published Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

Just Married

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 ...

108
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.
AndrewLohr said...

Beats bathhouses...but when it burns, they'll be in trouble...

Creation: Adam and Eve.(Evolution: Adam and Eve, or no kids without artificial wombs and/or virgin conceptions. Artificial insemination, surrogate motherhood still require cooperation of both sexes, tho not in bed: Adam + Eve. Evolution shows "gay" behavior? Also cannibalistic and parasitic behaviors. "Gay" is genetic? A rigidly genetic gay wouldn't breed, so there's an element of choice, however hard a sex habit is to break. And hard to break doesn't mean impossible to bend or to try to break. Smoking may be hard to break, but wouldn't you advise a smoker to keep trying?)

I've posted before here that there's something to be said for allowing Registered Significant Others (RSOs) for hospital visits, prearranging for peaceful distribution of stuff in case of a breakup, and so on. But "gay" behavior is a grouping, and if "liberty" and "justice" call for tolerating such grouping, what about at least equal liberty and justice for non-"gay" groupings? It's one thing to stop sending the cops after "gays." The police may well have better things to do than hunt for "gays." It's another thing to send the cops after people who idolize evolution as described above, or who believe what the Bible, the Church throughout history, and the God-fearing sections of the Church today say to "gays," namely "Repent and be saved! (Same as any other sinners, which is all of us except Jesus Christ.)" If a somewhat Christian outfit doesn't want to hire "gays" or do business with them, let it keep up its standards. Liberty! Justice! I practice monogamy (thanks, Wendy); why should I subsidize insurance for people who do riskier things? (RSOs might reduce promiscuous "gay" sex, maybe.)

In I Corinthians 5:9-13 Paul tells us Christians not to worry about the fornicators of the world. outside the Church (he knew sex is very popular), "But...not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or covetous or an idolater or a railer [nasty bigmouth] or a drunkard or an extortioner; with such a one, no not to eat." If someone calls themselves a Christian and is doing these things, Christians must not eat with them. Got that? (I hope I have now, though I don't follow people around to make sure.) "For what have I now to do also with them that are outside [outside the church]? Do you not judge those that are inside? But those that are outside God judges." So throw the fornicator out of the Church [until he repents. The particular man Paul was writing to the Corinthians about did repent, according to II Corinthians, and was to be let back in.]

So I don't see that Christians have to avoid "gays" outside the Church (I used to work for one, and was once sent out to wait on a "gay" couple by good ole' boys who preferred to laugh in a back room), but we do need strong standards inside as against other sins ("Be ye holy for I am Holy"--God). Repent [change] and be saved!

February 27, 2013 at 6:05 a.m.
dao1980 said...

Wow, Andy you must feel pretty guilty about your own "fornications" to blather nonsense for that long about the "fornications" of others..

February 27, 2013 at 7:16 a.m.
jesse said...

That fire plug has a nice rack on it maybe that's what got him stirred up this early!

February 27, 2013 at 7:23 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Andrew said... "and was once sent out to wait on a "gay" couple by good ole' boys who preferred to laugh in a back room."

Did those boys make you do other things against your will, Andrew? The whole affair seems tawdry. Did they make you walk funny or wear something frilly? Why didn't you mention that the spark plug has remarkable boobage? You gotta notice these things before you get to laugh in the back room!

February 27, 2013 at 7:31 a.m.
dude_abides said...

damn, jesse beat me to the sexy fireplug angle!

February 27, 2013 at 7:33 a.m.
degage said...

Here we go again, round 100 of the same old same old toon. Clay needs help.

February 27, 2013 at 7:56 a.m.
Yano said...

Opponents of gay marriage stupidly claim it violates their rights.

Gay people should not come into your church and tell you how to pray. Nobody is proposing that.

But if you want to run a business, you've got to abide by the rules. You have to obey safety regulations. You have to pay taxes. You can't discriminate against people based on race. And you shouldn't discriminate against gay people.

Those who claim their "moral" principles should allow them to refuse business transactions with gay people are just wrong. You shouldn't impose your prejudices, kooky religious ideas or bronze age morality on strangers trying to book a room, buy a cake, or get a job.

Keep that bigotry in your church where it belongs.

February 27, 2013 at 8:04 a.m.
limric said...

Pretty good effort today Clay; Which brought about the statement of the month,

"Keep that bigotry in your church where it belongs."

BRAVO

Thanks Yano.


Oh, and Jesse's

"That fire plug has a nice rack on it" is pretty damn good too. Only Jesse could see boobs on a fire plug. :-D

Nicely done.

February 27, 2013 at 8:36 a.m.
conservative said...

Marriage is a divine institution. It is to be a permanent union between a man and a woman who were created by God. One purpose of that union was to propagate the human race.

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Genesis 1:27

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" Genesis 1:28

February 27, 2013 at 8:39 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

conservative, if you can offer a secular reason to oppose gay marriage, we'll listen. Until then, it is imposing your sectarian beliefs on everyone else.

February 27, 2013 at 8:42 a.m.
Yano said...

Conservative,

Humans were marrying and propagating long before Hebrew tribalists invented Jehovah. We have Chinese, Sumerian, and Egyptian documentation of this.

How does gay marriage prevent you or anyone from propagating?

Why should other people be bound by law to obey your religious beliefs?

February 27, 2013 at 8:52 a.m.
Maximus said...

Just like the N.O.W. organization gave a voice and relevance to ugly women the gays are driving the gay marriage non-issue to establish some sort of civil rights position. Who cares? As a black man I do get upset when the gays compare their so-called struggle to the black civil rights movement of the sixties. Have the gays had to dine at a separate "colored" lunch counter. I have. Clay, the doodle is useless.

February 27, 2013 at 9:12 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Just like the N.O.W. organization gave a voice and relevance to ugly women...

Nice-reveals much about you maxie.

February 27, 2013 at 9:13 a.m.
conservative said...

caught you looking. You will just have to wait, I own you.

February 27, 2013 at 9:13 a.m.
Maximus said...

Dude, I was referring to the population of Canada. No where near 350 million of the U.S. Canada statistically irrelevant when compared to the US., non- diverse population and most of them are dopers and pot heads like you and Clay The Doper Doodler. Now dats fuuuuuuny. Gotta go make some money. Peace out!

February 27, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.
Maximus said...

Ike look in the mirror the truth hurts. Remember NOW gang leader Molly Yard? Bow wow...wuf wuf.

February 27, 2013 at 9:20 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Your comments make it clear you consider women as decorations only. Not surprised.

February 27, 2013 at 9:23 a.m.
jesse said...

Maximus isn't content w/being ignorant, he enjoys gittin on here and showin it off! Molly Yard was an old lady who,in her youth prob.looked a lot better than him!

February 27, 2013 at 9:35 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Was same sex marriage in the news again? Why is this issue so important to Bennett? I would rather talk about extracting marriage from the government domain. I cannot understand why same sex couples are interested in bringing the government into their relationship(s)! Do we need to add masochism to the list of traits that are common with the sexually confused?

February 27, 2013 at 9:58 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Actually it was in the news again. Apparently some prominent GOP lawmakers came out publicly (so to speak) in favor of it and against DOMA.

February 27, 2013 at 10:05 a.m.
caddy said...

Thanks Andrew Lohr

Those who do not favor taking God's law as the ultimate standard for civil morality and public justice will be forced to substitute some other criterion of good and evil for it. The civil magistrate cannot function without some ethical guidance, without some standard of good and evil. If that standard is not to be the revealed law of God ( which, we must note, was addressed specifically to perennial problems in political morality ), then what will it be ? In some form or expression it will have to be the law of man ( or men ) the standard of self-law or autonomy. And when autonomous laws come to govern a commonwealth, the sword is certainly wielded in vain, for it represents simply the brute force of some men's will against the will of other men. "Justice" then indeed becomes a verbal cloak for whatever serves the interest of the strongmen in society ( whatever their strength be that of physical might or of media manipulation ).

Men will either choose to be governed by God or be ruled by tyrants. Because of the merciful, restraining work of the Holy Spirit in societies, we do not see at every stage in history these stark polarities coming to expression; most societies will to some measure strive for conformity to God's law, even when it is officially denounced.

Marriage is a creation institution--not a church institution. People know how bodies are designed and they know how they function. When they unnaturally go against the order of that design, they can rest assured that judgment awaits them.

The deceived always hear their preferred answer. Rationalization is the homage paid by sin to guilty knowledge. The fact that men can make laws does not mean they can make them "right."

February 27, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.
caddy said...

Someone above asked for "secular reasons to oppose Gay marriage." I found this response a good one.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1082190/posts

as was this one

http://secularright.org/SR/wordpress/a-secular-case-against-gay-marriage/

Point being, excellent reasons can be found as to why this "dis-ordering" of society is not good on Religious and Secular grounds.

Fallen men ( and women ) however, will always clamor for what they want--simply because they want it. On those grounds a case can be made as to why a whole litany of sins and perversions should be allowed the citizens of a free nation.

February 27, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Read your links-there are some problems.

Link #2

1) majority rights? Not if they come at the cost of minority rights.

2) social traditions. This argument could be made to deny mixed race marriages. If a marriage is indeed a state-awarded contract, then adhering to "tradition" in the face of pairings that do not interfere with the rights of others is wrong.

3) "Slippery slope": commonly used. But no one is suggesting that NON-consensual pairings (children, animals, mentally disabled) are ever okay, because there is a victim in such situations. As far as plural marriage, there are multiple societies in which plural marriage is the norm. There is nothing wrong with adults entering into plural marriages. The laws in place are written for pairs, and modifying that to apply to plural marriage will take longer.

4) Low intelligence: I have to admit that this is a new one for me. Traditional marriage is important because stupid people can't handle gay marriage???

5) Human's innate tendency towards homophobia: this is another new on for me, although I have read that homophobia appears to be a mostly male response. Men are NOT attracted to male on male sex unless they are really and truly homosexual. Women are more pliant and find all sex to be interesting. Truly rabid and violent homophobes are often repressed gay men.

These are pretty poor arguments for denying full rights to gays, but thanks for the effort anyway. Consensual gay relationships are victimless, and therefore there is no real reason to restrict them.

Will go through the 1st link.

February 27, 2013 at 10:41 a.m.
conservative said...

Marriage.

Same sex marriage.

Two different terms.

Proof that EVERYONE knows there is a difference.

Proof that EVERYONE knows they are not the same.

February 27, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

The first link I found to be pretty problematic. Although the author states that the reasons he is using are secular, the underlying religiosity peeks through often in the essay. That marriage is primarily about procreation and providing a home for children. That marriage is in trouble today, and the reason why is that people are getting married first and foremost for their own happiness (gasp!). That because straight marriage is in trouble, adding gay marriage will make it worse. (My 30+ year old marriage is not at risk because gays want the same benefit) The description of the various restrictions placed on couples (STD's, too closely related, non-fertile) was followed by a claim that these should be applied to people getting married too late in life to have children, "but such cases are so rare that it is simply not worth the effort to restrict them". (I find that odd)

In arguing against gay parenting, the author states: " However, there is ample evidence (see, for example, David Popenoe's Life Without Father) that children need both a male and female parent for proper development." However, most of the causes of problems in children raised by only one parent are linked to economics (one income, or low income if the parent was younger) and supervision. Effective single parents tend to be higher paid professionals who can afford child care and often enlist adults of the opposite sex as role models for their kids, such as a favorite aunt or uncle, grandparent, or other adult. A gay couple can be as effective in raising children as any adoptive pair. At least the author admits that gay parents can't "make" their children gay.

February 27, 2013 at 10:56 a.m.
caddy said...

So slippery slopes ( and redefinition ) are never ok...and can never be "redefined" because YOU said there is a Victim. ( says you ).

Got it. Sigh.

February 27, 2013 at 10:57 a.m.
Leaf said...

You anti-gay bible thumpers are on the wrong side of history, just like segregationists were. You'll realize it eventually, or you'll just die off. Either way, there's nothing you can do about it.

February 27, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

If you call that an secular argument, connie, it is clear you have nothing. Not surprising since religion appears to be the only thing you think about.

February 27, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Do you not consider someone that can't give consent a victim if they enter into a contract like marriage, caddy? Would you not consider a child or a pet victimized if they were used for sex?

February 27, 2013 at 11:01 a.m.
caddy said...

Religiousity peeks through.

Again: Assuming God does not exist and has not given us moral norms, on what basis is your standard ? There are deep seated reasons why we KNOW we should not marry our daughters and our ponies and yes, even those of the same sex.

Again: if the anthropological data suggests something short of the ideal, that is not because nothing is universal, but because two universals are in conflict: universal moral knowledge and universal desire to evade it. The first we owe to our creation. The second we owe to our fall.

Interesting the function of the law. Men are generally restrained not because their inner mind is stirred or affected, but because, being bridled so to speak, they keep their hands from outward activity, and hold inside the depravity that otherwise they would wantonly have indulged.

I won't deny for a second -- and I have no problem with the agnostics here that do -- to posit that all laws are theologically based whether you seek to affirm that truth or not.

Natural law is not the one true star in a galaxy of false ones; it is the only star. There is only one possible source of value judgments, one possible well from which moral duties can be drawn, one tree from which they can be plucked. The so-called new moralities do not pluck from different trees. They pluck from the same tree, but selectively.

The final gasps of a culture dying of passivity is sold to us in the name of “tolerance” and open-mindedness. Dorothy Sayers ( a brilliant and deeply religious soul herself ) described this well: “In the world,” she said, “it is called Tolerance, but in hell it is called Despair...the sin that believes in nothing, cares for nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, enjoys nothing, hates nothing, finds purpose in nothing, lives for nothing, and remains alive only because there is nothing for which it will die.”

February 27, 2013 at 11:10 a.m.
caddy said...

In a society where men change their morals like they change their pants I don't think you have legs to stand on with either the child or your pony, lkeithlu. IF YOU wish to draw the line with them I will tell you-- YOU draw the line there because you understand, as all humans understand ( Romans 1 & Natural law ) -- that they are morally wrong because God has given us ( and you ) the innate standard of right and wrong. Now, if you base it on your ever - changing standard of man's law, I should suggest you just wait 30-50 years to see how far man progresses to incorporate children and ponies.

You do realize that Scripture itself suggests that there is nothing new under the sun, right ? Pedophilia and Bestiality have always existed. There is a reason ( God Himself -- and His restraining Arm ) as to why it does does not flourish and advance. All God really need to do is: withdraw His arm of protection, and man will--and can--be as base as he wants--even to the point of figuring out a way to marry his daughters ( Actually watching Game of Thrones on HBO--this was happening in one tribe. The father king was killing all his male children and marrying all of his daughters--so as to defeat all his potential suitors & rivals and living as a law unto himself. So, the very fact that men have written and conceived of this evil proves that IT can and does exist and happen. The question again is: why does it not MOVE FORWARD--to steal a phrase from Obama )and ponies....

February 27, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

No one is suggesting, caddy, that morality be thrown to the wind. But what is moral? In my (according to you, incorrect) atheist mind, morality is based on how we treat one another. My morality is not based on a religious belief. I do not believe that someone is "watching" me from outside the natural world.

If being gay, or entering a marriage between two consenting adults of the same gender, resulted in someone else being hurt or someone's rights as a human being taken, I would be against it 100%. However, no one is hurt by two men or two women entering a marriage contract. No one. That it doesn't sit well with some people? That's THEIR problem. No one is saying churches must perform these weddings-that is up to each religious group to decide.

Your problem is that you cannot conceive of anyone having morals outside religion. There is where you are incorrect. I am a non-believer, and my morals are simple: treat others as I would like to be treated, be truthful in everything I do, try to do no harm. No supernatural entity, no score taking, no "reward" other than the hope that I can go to bed each night knowing that I did my best to stick with those simple rules, and the pledge to try just as hard or harder the next day. Another problem is that you, like the author in your first link, have an old-fashioned idea of what marriage's purpose is-for the biological production of children. If a marriage isn't first and foremost about this, you think it is somehow less.

Gay marriage will eventually be legal. Why? Because there is no real legal or moral reason to stop it from being legal. All "secular" arguments come back to either sectarian religion or the discomfort some people have. A friend of mine (who is clergy, BTW) began to accept the idea of gay marriage when he realized that he just needed to stop imagining what a gay pair does behind closed doors. I don't like to imagine what any pair, gay or straight, does in private. It is and always will be none of my business. There are straight marriages out there that are chaste, but we don't need to know this much about the relationship between two people who love each other.

It boils down to this: gay marriage affirms loving relationships between people. It gives them a symbolic way of making and maintaining a commitment to someone. It has no victims. If you don't like gay marriage, don't enter into one. If you don't think your religion should endorse them, then work hard to make sure your church never performs same sex weddings.

February 27, 2013 at 11:29 a.m.
timbo said...

The REAL conservative view is that it is no business of the government to tell anyone who to marry. Social conservatives, for the most part, are just putting their religious views over the political.

They still want to use the government to control personal behavior just like their liberal buddies. Government control is government control whether it comes from the left or the right.

Both sides and their hypocritical positions scare me to death. How does Frank marrying Joe affect me one bit? I really don't care.

February 27, 2013 at 11:31 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Well, timbo, it is nice to agree with you for once, given how often we butt heads.

February 27, 2013 at 11:34 a.m.
Leaf said...

Well said, timbo.

February 27, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.
caddy said...

As a Libertarian, I would agree that government is FAR too involved in our lives. On the issue of marriage, I see it as common sense. Based on Natural law, men ( and women ) understand fully what their bodies are designed for, just as Mothers KNOW that the Children they carry in their bellies is not foreign matter and clumps of cells, but real human beings.

Still, if Mother's can convince themselves of this and be convinced by evil people like Planned Parenthood, that they are doing a "good" thing by killing their children, what can humans NOT be convinced of ! ?

February 27, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.
Easy123 said...

caddy,

"Based on Natural law, men ( and women ) understand fully what their bodies are designed for"

Human bodies weren't designed. If they were, whoever designed them was drunk. The human body is a very poorly "design". However, if you look at the world in the light of evolution, then you don't have to worry about a "designer" at all. Humans evolved. It is very apparent when assessing the human body.

"just as Mothers KNOW that the Children they carry in their bellies is not foreign matter and clumps of cells, but real human beings."

Mothers don't know that. Sometimes their bodies actually do attack the fetus (Google: Rh factor). Sometimes the embryo doesn't grow but still implants to the uterus (Google: Molar Pregnancy). And, if you look at it from strictly a scientific/medical point of view, an embryo is, in fact, a clump of cells.

"Still, if Mother's can convince themselves of this and be convinced by evil people like Planned Parenthood, that they are doing a "good" thing by killing their children, what can humans NOT be convinced of ! ?"

Abortion isn't evil and it isn't your decision to make.

Your "god" puts millions of miscarriages in motion. Is that evil?

February 27, 2013 at 11:58 a.m.
dao1980 said...

Referencing "natural law" is a "slippery slope" for sure..

February 27, 2013 at 11:58 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

What is "common sense" to you caddy may not be to others, as common sense is a product of our upbringing, attitude, preconceived notions and misconceptions, education and religion. Since abortion is not the subject of this cartoon or thread I am not going to enter a discussion about it.

February 27, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.
caddy said...

Re: Mother's don't know that !

hogwash. So, Easy123, if you are standing beside a Pregnant woman on the street and a man comes up and Punches her in the Stomach causing death to the Child, can that man be tried for Murder ?

Absolutely He can.

You are a fool, sir.

If there were a way to Block your sorry ass from being seen in this feed, I would certainly block you.

February 27, 2013 at 12:02 p.m.
Easy123 said...

caddy,

"So, Easy123, if you are standing beside a Pregnant woman on the street and a man comes up and Punches her in the Stomach causing death to the Child, can that man be tried for Murder ?"

You do realize that the woman would have to very far along for that to occur, correct? Did you even read the examples I mentioned? Do you even realize that there are different stages of fetal development and pregnancy? Every woman that tests positive on a pregnancy test isn't pregnant nor are they carrying a child. Sometimes their body even confuses the fetus for a foreign body! Heck, most women have no clue they're pregnant until they are 5 or 6 weeks along.

"You are a fool, sir."

You are the fool. Everyone can see that.

"If there were a way to Block your sorry ass from being seen in this feed, I would certainly block you."

Of course you would! I wouldn't expect anything less from an ignorant, Bible-thumping bigot like yourself. So much for the 1st Amendment, right? Your true colors are shining through.

February 27, 2013 at 12:07 p.m.
caddy said...

On Common sense: lkeithlu

True, and I agree. Hence My statement up above:


"The deceived always hear their preferred answer. Rationalization is the homage paid by sin to guilty knowledge. The fact that men can make laws does not mean they can make them right."

People know what the parts of the male anatomy and female anatomy are made for. The fact that easy123 might like to stick his Part in his favorite sheep isn't good common sense proof that that was its intent and original design by His creator.

"Those who do not accept a God who stands outside of "natural" processes have no more reason for their faith than Christians who believe that Jesus rose on the third day or Jews who believe God made them His chosen people. Many people have a sort of vague idea that one day science will reveal everything, but that rests upon a number of assumptions essentially taken on faith, among them that there is a natural world independent of the mind that purports to observe it and that that universe is ultimately reducible to laws the mind can discover." Robert H. Bork

February 27, 2013 at 12:12 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

The religious always hear their preferred answer: that the world somehow "fits" with the scriptures in their chosen holy text, and that no matter how silly or insane these claims are, everyone else just needs to be taught (or perhaps forced) to conform.

Although I don't go as far as Easy in mocking religions, to each group of believers their stories seem real, and all other stories sound like fairy tales. If you look at the premise of Christianity (virgin birth, all seeing god, rising from the dead) from the point of view of a Native American, it sounds silly.

I have no "reason" for my lack of faith, Belief is a pretty personal thing. I can no more make you NOT believe than you can make me believe. I just don't, and in hindsight, never did since I stopped believing in Santa. (sad day-all magic and supernatural stuff was gone forever). As a child I learned to find joy in my imagination (play) the imagination of others (music, movies and especially books) and the natural world which because of my circumstances I have been able to see, often up close.

That you don't agree is none of my concern.

February 27, 2013 at 12:19 p.m.
Easy123 said...

caddy,

"The fact that easy123 might like to stick his Part in his favorite sheep isn't good common sense proof that that was its intent and original design by His creator."

I'm sure Jesus would be cool with it! After all, Jesus was the "Good Shepherd" and born in a manger. You never know!

February 27, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.
jesse said...

When they unify particle physics w/quantum mech. and discover that reality as we perceive it is merely the result of "wave function" ,Then we can put all this "Religion " b/s to bed for good and get on with gittin CIVILIZED

February 27, 2013 at 12:22 p.m.

Thanks Andrew for your Bible-crap comments.. Reminds us europeans of the dark middle ages and its spanish Inquisitors.. ... but that fits well to the south where the conservative people are on the intellectual level of Europe in the 15-hundreds ...

February 27, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.
conservative said...

Marriage is ordained by God. It is to be a permanent union between a man and a woman who were created by God.

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24

February 27, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
Leaf said...

Religion and common sense are . . . Sorry, I can't concentrate. I can't stop looking at that fireplug.

February 27, 2013 at 12:37 p.m.
caddy said...

lkeithlu, as a Calvinist, I'm completely at home with the notion that God gives some faith and not others ( Ephesians 2 ) No man is deserving of His truth. All men are born spiritually dead, dumb, and blind to God's true truth. Me included. The weight of the world is not on me to convince rabid atheist and agnostics of that fact. Calvinists have peace. Converting the world is not their mission.

Christ Himself was mocked by the pagans and His own "religious elite" groups.

Deep religious inquiry does take place, but more often it is in hospital rooms rather than in classrooms or living rooms...or forums like this.

Reminds me of Pascal:

"That is why men are so fond of hustle and bustle; that is why prison is such a fearful punishment; that is why the pleasures of solitude are so incomprehensible. That, in fact, is the main joy of being a King, because people are continually trying to divert him and provide him every kind of pleasure. A king is surrounded by people whose only thought is to divert him and stop him thinking about himself, because, King though he is, he becomes unhappy as soon as he things about himself ( Pensee 136 ).

Sinful men are diverted and distracted from thinking deeply about who they really are. Simply put: Scripture tells us one simple thing: NONE of us are good. We've all sought to sit on God's throne--or to do away with God--and be our own God. It was the original sin. The apple itself is a diversion from the true truth of wanting to be in control, make our own decisions apart from God himself.

I suggest: To some God gives that wish. SO be it.

February 27, 2013 at 12:49 p.m.
Leaf said...

Here's proof of whatever it is I'm trying to say because it's quoted from my favorite book.

"And therefore it came to pass that God judged that bacon and barbecue are the most delicious and that none of the tribe of Israel should eat it but only reserve it for Him." - Book of Leaf 12:48.

PROOF!

February 27, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
dao1980 said...

Have any of you ever wondered how it could even be possible, that people who participated in the inquisition could really believe that they were saving souls to burn them at the stake?.. well, caddy a useful modern illustration of what a warped mind is capable of.

By caddy's morals, he/she could stab you in the face, then justify it with blind and selfish calvinistic nonsense.

It's no wonder that organized religion in general is quickly dying out in the civilized portions of the world.. and even kinda funny that the last bastions of societal strength for organized "warrior-tribe" or "predestination-style" religions are places where education is condemned and the population lives in un-sanitary filth while their leaders wear gold jewelry engraved with the names of their deities.

February 27, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.
Maximus said...

Jesse defending Molly Yard as a hottie now that's funny. The gays have a complete rights agenda to include recruiting young children into the gay fold by encouraging elementary school aged children to choose their sexual identity at school without their parents consent or involvement. Already a BIG issue in Massachusetts. If you have not done so enroll your kids into a private school ASAP! We prefer Baylor and GPS.

February 27, 2013 at 1:19 p.m.
limric said...

I've asked myself now and again, why do Christians hate gays? But then again, I know not all of them do, and there are many other religions that are the same- and some worse. I still wonder though, why so many Christians hate (as evidenced by Christians posting here today) so much?

I heard this song by Macklemore & Ryan Lewis I thought it was quite good (even with the ‘icky’ parts) and a great example as to what I am asking;

Same Love Feat’ About 7 minutes long.

And still – I do not know.

February 27, 2013 at 1:20 p.m.
limric said...

Leaf,

BLASPHEMER!

I too have read the book Leaf 12:48. In it says, And therefore it came to pass that God judged that bacon and barbecue are the most delicious of meaty goodness; and that ALL of the tribe of LIMRIC shall consume it merrily (with some Tequila) from the altar of Weber, *but must also - on pain of hellfire reserve a taste for Him."

Meka Leka Hi Meka Hiney HO.

Long live Jambi...and maybe some gay Christians...and some negros...and those pesky Mexicans...and maybe - jussst maybe, a repentant Republican.

February 27, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.
Leaf said...

Yeah, I don't understand gay bashing either. Normally people hate what they fear, and religious people tend to be more fearful than the norm. But I don't see what threat gay people pose. I mean, I suppose I could be offended that lesbians won't sleep with me, but then I'd have to hate almost all women!

February 27, 2013 at 1:37 p.m.
hambone said...

conservative said

"Marriage is a divine institution"

He never meet my first wife!

February 27, 2013 at 1:45 p.m.
jesse said...

Limric ya kneeling at the wrong altar. BIG GREEN EGG beez the one true god!!

BTW: Max,i did not say she was hot, i said she prob.looked better than you which means she coulda been PLUG UGLY and still won!

February 27, 2013 at 1:47 p.m.
limric said...

LOL

You three stooges, Leaf, Hambone and Jesse. Are you...the trinity?

Or just gay?

LOL

P.S. THE BIG GREEN EGG? That soundeth Dr Seuss(ish). My friend has one. They're excellent. My conservative leanings however will not let let me veer into EGG country and give up on the Weber. Which is as old as Methuselah.

February 27, 2013 at 1:56 p.m.
Leaf said...

limric, you are using a translation not approved by the Most Holy Conclave of Elders of the Church of Leaf. The original pig latin was mistranslated by gay drunken monks in the middle ages and remained uncorrected until the revised printing on November 14th, 1994. Burn your unapproved Pre-1994 translation now or my army will pillage your lands, run off your women, and rape your livestock.

February 27, 2013 at 1:57 p.m.
jesse said...

When i got them baby backs workin on the big green egg and partakin of Brother LEM MOTLOWS elixir i do my incantations in PIG LATIN, makes the ribs come out better!!

February 27, 2013 at 2:14 p.m.
Leaf said...

"And he who doth cook with the gas of satan surely shall perish, but the righteous man shall find peace everlasting if he doth burneth the holy wood." - Book of Leaf 2:24

February 27, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.
jesse said...

And THAT'S THE WORD of the LORD!!

BTW: Leaf,ya know if con man is readin this he's prob. out ROOTIN up his asphalt drive way!LMFAO!!every once in a while this place gets to be fun!!

February 27, 2013 at 2:30 p.m.
limric said...

EVIL PORKUBUS

Dare not deceive me with the vile mis-truths of drunken elderberries. For to do so is to misunderestimate my swine smoking BBQ gullibility. I shall NEVER renounce my pre-1994 Book of Leaf. For in it to this day are many many strange things I do not and need not understand. God works in mysterious, ineffective and breathtakingly cruel ways. And as such tells me that to know god there is no peace and to no god is to know peace. This one palm – er I mean psalm (From the Book of Leaf chapter ‘DOH’!) hurts my brain like a thousand burgers flipping at once. And Catsup. :-D

Send forth your army evil tree appendage to pillage my lands if you wish; Or run off with my women folk, and pray thee not rape my livestock. But if thou will ---please don’t hurt my mules.

Woe is to Limric, the false god of Jesse's green egg - LOL - and the Hambone. All subject to the wrath of Leaf's bagged sword wielding Kingsfords.

February 27, 2013 at 2:31 p.m.
conservative said...

No mistaking what God thinks about sexual perverts and those who practice sodomy.

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination:" Leviticus 20:13

February 27, 2013 at 2:34 p.m.
jesse said...

All that "livestock" buis.is O.K. JUST DON'T MESS W THE PIGS!!

February 27, 2013 at 2:36 p.m.
limric said...

This idle simonizing -- er - sermonizing pleases me, yet I must travel far; to pick up young bumpkin Granddaughter. Whence we return to camp we shall revel in juice and ice pops until cute cherubs mother comes hither. Or something.

Anyway that sounded sooo gay. LOL

February 27, 2013 at 2:40 p.m.
limric said...

Sodomy, isn't that what Conservative 'whips up' in his gas grill?

LOL LOL LOL

Ahem.......

February 27, 2013 at 2:43 p.m.
jesse said...

I know limric,you just couldn't help yourself!!LOL

Ha HA ya had a BETTER idea after ya posted! right??

February 27, 2013 at 2:45 p.m.
conservative said...

Now notice that sodomy is a behavior, an act, conduct, that is condemned by God.

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination:" Leviticus 20:13

February 27, 2013 at 3:19 p.m.
hambone said...

Sodomy? That's close to Daisy, south of Sale Creek in North Hamilton County.

February 27, 2013 at 3:31 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

So conservative, being a lesbian is okay, then. According to your bible.

February 27, 2013 at 3:38 p.m.
jen1972 said...

Ah, yes. Conservative is relying on good ol' Leviticus. Hmm... what else does Leviticus tell us?

Don't let cattle graze with other kinds of cattle (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't have a variety of crops on the same field. (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)

Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)

If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10).

If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both he and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)

If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death. (Leviticus 20:14)

If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)

Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death. (Leviticus 20:27)

If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake. (Leviticus 21:9)

People who have flat noses, or are blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)

Anyone who curses or blasphemes God, should be stoned to death by the community. (Leviticus 24:14-16)

And yet, it seems, for Conservative, it's all about the sodomy. How nice to simply pick and choose passages from your holy book.

February 27, 2013 at 3:39 p.m.
conservative said...

Translation - Yes sodomites do spread aids but we will live in denial.

"Manhattan Teacher Training: Do's and Dont's When Discussing AIDS"

" Homosexuals should not be blamed for the spread of AIDS.

Reference: "High School AIDS Education Workshop. Presented by Bruce Schutte and Rebecca Porper, New York City Department of Health.

February 27, 2013 at 3:54 p.m.
Leaf said...

Oh, ye unbelievers and assorted sodomizers and wankers and fireplug motorboaters - the end times must surely be upon us for there is much injustice and iniquity in the world and now I'm hungry for barbecue.

What does your holy book have to say about eating pork, Connie? You just quoted Leviticus, I bet it's around there somewhere.

February 27, 2013 at 3:54 p.m.
jesse said...

Maybe con man has a "fixation in the anal stage!"

Con man ,while he doesn'r realize it provides some comic relief on here BUT trying to REASON w/him if futile!I think Alprova argues w/him just to break the monotony!

February 27, 2013 at 3:56 p.m.
jtthomas16 said...

"You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."

  • Anne Lamott
February 27, 2013 at 4:46 p.m.
conservative said...

"Reference: "High School AIDS Education Workshop. Presented by Bruce Schutte and Rebecca Porper, New York City Department of Health."

"Manhattan Teacher Training: Do's and Dont's When Discussing AIDS"

"Infants infected with AIDS should not be referred to as "innocent" children, as that implies someone is guilty"

How does anyone other than the most vile defend that?

February 27, 2013 at 5:03 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

"Infants infected with AIDS should not be referred to as "innocent" children, as that implies someone is guilty"

Just what problem do you have with that quote conservative? The other two are just titles-what is there to discuss? High school students should be taught about all STD's. To fail to do so is immoral-they can put themselves at risk. And before you protest and say "Just say no" in regards to teen sex, let me remind you that 95% of the last 3 generations; 95%!!: admitted to sex outside of marriage. So even in the Leave it to Beaver days, teens had sex.

I suspect you and your kind feel real discomfort in having frank talks with teens about sex, contraception, and STDs. Hope you don't work in a school. Keeping kids ignorant can cost them their future, their fertility, their very lives.

February 27, 2013 at 5:17 p.m.
conservative said...

"Reference: "High School AIDS Education Workshop. Presented by Bruce Schutte and Rebecca Porper, New York City Department of Health."

"Manhattan Teacher Training: Do's and Dont's When Discussing AIDS"

"Teachers should not be squeamish about using explicit terms to describe gay sexual behavior"

You mean there is some sodomite behavior that is just too disgusting, repugnant and abhorrent to discuss with children?

February 27, 2013 at 6:17 p.m.
alprova said...

Time for another installment of blasphemy, as conservative will surely charge me with.

He is fond of that one scriptural quote found in Leviticus. It's what he bases his entire condemnation of homosexuality upon.

Understanding the Bible goes hand in hand with an understanding of the context in which scripture is presented, and of course, an understanding of who wrote it.

God wrote not a word contained in the Bible. Mortal men did.

Leviticus is traditionally believed to have been compiled by Moses, or alternatively believed that the material in it goes back to his time, but Biblical scholars have dated material contained in Leviticus sometime after Moses walked the Earth. Scholars are practically unanimous that the book had a long period of growth and that it reached its present form around 538 BC.

And what about context? Is that not important as well? Of course it is.

Now ole' conservative believes that the instructions contained in Leviticus apply to each and every one of us. Is that true? No, it is not.

Leviticus contains a series of instructions laid down to define the character of altar priesthood, or priests empowered to offer sacrifices to God, and it outlines all the restrictions on their position.

Certain foods are outlawed in chapters 11-15. Chapter 16 deals with the Day of Atonement. This is the only day on which the High Priest is to enter the holiest part of the sanctuary, wherever that was at the time, the holy of holies.

Chapters 17-26 are the Holiness code. Conservative's favorite quote is contained therein.

The entire book of Leviticus is composed entirely of Priestly literature.

Christians have twisted the pure ritual to the theological and moral into a model for the relationship of lay people to God. Leviticus was not a set of instructions for lay people at all.

The Holiness code contained in Leviticus was to be regarded as a separate document that was later incorporated into Leviticus, with the Holiness authors editing the book with the Priestly code.

This is why I eat shellfish and pork without an ounce of guilt, and I enjoy each bite. It may have been prohibited for ancient priests to eat such foods, but there is no reason on Earth why we peons are not allowed to eat such foods.

Homosexuality was an abomination cited by the authors of Leviticus for any man seeking to be a high priest. Outside of that context, who knows?

So fire away conservative. And as always, you are free to respond with any evidence you can dig up to contradict me, which I am quite sure will not be offered. You're just going to condemn me to hell for my blasphemy...

February 27, 2013 at 6:30 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

You will answer to the Lord Jesus Christ for this blasphemy :

"Was Jesus a perfect man while on Earth? Although few and far between, there is scripture that suggests that Jesus was not perfect."

"And again, you fail to include the scripture I cited that proves that Jesus himself did not consider himself to be perfect and without sin."

There is NO Scripture that suggests that Jesus was not perfect. The sinlessness of Jesus Christ is an essential doctrine of Scripture and an essential requirement for a professing Christian. To state otherwise as you have several times is blasphemy.

There is not one chance that you are a Christian. Why the charade?

February 27, 2013 at 7:04 p.m.
jesse said...

GAS GRILL?? altho i've never heard it called that, that will work!!LMAO

If con man ever gits his head wraped around that he might come lookin!!AHEM my arz!

February 27, 2013 at 7:12 p.m.
conservative said...

"Reference: "High School AIDS Education Workshop. Presented by Bruce Schutte and Rebecca Porper, New York City Department of Health."

"Manhattan Teacher Training: Do's and Dont's When Discussing AIDS"

"Stress safe-sex behaviors. Don't make an issue about the number of sex partners."

What kind of a moral moron would stress same sex behaviors to school children? Recruitment?

Yes, if you are a moral moron, the number of same sex partners would not be an issue would it?

February 27, 2013 at 7:49 p.m.
dude_abides said...

While it's obvious that nobody that posts here could make a living as a writer, there have been some interesting and hilarious attempts! Moor on this, conservative.

February 27, 2013 at 8:05 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Conservative: STDs, including HIV are not confined to homosexuals. Surely you know this. If not, you should be embarrassed.

February 27, 2013 at 9:06 p.m.
BluesHarp said...

“The Right thinks that the breakdown of the family is the source of crime and poverty, and this they very insightfully blame on the homosexuals, which would be amusing were it not so tragic. Families and 'family values' are crushed by grinding poverty, which also makes violent crime and drugs attractive alternatives to desperate young men and sends young women into prostitution. Family values are no less corrupted by the corrosive effects of individualism, consumerism, and the accumulation of wealth. Instead of shouting this from the mountain tops, the get-me-to-heaven-and-the-rest-be-damned Christianity the Christian Right preaches is itself a version of selfish spiritual capitalism aimed at netting major and eternal dividends, and it fits hand in glove with American materialism and greed.” ― John D. Caputo, What Would Jesus Deconstruct?: The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church

“I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all." ― Alexis de Tocqueville

"Liberals and conservatives disagree over what are the most important sins. For conservatives, the sins that matter are personal irresponsibility, the flight from family life, sexual permissiveness, the failure of individuals to work hard. For liberals, the gravest sins are intolerance, a lack of generosity toward the needy, narrow-mindedness toward social and racial minorities." -E.J. Dionne

"Conservatives are more religious than liberals -although there is no evidence that they're nicer people because of it." -Andy Rooney

"The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas -- uncertainty, progress, change -- into crimes." - Salman Rushdie

"The conservative may clamor against reform, but he might as well clamor against the centrifugal force. He sighs for the "good old times,"--he might as well wish the oak back into the acorn."
-E. H. Chapin, Living Words

“Expect poison from the standing water.” ― William Blake

"I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass." -Barry Goldwater, 1981

February 27, 2013 at 9:32 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "here is NO Scripture that suggests that Jesus was not perfect. The sinlessness of Jesus Christ is an essential doctrine of Scripture and an essential requirement for a professing Christian. To state otherwise as you have several times is blasphemy."

Ah...but there is proof that Jesus did indeed sin. In addition to saying that only God was good, he conspired to steal an animal that was not his to take. Luke 19:29-34, & Matthew 21:1-3, as well as in Mark, the exact location escapes my memory at the moment, outline the tale when Jesus commanded two of his disciples to enter the town of Bethany and to take a young colt or donkey without permission.

Biblical scholars since the late 1700s have used definitive tools, criteria and standards for separating the actual history of Jesus from the memory and mythology of Jesus.

Biblical texts were originally oral and finally after many years were written down by hand, copied by scribes and passed around to different early Christian groups during the 300 years after Jesus lived. Some of these texts survived and a few of them were finally established as the definitive books to be included in the New Testament.

If you cannot believe in a tradition passed along orally and written down and copied and then copied again and again, along with alterations and mistakes that were often copied and passed along too, then you may have nothing left to believe in at all.

You believe what you believe because you have been taught to believe it. Your "truths" are not facts. Your beliefs are not facts. Far be it for me to attempt in the slightest to change your mind about a thing, but your opinions are not factual and they never will be.

So please, for the umpteenth time...you worry about your own soul and I will tend to mine. If I am indeed being blasphemous, which I know that I am not, I will pay the price for it.

February 27, 2013 at 10:02 p.m.
alprova said...

lkeithlu wrote: "Conservative: STDs, including HIV are not confined to homosexuals. Surely you know this. If not, you should be embarrassed."

In fact most of the people around the world infected with HIV are not homosexual at all. They are women.

It truly would be interesting to know conservative's age. Some of his statements come off as if he is 90 years old. Whatever the man's age, he lives in a world of his own and it is filled with complete ignorance of certain facts.

I am firmly convinced that he is a closet case of the worst kind. No one can be as outspoken against homosexuality as he has been consistently and not be in complete denial of his own tendencies to want to embrace a little gay love for himself.

Thou doth protesteth too much...

February 27, 2013 at 10:19 p.m.
caddy said...

dao1980 said... "Have any of you ever wondered how it could even be possible, that people who participated in the inquisition could really believe that they were saving souls to burn them at the stake?.. well, caddy a useful modern illustration of what a warped mind is capable of."


Yes, I have, the inquisition was a part of the RCC--of which I think for the most part is heretical itself. Men forcing other men never made a Christian. Only agnostics and atheists would really think such a thing were true. Most all Atheists and agnostics I know are dumb concerning the historical narratives. If I had a dime for every time I hear a whimmpy-assed agnostic attempt to grill me on the stupid inquisition, I'd be a millionaire.

Do yourself a favor and pick up Rodney Stark's book on the Crusades and educate yourself.

http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Battalions-Crusades-Rodney-Stark/dp/0061582603

dao1980 said... [By caddy's morals, he/she could stab you in the face, then justify it with blind and selfish calvinistic nonsense.]


Hardly. Nowhere does Scripture say that to know all is to forgive all. Rather it says that on the Day of Wrath, everything secret will be known and everything in darkness will come to light. Nevertheless, Christians get pulled into absolutionism by all sorts of ropes. Ours is a God of mercy. Yes, but He is also a God of judgment. These two qualities are united by the atoning sacrifice of Christ, of which we cannot avail ourselves unless we repent. Christ has commanded us not to judge. Yes, but we are not commanded not to judge acts; we are only commanded not to judge souls. We know which acts are wrong because He has told us; we don't know which souls will repent because He hasn't. Hardly

dao1980 said... [It's no wonder that organized religion in general is quickly dying out in the civilized portions of the world.. and even kinda funny that the last bastions of societal strength for organized "warrior-tribe" or "predestination-style" religions are places where education is condemned and the population lives in un-sanitary filth while their leaders wear gold jewelry engraved with the names of their deities.]


True religion will not die because it is NOT dependent on men, but on a Sovereign God who reigns and is in control--despite living in a world full of sin, wars, murders, rapes, death, and dying.

These things exist expressly because of our first choice to usurp control from God. As Augustine rightly stated, “For it was in the evil use of his free will that man destroyed himself and his will at the same time.”

http://thinkingreed.wordpress.com/2007/01/23/augustines-enchiridion-9-redemption-grace-and-free-will/

February 28, 2013 at 12:25 p.m.
dao1980 said...

Don't mistake my simple and accurate assertion for "an attempt to grill you" regarding the various inquisitions.

Apologetics are pitiful enough.. denial smells even worse.

It is a valuable tool in developing perspective to understand that "group think" has an immense amount of power over the individual, and can influence us to do terrible things to each other while believing wholeheartedly in the purpose of the action.

Who's really "wimpy-assed" when your perceived self worth is reliant on the need to believe that in the entire universe, across deep time, our planet is "special" to anyone but it's own inhabitants.

Your methods of twisting up your own mind to make sense of the world around you seem very much like an attempt to "usurp control from God" in the first place.

Where do you draw the line in regards to which point in time humans became "save" worthy along the line of our development? Monotheism is actually very very young in comparison to the span of time that we humans have been grouping together to engage in cultural and societal functions.

Oh, and here's some good reading in return for your offerings.

http://cullenmurphy.com/gods-jury

February 28, 2013 at 1:39 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.