isn't that Kansas church all related?) I Corinthians 5:9-13 tells Christians to keep away from anyone who calls himself a brother (a Christian) but is a fornicator, idolator, drunkard, etc.; but not to separate from people who sin in those ways without calling themselves Christians. So gays in the military is no worse Biblically than gays in Wal-Mart. Can gays help the military do its job? Probably help some, hurts some, and what gays do isn't the only sex that can hurt the military. What, 10% of military women are pregnant at any given time, and in some cases they can't do their jobs as well? We need to face the facts, whatever these are. Most women have less muscle than most men, so men are usually better for muscle jobs. Whatever sex rules the military needs to do its job are probably OK for it. Christian groups in the military need to be able to throw gays out of the group, but not out of the Army. Toleration cuts both ways, right? Jesus showed both enormous acceptance to sinners, and perfect holiness calling sinners to repent and become saints. (And the Gospel of Matthew was written within a year of Pentecost, for converts who needed something to take home with them; a minority opinion I'll stand by unless convinced otherwise. Even John's gospel was written before A.D. 70; consider 11:45-53. I suppose Caesar wrote his war stories, but the oldest copies are hundreds of years later than he wrote, not 70-250 years as is true of the New Testament.) "Progressive" is no standard--the turkey I thawed too long is progressing from bad to worse in the trash. What does God want? Look at Jesus.

May 30, 2010 at 11 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

"Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar."

"You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."

  • Barry Goldwater a.k.a. "Mr. Conservative"
May 30, 2010 at 11:06 p.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

Rolando,

My apologies for any offense taken. By celebrate, I meant in a positive but reverent light, the lives of those who fought and gave their lives. Thank you sir for your career service to our country - you are a hero to us all.

May 30, 2010 at 11:14 p.m.
alprova said...

Chattpatriot08 wrote: "That would be the brain God endowed all of us with, giving us the power of choice."


Agreed, but often time, those with rigid religious beliefs seem to also believe that they have the right to dictate standards under which everyone else should live. Their tolerance only extends as far as their belief structure.


I previously wrote: "How do you or anyone else conclusively know what our Creator condones or does not condone?"

Chattpatriot responded: "For starters, it's called the Ten Commandments. How about "Thou shalt not kill."


Sorry Counselor, but that is hearsay evidence.

Imagine if you will any man alive today, who would claim to have went to some remote place on Earth, spoken with God, and that God had instructed him to share with the world, five more holy commandments that we as a people are to live by.

It wouldn't matter what those commandments consisted of, or how relevant that they may be to all of our lives. Such a man would never be believed, not even by yourself.

But because the Bible relates that many years ago, such an incident took place, it is to be believed without question.

Is that logical?


"And by using the Bible, I have a source - a foundation. It is in fact the basis of my own belief, as well as nearly 1/3 of the rest of the World. What then is the basis of your belief system?"


Trust me, I get it. This isn't my first rodeo. People will cling to that Bible and believe every word in it to be Holy and beyond reproach. My wife is one of them. We have argued many times over that very issue.

When the Warren Commission released their written findings on the JFK assassination, many people came to believe wholeheartedly in the "magic bullet theory" that was related in those writings.

There are people in this country who firmly believe that former President Bush conspired with others to crash four planes into New York and Washington D.C., causing the deaths of more than 3,000 people on September 11, 2001. Some of these same people think that Flight 93 landed safely in Cleveland, Ohio and that all of those people are alive and well.

People sometimes believe what they want to believe, no matter how illogical it may be to do so.

I believe first and foremost that which I can see, hear, touch, taste, and smell.

I am a person who has always used the power of my brain to assimilate information, to digest it, and to sort it. I research sources, motivations, historical aspects, and anything else of relevance to determine what makes sense or does not make sense to me.

More to the point, I began to question and to research the Bible during my junior year in high school, following four semesters of a Bible literature course.

To basically sum it up, you need your Bible...your foundation...to base your beliefs upon.

I don't and I never will. I allow my brain to roam freely to reason, deduce, and to arrive at logical conclusions.

May 30, 2010 at 11:45 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

AndrewLohr, haven't you posted those stats about women in the military before?

I think that it is sad that some people think that gays don't want to serve their country. Why would homosexuality make you NOT patriotic?

The point of the cartoon is that is HAS seemed to matter whether or not a person was gay and defending our country. Seems like there is always some kind of witch hunt going on.

~Jesus wasn't a conservative.~

May 30, 2010 at 11:47 p.m.
alprova said...

Rebelliousnature wrote: "For someone that has degrees in History and Theology, Chattpatriot is winning this debate in regards of foundation of beliefs."


Okay, I respect that. I'm not necessarily in this to win anything.


"You can't disprove someone's belief of a substance with no proof alprova. which is why Yes, no one can prove you wrong..."


Fair enough. I'm well aware of that fact. It's why I made the challenge.

Conversely, no one can prove the Bible contains the ultimate, indisputable answer to every contentious issue, such as this one. The Bible is a crutch for those who are unable to present any logical argument to support their opinion.


"...if I said I believed a spaghetti monster created the universe for God, you can't disprove me. I think you are being argumentative just to for the sake."


For sure, we are off the path that this thread should be on, but I don't argue just to have something to do.

My arguments aside, one thing is for sure;

This world would be a far better place if people would just live their lives as they choose and butt the heck out of everyone else's life.

God created this world, all that is in it. He made each and every one of us different in some way. No two of us are alike.

One of my deductions as to the meaning of life, is that we were put here around the world, so different in so many ways, to see if we can find a way to become a people that bridges all differences and one day will live in complete peace and respect for one another.

Or we could have all been dumped here by aliens and we'll just destroy ourselves in due time.

May 31, 2010 at 12:28 a.m.
chattpatriot08 said...

Alprova, I read your response to "Rebelliousnature" and am more surprised at your answers each time we write. So far you believe in God and Jesus and that God created the world we live in and all of us in it, but you don't believe the Bible as the Word of God (nothing more than a history book).

You say,"...no one can prove the Bible contains the ultimate, indisputable answer to every contentious issue, such as this one. The Bible is a crutch for those who are unable to present any logical argument to support their opinion."

In fact, the Bible does NOT contain the ultimate, indisputable answer to every contentious issue. We are only human and therefore only have limited knowledge and discernment - imagine if the creator of us and the entire universe, which we both agree is God, made us able to understand Him and all if His ways. What then? We would not need Him, nor would we need Jesus to save us from our sin, because Adam would have never committed his Original Sin. Your "crutch" statement sounds like a frustrated hit below the belt. Your argument is that there are believers like me and thinkers like you. Believers being those that apparently don't feel the need to use their brains and logic (like I am now?) and thinkers who contend that reality and logic only exists as far as they or someone else can think it.

Sir, this is absolutely flawed. We will never know the answers to all things in the universe - our human brains will never compute on that level.

"This world would be a far better place if people would just live their lives as they choose and butt the heck out of everyone else's life."

I absolutely agree, unless invited to butt in, of course.

Alprova, you are most certainly a thinker - I'll give you that one. Our banter has been good for me, as I hope it has been for you as well. Undoubtedly, we have both put questions in the other's head and will grow from this experience. My prayer is that with all you know and the fact that you do believe in God and Jesus, you will come around to the legitimacy of God's scriptures and the truths He offers us in them. There is nothing wrong with putting our God-given brains to work for Him, studying His Word and applying it daily to our lives, but you must realize your sinful nature and accept that you need Christ to live inside of you and save you from your sins, just like He did me.

Let me leave you with this well-known thought on the subject (which you may have heard):

"If I am wrong and there is no Heaven, then we are both going to die. If, however, I am right and there is a Heaven, I will be there when I die. Either way, you lose."

Do you really want to chance spending eternity separated from your wife?

chattpatriot08 signing off....

May 31, 2010 at 1:18 a.m.
alprova said...

Chattpatriot wrote: "Your "crutch" statement sounds like a frustrated hit below the belt. Your argument is that there are believers like me and thinkers like you.


It's not a strike below the belt. I think, but I also believe. Logical thinking assists me in arriving at equally logical beliefs. I respect that you may feel the same way about your own beliefs.

This is not an accusation, but what I don't do is take obscurely written passages in the Bible and throw them at people as if they were daggers from Heaven, as others take it upon themselves to do routinely.


"We will never know the answers to all things in the universe - our human brains will never compute on that level."


We are in full agreement on that one. The problem however, is that some people believe that the Bible is a tool to be used to judge, to condemn, and to influence the lives of others, despite wording contained within that very book that instructs all of us to refrain from doing any or all of those things.

Apple, Inc. advertises that if you have a need for something, there is an "app for that." Far too many Christians, when faced with a controversial issue, state that there is a "verse for that."


"Alprova, you are most certainly a thinker - I'll give you that one. Our banter has been good for me, as I hope it has been for you as well. Undoubtedly, we have both put questions in the other's head and will grow from this experience. My prayer is that with all you know and the fact that you do believe in God and Jesus, you will come around to the legitimacy of God's scriptures and the truths He offers us in them. There is nothing wrong with putting our God-given brains to work for Him, studying His Word and applying it daily to our lives, but you must realize your sinful nature and accept that you need Christ to live inside of you and save you from your sins, just like He did me."


I am a Christian. I am not a traditional Christian. I am a sinner. I pray daily for forgiveness of my sins. I'm sure that not many traditional Christians agree with me, and I learned to live with that many years ago.

I always enjoy a sensible, rational discussion, regardless of the subject matter.

Our only basic difference is that you refer to the Bible as being God's word, while I consider it to be a work of many men who have written their testimonials regarding the existence of God. Morality is the main theme expressed throughout the Bible, but none of us live our lives remotely as the Bible would dictate that we should, if every verse in the Bible were taken literally.

In conclusion, all of us accept and reject portions of the Bible. My acceptances are perhaps fewer, and my rejections most likely are higher in number.

I love the Bible. I love to hear others express their interpretations of Biblical passages and stories. It's been a life-long passion of mine. But I also try to keep things in perspective at all times.

May 31, 2010 at 2:23 a.m.
alprova said...

I made a conscience decision to not single out Ronnie's remarks, but a couple of these cannot be left alone.

"Bennett implies official VA policy would force the exhumation of the remains of a soldier simply because he was a homosexual."


You're taking a cartoon far too serious. No one, least of all Clay, would make such an assumption. As we have seen from your remarks, even the most conservative and opinionated person would find that to be beyond objectionable.

As others have stated, the point of any cartoon is to stimulate thought. The Times Free Press very graciously allows us to dispel our thoughts in this forum.

You're not allowing your mind to grasp what is being conveyed in an image. The subject at hand is whether or not openly gay people should be allowed to serve our country. It is not a condemnation of the military. It is an appeal to our military leaders to drop antiquated prejudices and to allow honorable men and women to serve this nation like everyone else is allowed to do.


"What a ridiculous premise that should never be used in the fashion in which he used it. These are our honorable dead he besmirched."


On the contrary. It was a perfect way to make a point and I applaud him for posting it. Keep in mind that it is a cartoon and not actually a body in a casket up there.

Everyone else is amazed that you reacted the way you did to it. I'm amazed that you have chosen to reveal that there is something that will cause you to display a little human emotion, as misplaced as it may be.

Do you remember the words you wrote regarding my two uncles who died in Vietnam? They are buried off of Holtzclaw Avenue at the National Cemetery. I will be visiting their graves later today. Multiply your anger about three times, and you have a clue just how upset I was at your lack of respect towards two men who were not homosexuals, but died serving our nation at the behest of our Government.

I'm probably the most likely person in here to find your outrage to be nothing other than semantical in nature as well as inconsistent with your demeanor in the past. But...I wouldn't want you to pop a vein over it or anything.

Go take a chill pill.


"[Note for alpo: I commonly use the generic pronoun when actual gender is unknown.]"

Uh...okay. I don't exactly what you are referring to, but the only thing that comes to my mind is that there wouldn't be any issue at all if your spouse would simply fess up to the fact that she is a female and your biker babe to boot.

You two seem to be the only ones who are unaware that the rouse was up a long time ago.

May 31, 2010 at 3:08 a.m.
rolando said...

chattpatriot08: Your apology was neither expected nor necessary, but appreciated. I agree with your definition of "celebration". I hope for a good day for you and yours.

May 31, 2010 at 8:09 a.m.
aces25 said...

Thank you, chattpatriot08, for your commentary. Well put indeed.

May 31, 2010 at 8:20 a.m.
InspectorBucket said...

Gerard Manley Hopkins The Soldier

YES. Why do we áll, seeing of a soldier, bless him? bless
Our redcoats, our tars? Both these being, the greater part, But frail clay, nay but foul clay. Here it is: the heart,
Since, proud, it calls the calling manly, gives a guess That, hopes that, makesbelieve, the men must be no less;
It fancies, feigns, deems, dears the artist after his art;
And fain will find as sterling all as all is smart, And scarlet wear the spirit of wár thére express.

Mark Christ our King. He knows war, served this soldiering through; He of all can handle a rope best. There he bides in bliss
Now, and séeing somewhére some mán do all that man can do,
For love he leans forth, needs his neck must fall on, kiss, And cry ‘O Christ-done deed! So God-made-flesh does too:
Were I come o’er again’ cries Christ ‘it should be this’.

May 31, 2010 at 9:04 a.m.
InspectorBucket said...

Thomas Hardy The Drummer Hodge

They throw in Drummer Hodge, to rest Uncoffined -- just as found: His landmark is a kopje-crest That breaks the veldt around: And foreign constellations west Each night above his mound.

Young Hodge the drummer never knew -- Fresh from his Wessex home -- The meaning of the broad Karoo, The Bush, the dusty loam, And why uprose to nightly view Strange stars amid the gloam.

Yet portion of that unknown plain Will Hodge for ever be; His homely Northern breast and brain Grow to some Southern tree, And strange-eyed constellations reign His stars eternally.

May 31, 2010 at 9:07 a.m.
InspectorBucket said...

All we need to know:

"For he to-day that sheds his blood with me / Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile, / This day shall gentle his condition."


God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour As one man more, methinks, would share from me For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more! Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host, That he which hath no stomach to this fight, Let him depart; his passport shall be made And crowns for convoy put into his purse: We would not die in that man's company That fears his fellowship to die with us. This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day, and comes safe home, Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named, And rouse him at the name of Crispian. He that shall live this day, and see old age, Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours, And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:' Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars. And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.' Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages What feats he did that day: then shall our names. Familiar in his mouth as household words Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester, Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd. This story shall the good man teach his son; And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by, From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be remember'd; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile, This day shall gentle his condition: And gentlemen in England now a-bed Shall think themselves accursed they were not here, And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

~~ Henry V : 4.3

May 31, 2010 at 9:39 a.m.
OllieH said...

rolando writes: "Bennett picked the wrong time and place for his jab at our military,"


This is not a jab at the military, rolando. It's a jab at military policy.

The issue of 'don't ask, don't tell" is currently under review by the military and in Congress. There were several advances on its proposed repeal just last week. This week we celebrate Memorial Day with people all over the country visiting veterans cemeteries.

So, it seems to me that this cartoon was PERFECTLY timed. It takes the confluence of all these events, and combines it with the outrageousness of the act depicted in the cartoon to make a powerful and effective point.

You seem to be very concerned about how soldiers are treated after they're dead. I just wish the military was as conscientious about how they get treated while they're still alive.


Rolando continues "Bennett implies official VA policy would force the exhumation of the remains of a soldier simply because he was a homosexual".


Come on, rolando, you knew how ridiculous that statement was before you wrote it. Clay Bennett is implying no such thing. Cartoons make their points through exaggerating reality. In this particular case it was used to show the logical extension of a discriminatory practice within the military. If the revelation of a soldier's homosexuality deems him unworthy to serve beside his fellow soldiers in life, it makes perfect sense that he might well be deemed unfit to rest beside them in death.


Rolando goes on, "What a ridiculous premise that should never be used in the fashion in which he used it. These are our honorable dead he besmirched".


So, a gay soldier gets unconditional honor in death, but prejudicial disrespect in life? Strange priorities, rolando.

May 31, 2010 at 10:38 a.m.
nurseforjustice said...

chattpatriot, I agree with your arguements on these matters 100% and I thank you for writing it so gracefully. I am one who believes that the Bible is God's Word, inerrant and complete. Nothing more should be added and nothing should be taken away.

Alprova, I am not sure how you can justify believing that there is a God, that He created this world/universe and that Jesus is His Son if you don't believe the Bible is God's Word. That is just a thought, not to be arguementative. But I join chattpatriot and your wife in praying for you since it is my belief that one cannot know Christ as his savior without believing in His very Word.

Now back on topic, if you are a regular reader on these post, you will know that I do not agree with the lifestyle of a homosexual. However, I am not one to condemn them either. I have had many friends that have been gay and none of them have ever made an advance towards me. I would not have a problem serving side by side with them as long as they do their job. In fact, I did serve with some gay people when I was in the USAF back in the early 80's. We all knew they were gay but we did not care because they were good at their jobs.

May 31, 2010 at 10:46 a.m.
moonpie said...

Between rolando's anger and tteological debate, the issue which prompted this cartoon has been largely ignored.

Don't ask don't tell is anti freedom. It's bigotted, backwards, and anti American.

May 31, 2010 at 2:26 p.m.
alprova said...

Nurse wrote: "Alprova, I am not sure how you can justify believing that there is a God, that He created this world/universe and that Jesus is His Son if you don't believe the Bible is God's Word."


I pondered long and hard to come up with one example that would illustrate why all of the Bible cannot be the word of God.

In the second book of Samuel, Chapter 11, one begins to read the story of King David, who obtained one of his many wives, Bathsheba, via acts of kidnapping, rape, and murder. King David observed her bathing one day and took a liking to her.

(4) "And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came in unto him and he lay with her"

The story goes on to relate that Bathsheba became pregnant. David had her husband, Uriah, murdered.

(26) "And when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she mourned for her husband."

(27) "And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bore him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord."

How did God punish David for what he had done? How do you think such a terrible man should be punished? God's punishment for David's crimes begins in Samuel II, Chapter 12, Verse 15:

(15) "And the Lord struck the child, that Uriah's wife bore unto David, and it was very sick."

(18) "And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died."

God's idea of justice according to the Bible, for the murder of Bathsheba's husband, was to take the life of an innocent baby.

The story does not end there.

(24) "And David comforted Bath-sheba his wife, and went in unto her, and lay with her: and she bare a son, and he called his name Solomon: and the LORD loved him."

This is God's word? This is supposed to be an his example of the justice that he doles out to a man who kidnaps a married woman, who rapes that woman, resulting in the birth of a child, and who goes on to murder a woman's husband?

Are we to to learn from this story that because the first child was conceived out of wedlock, the Lord took his life, but the second one was allowed to live and was blessed by the Lord, because they were 'legally' man and wife at that point?

Or, are we to perceive that God is in favor of retroactive abortion when sin results in the birth of a child?

Can anyone read those two chapters and come to any sort of a logical conclusion that this is a shining example of wording that God would have had written on his behalf?

Does this make sense to anyone? The Bible has been manipulated and changed by some pretty sick folks over time, to transform a loving God to one that we are to fear at all times, again...if the every word in the Bible is taken literally.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. If the above is a 100% accurate depiction of God's form of justice, then he can send me to Hell.

May 31, 2010 at 5:19 p.m.
rolando said...

alpo spewed, "You're taking a cartoon far too serious."

Death is always serious, al baby. Far too serious to be bandied about to make a minor political point.

How you do love to cherry-pick. Especially when you said, "[The cartoon] was a perfect way to make a point and I applaud him for posting it. Keep in mind that it is a cartoon and not actually a body in a casket up there."

It would then follow that you consider the American flag just some rag of cloth and not a symbol of our country. How Progressive of you. The image becomes reality.

And I suppose you still remember your calling a military retiree a "drain on the taxpayers and society" on the day of retirement [or words to that effect]? Your real feelings about our military jumped right out there, didn't they, al baby?]

May 31, 2010 at 9:34 p.m.
rolando said...

OllieH -- Yes, Bennett intended the drawing to be a jab at military policy...but he used the wrong vehicle. But with Memorial Day so close at hand, who could blame him, right? What a wonderful tie-in, right? Everyone would gush over his wittiness, his artistic ability [which is considerable], even his Progressive presentation, right?

Yeah, that my be true...at least in his mind and yours. Which doesn't make the dragging of our dead into a political issue correct...which it isn't...and that is my point.

You seem to think the military is some sort of democracy, OllieH. One in which everyone is equal. It isn't. It cannot be and still function. You think the troops have freedom of speech while in uniform? Freedom of association? Freedom from search and seizure? LOL Read the UCMJ. There is an hierarchy in the military that is anything but democratic. Anyone or anything which interferes with the smooth running of the military machine is anathema and is closely examined. Especially when an individual disrupts the good order of discipline. Our military leaders -- those with years of training/experience -- are a darn sight better positioned to determine who disrupts good order and who doesn't.

This is a military decision not a political one...unless your goal is to disrupt our military efficiency -- in which case Congress is following the right path.

May 31, 2010 at 10:43 p.m.
rolando said...

moonpie said, "Don't ask don't tell is anti freedom. It's bigotted, backwards, and anti American."

Perhaps it is, moonpie, but I doubt it. First, while in uniform no one in the military has freedom of speech as civilians know it and maintaining good order in the ranks is neither bigoted nor backwards...discipline within the ranks has been important since the Roman Legions and before. Nor is it anti-American to maintain good order within the military...even Geo. Washington did it. That is how wars are won...and perhaps preventing our generals from conducting war without micromanagement from Congress is costing us lives.

May 31, 2010 at 11:03 p.m.
anonymight said...

The purpose of the military is not to unconditionally tolerate homosexuals . . . Or heterosexuals for that matter. It is to kill people and break things. If the leaders with military experience think its beneficial to open the ranks so be it. If notgo cry in a hanky.

May 31, 2010 at 11:26 p.m.
alprova said...

Rolando wrote: "Death is always serious, al baby. Far too serious to be bandied about to make a minor political point."


Death wasn't serious enough for you to offer an ounce of respect when it involved my two uncles who died in Vietnam and the suicide of my Grandfather, now did it?

There's really no end to the depth of your hypocrisy, is there?

Your 'holier than thou' demeanor all of a sudden for those who are no longer with us is rather amusing, given that you rarely muster any respect for the living.


"How you do love to cherry-pick. Especially when you said, "[The cartoon] was a perfect way to make a point and I applaud him for posting it. Keep in mind that it is a cartoon and not actually a body in a casket up there."

It would then follow that you consider the American flag just some rag of cloth and not a symbol of our country. How Progressive of you. The image becomes reality."


You're making an invalid and undeclared comparison. Any opinion I hold regarding the American flag has nothing at all to do with the level of respect that I demonstrate for the dead.

But when you get right down to it, and since you brought it up, an American flag IS indeed a piece of cloth, and if something happens to one that is flying, it can be replaced with another one just like it.

The same premise however, does not hold true when it comes to our loved ones, now does it?

You sure love placing apples and oranges on the same plate and see them as all being the same in all respects, don't you?


"And I suppose you still remember your calling a military retiree a "drain on the taxpayers and society" on the day of retirement [or words to that effect]? Your real feelings about our military jumped right out there, didn't they, al baby?]"


When I got upset way back when about your callous words regarding my kin folk, I didn't know what caliber of a person you really were. A years or so later, I am well aware of what you are all about.

I think that given the lack of other participants in here who have served in our military, to refuse to rush to your side in an affront against me, speaks volumes to the fact that they realize that my previous comments that you never fail to misquote, were directed at you and you only, and were always offered in direct response to your hypocritical attitudes that have come to define you, at least in this forum anyway.

You've chosen to become outraged over a cartoon, that neither depicts a current or predicted reality. I once allowed you to penetrate my thick skin because you disrespected three people that I loved, all three of whom served this nation in our military. Two of them died while serving this nation and while engaged in battle.

No offense, but in my opinion, any declaration coming from you to have this deep and undying respect for any soldier, dead or alive, is a histrionic display deserving a standing ovation.

June 1, 2010 at 2:52 a.m.
alprova said...

Anonymight wrote: "The purpose of the military is not to unconditionally tolerate homosexuals . . . Or heterosexuals for that matter. It is to kill people and break things. If the leaders with military experience think its beneficial to open the ranks so be it. If not go cry in a hanky."


Thank you so much for that brief and insightful description of what our military does.

I think that most, if not all military leaders would tend to disagree with your assessment.

I guess the American people didn't get the memo outlining this new strategy of the military. I was under the impression that they were fighting for freedom whenever and wherever they are deployed.

June 1, 2010 at 3:14 a.m.
rolando said...

"When I got upset way back when about your callous words regarding my kin folk, I didn't know what caliber of a person you really were. A years or so later, I am well aware of what you are all about."

Yeah, and we all know of what you are made, alpo. The Stygian [Augean] Stables were filled with it.

Still cherry-picking again, I see? Picking and choosing out-of-context, unrelated sentences. You did that back then, too.

The essential part of your post up there was "...when I got upset..." Yeah, you got upset all right; so upset your true opinion of the military just slipped out, didn't it? That happens when you blindly strike out at others...deep-seated, true feelings bypass the self-censoring center and just gush out. In the headshrinker's world that's called a "break-through"...in the words of yet another generation, "you let it all hang out." But perhaps it was the grief and perceived injustice and regret in your relatives deaths in an unpopular war that prompted your outburst.

As I recall, your grandfather suicided for an unrelated reason but you drug it in anyway. Ya gonna drag him out yet again? Can't let even him lie in peace? Just another example of using the dead for your personal reasons, just as Bennett did. Admit it, you are a hypocrite.

June 1, 2010 at 6:53 a.m.
nurseforjustice said...

Alprova,

I admit, to us ordinary humans, that the story of David and Bathsheba is a very disturbing story. However, do you propose to have the mind of God? Do you think even for one milisecond that you know what is best for a person in any situation? Our God is sovereign and does know what is best in EVERY situation. "His ways are not our ways." "Man looks at the outward appearance but God looks at the heart", and I thank Him for that. Because if it were up to me, (if I were God), I would not tolerate the things that He does... there would be a whole lot less people in this world.

In 1986, I had a son who was afflicted with a virus in utero that caused severe brain damage also causing him to be blind and deaf. He was in and out of the hospital for 4 1/2 yrs until he passed away due to complications of his problems. Was it because I had sinned a great sin? or my wife (at the time) had sinned a great sin? I do not know why this happened. All I do know is that this event changed my life in more ways than you can count. And God knew what would happen and how it would change me. That is why He allowed it to happen. One of the things it did for me was giving me direction for a career. If my son had not been born this way I seriously doubt that I would be a nurse today.

"I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. If the above is a 100% accurate depiction of God's form of justice, then he can send me to Hell."


God is just and fair and loving. More than your or my feeble brain (no matter how smart we think we are) can fathom. If you even had an inkling of how bad Hell will be, you would have never made that statement as well, which tells me a lot of your spiritual condition.

I know where my son is and am glad he is there waiting on me. He is whole now with no disabilities whatsoever. Never to be sick again or in pain. And if I had to make a choice of him being the way he was and dying at just 4 1/2 yrs old or living to be an old man and going to hell (because I have no guarantees that he would have accepted Jesus as his savior), I would chose the former every time. Thankfully, my other 3 children have all given their life to the Lord at early ages.

I love the Word of God and study it daily. I will continue to trust in It's inerrancy. I will also continue to pray for you just I have done this morning.

June 1, 2010 at 11:44 a.m.

"....Adonai said, oh how I wish their hearts would stay like this always, that they would fear me and obey all my mitzvot, so that it would go well with them and their children forever. Go, tell them to return to their tents.

But you, stand here by me and I will tell you all the mitzvot, laws and rulings which you are to teach them so that they can obey them in the land I am giving them as their possession. Therefore you have to be careful to do as Adonai has ordered you, you are not to deviate either to the right or to the left. You are to follow the entire way which Adonai your God has ordered you, so that you will live, things will go well with you and you will live long in the land you are about to possess"..

"Now this is the mitzvah, the laws and rulings which Adonai your God ordered me to teach you, for you to obey in the land you are crossing over to possess, so that you will fear Adonai your God and observe all His regulations and mitzvot that I am giving you--you, your child and your grandchild--as long as you live and so that you will have long life. Therefore listen Israel, and take care to obey, so that things will go well with you and you will increase greatly, as Adonai the God of your ancestors promised you by giving you a land flowing with milk and honey."

"Sh'ma Yisra'el! Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad (Hear, Israel! Adonai our God, Adonai is One). And you are to love Adonai your God with all your heart, all your being and all your resources. These words, which I am ordering you today are to be on your heart; and you are to teach them carefully to your children. You are to talk about them when you sit at home, when you are travelling on the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them on your hand as as sign, put them at the front of a headband around your forehead, and write them on the door frames of your house and on your gates....someday your child will ask you, what is the meaning of the instructions, laws and rulings which Adonai our God has laid down for you? Then you will tell your child, we were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt and Adonai brought us out of Egypt with a strong hand.

Adonai worked great and terrible signs and wonders against Egypt, Pharaoh and all his household, before our very eyes. He brought us out from there in order to bring us to the land He had sworn to our ancestors that He would give us. Adonai ordered us to observe all these laws, to fear Adonai our God, always for our own good, so that he might keep us alive, as we are today. It will be righteousness for us if we are careful to obey all these mitzvot before Adonai our God, just as He ordered us to do." D'varim 5-6 (Deuteronomy)

June 1, 2010 at 11:06 p.m.

Whether one is an atheist and believes the ancient Hebrew Nation 'just made all this up', or a Believer who knows the consequences of disobedience to these words, one cannot negate that the Law inherent, was passed down in detail, through thousands of years to this day. The Original Mitzvot, notwithstanding the added words and doctrines of Judaic Legalists, rabbinic writings and the Talmud, still stands today as Truth and as evidence in the lives of millions of Believers and non-believers alike.

The ancient Hebrews knew how to write and dictate, had mature, experienced Scribes who like Moses and Aaron were held to the highest ethical standards within their tribal community. The positions of priests (Kohanim), Scribes, Temple assistants, designers of the Arts used in the Temple, were sacred positions, hand-picked by Adonai and Moses alone. (Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Numbers)

Whether in exile or at home in the land of Israel, wherever the tribes have been obedient to the Mitzvot, they have prospered and flourished. Here in the US today, there are approximately 6 million Jews, approximately the same number that were murdered under the Nazi Regime. Jews everywhere in the world, especially in the Holy Land, are brilliant and gifted in the Law, Business, Technology, the Sciences, the Arts, Invention, Agriculture and Building/Construction.

The Knesset in Jerusalem consists of Arabs and Jews, Gentiles and a minority Messianic Jewish presence. In short, the only democratic Gov't in the Middle East-amongst repression and oppression of women, children, foreigners, Christians, Jews and other religions by the Islamic Middle East, which is the exact opposite-and very jealous of Israel, desiring to 'own' Jerusalem and Israel completely, with no "bipartisanship" or co-existence possible in their books. Only complete annihilation of all Jews and any 'Infidels' not compliant with Islam will do.

June 1, 2010 at 11:15 p.m.

It is no coincidence that the Law and the Mizvot handed down to the Jews for thousands of years has permeated the consciousness of Jews and Christians alike, some of them the original founders of America who fully aware of the Land of Israel and the God of their fathers and mothers, sought to inculcate their Magna carta and Constitution, their courts and institutions with the Ten Commandments and the Mitzvah of the Lord; to teach their children the Word of the Lord and pass these standing Truths down through the generations, carefully, to this day.

If THIS Law was empty and meaningless as the Atheist and pagans like to accuse it to be today, then it would never have stood the test of Time, Experience and Truth all these centuries. It would be akin to Progressive Thought---always changing to suit the flavor of the day, always attempting to control others lives and money, while never, ever having proven to be a workable solution for anything or anybody. Just a burden, a misery, a whole lot of human suffering.

Yet the Law of Adonai is never that, instead it is summed up and works this way, The Way Yeshua pointed out: "Here is the summary of the Law and the Prophets, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your being and all your resources and to love your neighbor as yourself.." He, as a righteous Jew, kept the Law, the Mitzvot and that included the Ten Commandments as we know them. He knew therein, was the perfect antidote to the world's problems and if only we obeyed Him, He would gladly solve the greed, the hatred, the envy and the failings of Human nature and human-made disasters we have brought upon ourselves. But that also involves Belief in Him, Faith in Him who brought our ancestors out of our 'Egypt', and into the land of milk and honey, the New Land, America.

June 1, 2010 at 11:26 p.m.

From a program on the history Channel: Author and frequent researcher in the Middle East, Charles Pellegrino sees a correlation between the Exodus of the Jewish tribes and the Biblical account.

He interacts and works with archaeologists in Israel, Africa and the Middle East and has travelled extensively to their dig sites in Israel, Egypt, Syria, Eritrea, Ethiopia, etc. In Egypt recently, he went to a site to share research and findings with an American Professor who excavates there every year. The Islamic Gov't previously, never allowed anyone to excavate there and demands the site be covered up every year and then re-excavated when they return. A very slow process, yet this is what some of their findings to date are:

Prof. Manfred Bietak discovered the gravesite of Pharaoh Atmoze (Asmoses) (1500 BC) near a place called Avaris (Avares). The Bible, Geology and Archaeology tell the same story here. The Prof found mass graves of male babies at this site, including Atmoses' son who was about 12 years old. In addition, underground hierglyphics (ancient writing) were found on the walls of the tomb area. The hieroglyphics were dismissed as being depictions of the Pharaoh's court life by an inexperienced museum employee, but were actually found to be much more instructive in the history of that time when examined by experts in hieroglyphic writing.

Moreover, the first Alpha Hebraic writing was found on the walls of a cave near ancient Avaris, translated as "EL (Elohim) save me, help me". It is archaeological belief that the caves near Avaris were used as 'homes' for the Hebrew slaves who worked on the pyramids. Clay pots, vessels and cooking implements were also discovered. It's common for atheists and detractors of Biblical truth to claim the Hebrews never worked on the pyramids or even lived in Egypt. Yet, countless Egyptian and Mesopotamian Hieroglyphics clearly portray the Hebrew tribes visually, just as they are described in Scripture, down to the clothing attire and the references to their God, the God of Israel, as well as their 'position' as slaves for Pharaoh and builders of the pyramids who lived and died in their shadow.

June 1, 2010 at 11:31 p.m.

The graphics show a perfectly outlined and cohesive story of what appears to be the 10 plagues as described in the Exodus. The first plague, blood in the waters of Egypt (the Nile) is shown; the second---frogs all over the land, the third---lice, the fourth---flies, the fifth---an epidemic, the sixth---boils, the seventh---hail or volcanic hail as depicted on the drawing (ice and fire), the eighth---locusts, the ninth---darkness over the land of Egypt, the tenth---first born Egyptian males died, including Pharaoh's son. Also found, a papyrus that describes "a strange hail of ice and fire mixed together".

Volcanologists date findings to approximately 1700 BC, archaeologists say 1500 BC. The reason being is that volcanic pumice ash was found at the Avaris site that has been identified as ash from the isle of Santorini, Greece, 700 km away. Around 1500 BC, an enormous volcanic explosion occurred at Santorini, 100x the power of the Hiroshima bombing. So the volcanologists WANT the evidence to show the volcanic eruption happened 200 years after the Exodus, yet the Santorini ash evidence proves differently.

(This detail shows the constant push and pull within the fields of science, of individuals who would maniupulate findings to suit an agenda or belief and/or to keep that ole grant money pouring in. Like the climatologists in the US and Europe who refused to publish data that disagreed with theirs and theirs was eventually proven wrong and built upon lies. Today and in modern times, it seems we have a plethora of liars and obfuscators of the truth who lie easily and lie well. Where there is no Law, no Morals and no Lord to fear, it seems humankind becomes more regressive and depraved, not less).

According to Pellegrino's and Professor Bietak's findings and data, the nearest place as mapped out according to Biblical descriptions, was the Great Drift Fault Line Arca that runs under ancient Avaris all the way through to Santorini in Greece.

The pumice ash from the explosion in 1500 BC was also found embedded under the sea floor at various locations between those two points. Leading to Pellegrino's belief that indeed, it was a Divine and a perfectly 'Physic' possibility that a great parting of the waters occurred at that place and at that time in History.

The Torah reads, "Moshe reached out his hand (with his staff in it) out over the sea and Adonai caused the sea to go back before a strong east wind all night. He made the sea to become dry land and its water was divided in two. Then the people of Israel went into the sea on the dry ground, with the water walled up for them on their right and on their left". Here, Pellegrino believes the whole schmiel occurring where the Hebrews were standing on dry ground, also sparked the chain of events that would lead to the Santorini disaster on that isle 700 km away.

June 1, 2010 at 11:37 p.m.

Pellegrino's assertion is that the Lord God does not "suspend nature" but manipulates it. (I believe He, being Creator of the universe and all within, can do it any way He wants to or sees fit. Yeshua Himself, suspended all known physical laws when He performed healing miracles including raising the dead).

The Red Sea account or Yam Suf (Yam Suf means Reed Sea) has been substantiated by numerous archaeological quests into the huge Lake as it exists today, and in it's sub-surface shelf. It once was known as a marsh sea, Patufi, now it is Lake Abalah. The salt beds underwater indicate that thousands of years ago its salt waters and fresh waters co-merged. The ancient sea died when the Suez Canal was built and the modern lake is what is left today.

In mapping out the journey of the Exodus people, the Hebrew Nation, Pellegrino notes that an ancient granite stone found in one of the Pharaoh's tombs depicts the entire Exodus story. The drawings on the stone and the hieroglyphic writing call the Hebrews, "the evil ones". The drawings continue to depict two knives over water which is interpreted as 'divided waters'. Following the complete visual, the pharaoh figure is shown in his chariot pursuing the 'evil ones', the armies of pharaoh racing into the sea, tumbling and drowning in the waves as the wall of wave closes in on them. It depicts the entire Biblical account. Now Egypt's pharaonic rulers were never known to brag about their military losses, quite the contrary. Instead, they would exaggerate, like the Greeks and Romans, their mighty prowess in war and against their enemies.

In the case of the Exodus, it seems as the writings suggest, that the Egyptians were so distressed by what had occurred in their land, the ten plagues, the mass dying of Egyptians and the final coup, the escape of the entire captive Hebrew nation; that their advisors cautioned against NOT writing this down and depicting it in it's entirety for posterity's sake and as a future warning to the Egyptian people and other tribes in the land. The Biblical account notes that the Egyptians were completely felled by terror at these multiple sights and events..

June 1, 2010 at 11:45 p.m.

"The peoples have heard and they tremble, anguish takes hold of those living in P'leshet, then the chiefs of Edom are dismayed, trepidation seizes the heads of Mo'av, all those living in Kena'an are melted away. Terror and dread fall on them; by the might of your arm they are as still as stone until your people pass over, Adonai, till the people you purchased pass over. You will bring them in and plant them on the mountain which is your heritage, the place Adonai that you made your abode, the sanctuary Adonai, which your hands established. Adonai will reign for ever and ever..." Sh'mot (Exodus 15).

In 1972, archaelogists conducted a dig at Santorini, where ancient Minoan wall paintings depict a map of an Exodus, people sailing to Santorini (some of the Hebrew nation?). The wall paintings also prove that ancient Egyptians and Minoans lived together, traded with each other in Avaris (Avares).

Israelite swords mingling with Egyptian treasures have been found in 3500 year old Mycenae tombs that also contained stele (gravestones) depicting the Yam Suf (Reed Sea) account. This is a stunning revelation, that in another place in the Ancient world, around the time of the Exodus, Hebraic artifacts and the evidence of a long journey to Santorini may have occurred at the same time the obedient Hebrews were journeying to the land Adonai bequeathed to them--Israel and the disobedient ones had just been vanquished.

"Also because of you Adonai was angry with me and said, you too will not go in there (the Holy Land)..your children who don't yet know good from bad will go in there, I will give it to them and they will have possession of it. But as for yourselves, turn around and head into the desert by the road to the Sea of Suf" (the Reed Sea).

Another hypothesis Pellegrino postulates, is that because the Biblical Mount Sinai is only 165 km from Kadesh Barnea, where the Sinai route, the ancient road winds along; that route takes us to Mount G'rizim Tarif which contains a cleft and the gravesites of the holy ancestors and an ancient spring. The cleft and the spring are still there today, the exact description found in the Torah account. This also correlates with the Hebrew route (journey of 40 years) to Israel and to the plains of Mo'av where Moshe died and was buried, never reaching the Land, flowing with milk and honey, himself. Believers say no one knows the exact location of his grave because Adonai knew he, Moshe would be worshipped instead of the Lord, his Lord.

June 1, 2010 at 11:52 p.m.
jbowler said...

"It is a fact, at least in America, that heterosexuals are not procreating like they once were. They apparently are enjoying the act so much, that they are forgetting to concentrate on the reason they are engaged in the act."

"Science is like sex, it may occasionally produce practical results, but that is not why we do it." Richard Feynman

June 4, 2010 at 10:42 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.