ORONO, Maine — It was a busy, emotional Monday on the University of Maine mall. Demonstrators from the Genocide Awareness Project debated and sometimes clashed with students in front of a display showing graphic images of well-known instances of genocide alongside those of aborted fetuses.
Yards away, two gay marriage opponents announced during a press conference that they would form a political action committee to fight a November statewide referendum asking voters whether Maine should allow gays to marry.
Shortly after, a crowd UMaine students, officials and faculty stood in a circle, applauded and cheered as a rainbow flag was raised over the mall on the first day of the university’s Pride Week.
The Genocide Awareness Project, an effort of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, is an outdoor display of billboards and photo murals that liken abortion to the Holocaust, lynchings of blacks in the Jim Crow era and the Cambodian killing fields. Its aim is to reshape how people think about abortion.
The group argues that abortion is the extermination of a “national group” of unborn and unwanted children.
“I think that’s highly offensive to people whose families have suffered as a result of genocides,” said Kalie Hess, 22, of Orono, a fourth-year anthropology major and member of the UMaine Student Women’s Association.
“That’s not the real face of abortion,” Hess said, pointing to the billboards on the mall. She said the faces of abortion are “women who are making decisions for themselves.”
Most students passing by the display said they were disturbed by the images and offended by the content of the message. At some times, more than 50 students on their way to or from classes stopped at the display to listen to, debate or argue with members of the Genocide Awareness Project.
The arguments often became shouting matches, and one student called UMaine police and filed a harassment complaint against Darius Hardwick, the main speaker for the Genocide Awareness Project.
“I know [the students] are angry,” said Jeffrey Sneddon, a Genocide Awareness Project volunteer from Richmond. “I would be more concerned if people weren’t offended.”
Sneddon said people should be offended and outraged by the images but that anger should be directed toward “the people who are responsible” for abortion and genocide.
A “Free Speech Board” set up along a path on the mall near the display gave passers-by a place to write messages to share their thoughts on the demonstration.
Few comments on the board supported the program’s message.
“Ignorance is bliss,” one person wrote. Another shared: “People like these [expletive] idiots give pro-life people a bad name. I apologize for their hurtful words. — Sensible pro-lifer.”
At least one student was moved by the display and changed her viewpoint as a result. Amanda Rivers, 19, a UMaine student from Stratton who is studying social work, said she always had been against abortion except in instances of rape or incest.
When she saw the images, “I instantly started crying,” she said.
After speaking with several volunteers for the Genocide Awareness Project, she said her mindset changed.
“It’s never right to kill a baby, under any circumstance,” Rivers said.
The display will stay at UMaine through Tuesday. The display and demonstrators will relocate to the University of Southern Maine’s Portland campus on Wednesday and Thursday.
Near the spot where students and Genocide Awareness Project demonstrators debated, gay marriage opponents called a press conference to announce the formation of the “No Special Rights” political action committee, which will fight to assure that gay marriage isn’t legalized in Maine in November.
Michael Heath and Paul Madore, the PAC’s leaders, argued that Maine voters were being intimidated to change their minds after a similar gay marriage referendum failed in 2009.
Madore said gay marriage advocates are turning to the legal system to “force people to accept the homosexual lifestyle.”
The men distributed pledges to passers-by that ask potential voters to oppose “sodomy-based marriage” in November and contribute to the political action committee.
“We intend to take the gloves off,” said Madore, adding that he expects his group will be heavily outspent by gay marriage supporters.
About an hour after the press conference, a group of UMaine students, officials and faculty stood around a flagpole on the mall and cheered and applauded as a rainbow flag was hoisted into the air.
Evan McDuff, president of UMaine’s Wilde Stein Alliance for Sexual Diversity, said he was pleased that the demonstrations and announcement from the anti-gay marriage political action committee all occurred around the same time.
“It’s always good to have discussion, right?” McDuff said with a grin.
McDuff said that by and large people have become more accepting of gay and lesbian individuals over the years.
“One day, maybe I’d want to get married here,” said McDuff, who identifies himself as gay.
Key words from the woman from Ohio… “her belief system” which is based on the bible.
Thankfully not everyone shares her belief system.
Thankfully she has the freedom to express it.
I fully support her right to express her view. It is one the of the greatest things about the United States of America.
Indeed!
Does that make it right ?
That can be said on the other side also.
Sure, so would she be right, then, too ?
You can call being a polygamist slave dealer being a Biblical based lifestyle, too, if you wanted.
You can also use the word “servant” for slave and Biblically speaking, you are the treat them well.
So see, you can use the Bible to justify anything, like white washing slavery.
And some people do, too.
Pick and choose, pick and choose.
How about the belief a child has the right to live? If premies can live at such a young age out of the womb. Although if you kill someone that is pregnant you can be held for 2 murders in most states.
A fetus is not a child and cannot live outside the womb and this is when the majority of abortions are performed and what gives you the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body?
I find it amusing that men think they can make all the rules for what a woman can or cannot do with her body. You don’t have to carry it till term and raise it and please don’t tell me they should give it up for adoption.
There are thousands and thousands of children in the foster care system waiting to be adopted. Some of them never get into a stable home until they are into their teenage years.
I will always support a woman’s right to seek an abortion if that is the choice she makes.
Agreed. I don’t necessarily agree with Abortion, there are other methods but seriously. Why is it our right to tell a Woman or anyone else for that matter what they can or cannot do? I don’t go up to a random stranger and say “This is what I believe so you have no choice but to believe what I do and do what I tell you.”
For some reason old fat white men think in 2012 they can rule the world. It might have worked back in 1912 but it doesn’t work today.
Yeah , you 16 year olds are so much wiser !
Actually I hate to admit this, but I was MUCH smarter/wiser when I was 12-16 than I was at 18 – 22.
Just think it won’t be long and you will be there (old fat white men)
Let’s hope they have sense enough to get bigger underwear. The current crowd has their knickers in such a twist, you’d think they were Eastern Romania senior-citizen tourists at the Black Sea in Speedo thongs (what a vision!).
….and the last “Fat old white” President was……. Wait for it>>>>>>>>>> Bill Clinton. George was a lot of things but FAt wasn’t one of them.
True, when you have done as much coke as he has it tends to keep you slim.
Usually lots and lots of casual sex keeps you thin also, BUT in Bill’s case I guess it didn’t work that way.
I’ll add Gingrich and Haley Barbour to the fat old white man list.Thankfully neither of them will ever be President.
Age, weight, skin color, and gender of the speaker has nothing to do with the question of whether it is OK to kill an unborn child. If your hypothetical resident of 1912 was young, skinny, black, and female, would it then be wrong to kill a child? Ad hominem attacks are no substitutes for reasoned arguments.
As Surgeon General Koop stated so many years ago – if you want to stop abortion, stop unwanted pregnancies. He went on to state that unfortunately the people who are very anti-abortion also tend to be anti-birth control. Certainly, sex education and contraceptives would make a significant dent in the numbers of abortions each year. But, ultimately, this is the woman’s choice.
The people wound around the axle about contraceptives and birth control usually are ultra-conservative, religious, and actually believe abstinence is reliable. I would say it is about as reliable as the old Catholic withdrawal method.
It’s as simple as this – provide birth control, sex education, and awareness at an early age. Provide alternatives to abortion to those pregnant women who cannot care for a child (adoption, e.g.). Do this and the abortion numbers will drop. But, again, ultimately, it is up to the woman.
Regarding the relationship between contraception, sex education, and abortion among teens, be careful of unintended consequences. For example, a 2011 paper by Peter Arcidiancono (Duke University), Ahmed Khwaja (Yale University) and Lijing Ouyang (Centers for Disease Control) concluded, “Programs that increase access to contraception are found to decrease teen pregnancies in the short run but increase teen pregnancies in the long run.” (Source) More good information here.
I’m reminded of what former abortion clinic owner Carol Everett said about it. She used her status as a so-called “expert” to gain access to public school students. She has stated that “Our presence in schools guaranteed a 50% increase in pregnancy.” She described her process for increasing sexual activity among teens: “First, I established myself with the teens as an authority on sex. I explained to them that their parents wouldn’t help them with their sexuality, but I would. I separated them from their support system, number one, and they listened to me. Second, our doctors prescribed low dose birth control pills knowing well that they needed to be taken very accurately at the same time every day or pregnancy would occur. This insured the teens to be my best customers as teenagers typically are not responsible enough to follow such rigid medication guidelines on their own. I knew their sexual activity would increase from none or once a week to five or seven times a week once they were introduced to this contraception method. Then I could reach my goal – three to five abortions for each teenager between the ages of 13 and 18.”
Let’s show our appreciation to these very professional community organizers ,
these outta State professional political people for coming all the way to Maine
to teach us how we should live our lives by comparing us to Hitler and Pol Pot. http://www.fletcherarmstrongblog.com/
So, let me get this right – you are saying that Carol Everett created a conspiracy and purposely misled teens so they would become pregnant and thus seek abortions which her profit-making clinic then would provide?
Your posting sounds like a page right out of the anti-choice doctrine. Admittedly, this is not a subject area in which I am very well versed and some searching of the names you provided did not yield much information, making me question its general acceptance. I discovered this review of the movie, “Bloodmoney,” which seems to follow the points you have made.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/29/939925/-I-Don-t-Want-Your-Bloodmoney
I believe you and many of the others who are very uptight about sex seem to try to come up with some argument that pushes abstinence as the only moral way to prevent abortions as any reliable birth control method would imply (gasp!) that people would be having sexual relations outside of the Holy Blessed Whoop-di-doo church-sanctified wedding ceremony. You want to prevent sex outside of marriage, which in your mind is immoral, and this will “solve” the abortion problem, along with all that sinful sex to boot!
It kind of reminds me of the diversionary arguments used against same-sex marriage. These are starting to crop up more and more. That is, the religious arguments are getting rather stale and few of the general public really consider gay marriage (or what those nasty homos do behind closed doors) as immoral. There also is this fixation, again on sex, that the only reason gays would marry is because of sex. After all, two men or two women could not possibly actually “love” each other anymore than two dogs in heat court each other. If sex were all we were concerned with, we could hang around outside of a seminary, or any Southern Baptist husband retreat weekend, and take our pick.
With these religious argument causing all too many eyeballs to glaze over, groups like NOM start in on every other lame argument out there. These involve the “think of the children” ploys, the HIV spreading and flooding our medical system, and the coercion of our youth by gay teachers, and on and on. All of which is the biggest load of manure spread about in a long time. The American public may not be the sharpest pencils in the box but they know a con when the see one.
You know, I think instead of taking your quotes as credible, I instead will seek out published reports from credible news sources, a few of which I have listed:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/24/AR2008032401515.html
http://depts.washington.edu/hserv/articles/71
And, of course, this study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) stating that those teens with comprehensive sex education reported significantly less pregnancies than those who did not have sex education. Furthermore, those teens with “abstinence only” education might as well have had no sex education. Here are the conclusions of the NIH study:
CONCLUSIONS:
Teaching about contraception was not associated
with increased risk of adolescent sexual activity or STD. Adolescents
who received comprehensive sex education had a lower risk of pregnancy
than adolescents who received abstinence-only or no sex education.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18346659
My conclusion? Again, I will stick with science. I would suggest you try to pull yourself away from the bible and read facts for a change. This hang-up the religious crowd has against “the sin of sex” is really getting old. The only crowd wound around the axle about this are the old-school churches who have vested interest in controlling everyone’s lives. Once you get them tied into the church through fear and intimidation from birth, then married, and then they can’t use birth control, that mean more “meat in the seats” for our congregation. That means more money, power, and control. Sound rather conspiratorial and manipulative to me – not all that different than Carol Everett.
You must be getting my comments mixed up with somebody else’s. I never said anything about Bible nor sin.
Regarding choice, I am more pro-choice than any left-winger. (Unlike many on the left, for example, I believe you should have the choice what kind of insurance you can buy and whether or not you will purchase contraception for your neighbor.) But nobody should have the choice to kill another human being without justification. If you look at the history of genocide, you will notice that people who do it routinely frame their argument in the language of choice. For example, Stephen Douglas said that he was personally opposed to slavery, but he argued that each state should have the right to choose whether to be a slave state or a free state. As pro-choice as I am, I don’t find that argument persuasive, when the choice is to enslave or kill another person.
My argument was not about abstinence, per se. I was responding to your implication that pushing birth control and your version of sex education will magically eliminate abortion. It will not. In fact, the Guttmacher Institute reports that 54% of abortions are performed on women who used birth control in the month they got pregnant. They had access to birth control and knew how to use it, but they still got pregnant, most often becasue they chose not to use it consistently (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html). But if you want me to talk about abstinence, I can. It’s the only way to be certain you won’t get pregnant and you won’t get an STD. Condoms are supposed to be the be-all/end-all of “safe” sex. But their failures leave many, many people with deadly STDs. Used correctly every time, about 2% of people will get pregnant within a year. The failure to protect against STDs is even worse, because a woman can contract an STD on any day of the month, whereas she can get pregnant only a few days a month, hence more opportunities for failure against the STD. Condoms are almost totally ineffective against HPV, which causes cervical cancer. Why would we encourage anybody to put themselves at risk for an STD? Perhaps it is you who needs to concern yourself with the facts and science.
I apologize if misinterpreted your statements. However, you do seem to be pushing abstinence and while this is ideal, time and again it has proven ineffective as people cannot seem to abstain.
We also should not connect pregnancies and STDs. Quite correctly, a Norplant implant for a woman would practically guarantee she not get pregnant, but that has nothing to do with STDs. Any birth control technique, not followed according to the plan, increases the risk of pregnancy.
Your question seems to be what will effectively eliminate/reduce abortions. In my opinion and the opinion of NIH and other reputable medical studies, sex education and the proper use of birth control techniques, in fact reduces pregnancies. Abstinence would, too, but as it is not adhered to as rigorously as traditional birth control techniques, it is far less effective (because it wasn’t used).
I do not think it is a big leap to conclude that if unwanted pregnancies are prevented then the abortion rate drops.
Again, don’t mix STDs with pregnancies as those are different issues. A sterile person could contract/pass-on an STD and not risk pregnancy. Sex education would go a long way to alert young people about the dangers of STDs and also of unwanted pregnancies. There is no disadvantage to sex education. What possible valid reason is there to not have sex education in schools? Should the parents do this? Perhaps, but they are woefully inept at it and no doubt out-of-touch with the latest science and facts.
I recall back in 1973 when I graduated from high school that my very progressive and very detailed sex education class was mandatory for kids (everyone wanted to take it anyway!). Our school had a far lower teen pregnancy rate than the surrounding, more rural towns, who did not have such a program.
Perhaps, I am not seeing what your objection is. If the goal is to reduce abortions then sex education and properly used birth control goes a long ways to achieve that, and certainly a long ways further than no education and no birth control. Abstinence, while ideal has proven to be rarely followed.
MattOT, there is only one reason I can think of. If she is about to kill another human person. Its the same reason we prohibit murder, rape, holding slaves, etc.
A Fetus is not a Child and cannot live outside the womb. I suppose conception begins at erection as well right?
If a man were able to have a baby, there would be no more babies after this babies birth.
repeated by mistake
repeated by mistake
Very professional…
A fetus is a living human being. Embryologists, medical school textbooks, and even pro-abortion philosophers like Peter Singer and David Boonin agree on the humanity of the child. Why is it you believe that some human beings may be killed, while others are protected? What is the point at which it should no longer be OK to kill a human being? Is it birth? 3 months before birth? 2 months after birth?
There are waiting lists to adopt newborns. The shortage of adoptable newborns is so acute, people are going overseas to find them. While the plight of older children who have been abused and neglected is lamentable, how are their lives improved by killing younger children?
We are all pro-choice. But when one person’s choice kills or harms another person, or puts another person at risk fo harm, those choices cannot be permitted in a civilized society. That’s why we have laws against murder, rape, slavery, speeding, dumping toxic waste, etc.
Well said…
I agree with the general sentiment, but would strongly suggest to try to win the religious extremist’s class war by being classy enough to be more tolerant of others than they ever are.
The things is that it is just as easy to make the point by questioning these mean spirited,
self-appointed spokespersons for all Christians, than belittling Christianity as a whole just
because the extremist few are being purposely offensive.
That can done by respectfully asking how much like Christ, or the Pharisees, are which group of all of us wretched sinners really being.
Think about it in terms of politics and this November’s elections, and how both of you have just played into these PR wolves in wool suits’ only real game plan.
Good Christians, and there are plenty, deserve as much respect as anyone.
You know them as neighbors of yours don’t you ?
But sadly, the extremist “christians” purposely “offend and outrage” the liberal secularists, because instead of being good Christians or good neighbors, they are counting on you to take offence, and make them look as if they defending Christianity, not corrupting it,
as is really the case.
The Taliban operates in exactly the same way, I hope everyone realizes, except they blame all Americans, not just secular ones .
This election might well be decided by who are the better neighbors, the real Maine folks that are like your good neighbors, and WHO really has some wild political agenda that they just calling “christian” or equal rights to white wash the real agenda.
Everyone, please consider that and the fact that “”Sneddon said people should be offended and outraged by the images .” as his display compares our daughters, sisters, the co-eds at the University, exercising their legal rights, to Nazis, slave masters and Pol Pot :
“The Genocide Awareness Project, an effort of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, is an outdoor display of billboards and photo murals that liken abortion to the Holocaust, lynchings of blacks in the Jim Crow era and the Cambodian killing fields.”
It is hard not to be offended by that, but it is offense to most Christians that people are
doing that and calling it “christian” too.
That is what important to be saying.
Keep in mind there are liberal Christians, liberal Islamists, and so on. It isn’t liberalism vs. Christianity. Fanaticism–irrational fixated faith that is immune even to the intelligence of science–that will destroy us all, if it gets big enough.
And believe it or not there are conservative atheist.
Spruse did you really read what I said or just get caught up in the key words and how I am not following any of the extremist’s prescribed scripts, unlike you, because I know there are liberals of all sorts, and even moderates of some stripe, left in world ?
Keep you eye on the prize.
So what you are saying, because I am a Christian and believe the bible when it says that homosexuality is a sin, that a baby is alive at conception because God says he knew us before we were in the womb, and I take that to mean abortion is wrong that I am an extremist and will destroy us all because I believe that Satan exists and is always trying to pull us away from God. Sorry my faith in God and his Son is not irrational nor extremist, it is what the Bible predicted would happen.
I hope you don’t have any tattoos or eat fish.
That would be shellfish Heywood not fish.
So why did your god create animals that are homosexual?
And humans …
Well us humans are only animals that have slowly evolved to where we are today but CD won’t get that and he will ignore that fact that homosexuality occurs in nature.
Gay dolphins and lions most likely threaten his belief system.
oooh oooh oooh and Foxes…. I’ve seen gay foxes…..
Sir, I can only say with total respect to your views, that you should respect the views of others equally. If a person wishes to believe in Christianty, and wishes to follow and believe those teachings, then is that anymore wrong that to follow your beliefs in evolution? You paint your views with sarcasm, and disrespect. Your points and arguements are lost because the reader sof your comments are only going to focus on your sarcasm instead of the points you are trying to make. An old saying goes, “Respect is a to way street. It must given to get.” I may not agree with your views, but I respect the fact that you have the right to express them. I would ask that you respect those with opposing views, as they are as important as yours.
very nicely said, thank you
Christians no longer get a free pass so you can go boo hoo in a corner.
I wish you would explain what you mean that Christians no longer get a free pass.
Boo hoo in a corner?? Really? That’s the best come back line you can come up with? I’ve never asked for a “free pass” as you put it based on religious beliefs. I respect everyone’s beliefs not because they are important to me, but because they are important to them, and they are worth hearing and respecting. When I wore the uniform of this country, I wore it to protect everyone. No matter what their beliefs, or orientation. I may not agree with some people’s views, but I respect that they have those views, and have the right to those views. In many countries that is not allowed. That is what makes this country great, and the people in it great. Something you should learn.
There was nothing disrespectful, in or about Kevin’s post he ask a simple question. what is disrespectful, is the demanding, that you are right and others are wrong. it happens on both sides). What is wrong to me is those who say you can’t be moral, and not believe in god. I’m a moral person, my morality has little to do with a fear of not going to heaven if I’m not. I’m moral because I’m a good person.
I did not say that I was right about anything. I merely pointed out that everyone has their own feelings, emotions, and thoughts on what is considered important to them. And we should all respect those opinions as we wish to have our own respected. To give you an example, please read Kevin’s response to my post to him. And I have no doubt that you are a good person. What is important to you does not have to be important to anyone else. That is what makes every person, and their opinions important.
Well as many times as it says homosexuality is a sin it also says eating shellfish or wearing blended cloth is a sin. Are you out there saying lobster men or fruit of the loom is pulling you away from your God? It is the same passage in the same book. Your just picking and choosing what you want. You let lobster men slide. Why not gay people?
Fine, just keep your mythology in your own home and church and OUT of government and all other public venues as our founders clearly intended. And also, just don’t be a hyprocrite as so many right wingers are. They stand there and screech about how much they love god and Jesus, then out of the other side of their face they celebrate hateful evil filth like Limbaugh and Fox News, yell and scream about how much they hate liberals, and hate Obama, and hate Muslims, and hate minorities, and hate “lazy people on welfare,” and hate and hate and hate. How many people did Jesus hate? Then these so called Jesus lovers stand there and thump their chests and shout about how much they want to bomb other nations and wage wars, and would crawl through a snow storm to give endless tax giveaways to billionaires and the war machine companies. Gee, how many countries did Jesus want to bomb? And then, these right wing Jesus lovers stand and shout about how much they hate abortion, but then don’t say a single word about investing in education and planned parenthood programs which PREVENT abortions by PREVENTING the unwanted pregnancies. Then after these kids are born, they are written off by the right wing as “useless riffraff with useless lazy welfare queen mothers” and are against any programs which help them have better life chances. Is this what Jesus would want? Is this how Jesus would behave? So go ahead and have your mythology. But just don’t be a typical right wing ultrahypocrite. Jesus did not love war, and he did not hate the poor, and he did not hate gay people. If anything he loved the poor, he loved gays, he loved those who did not love him, he was a fervant peace advocate, he would want us to invest in education and other programs to help the poor, he would not want the military industrial complex to exist, he would not want the military to account for half of our nation’s discretionary budget, he would want all people regardless of race or religious background to love each other, he would want millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share of taxes for a change and help those less fortunate, and he would want us to preserve our natural environment and not be polluting it with endless right wing tax giveaways to filthy greedy oil corporations. So ENOUGH of the endless right wing HYPOCRISY. If Jesus could see the Republican TeaRadicals of today in action, he would never stop throwing up.
WOW, you really have issues…………
Your rant sounds almost as bad as the fanatic christian right your bashing!
Well said.
If they had clearly intended they would not have taught the Bible in schools, you would not have seen the 10 Commandments posted. You would not see so much Christianity in their wording. I do not hate Obama or Liberals, I dis-like a lot of what they stand for. In regards to unwanted pregnancies, how many abortions are done for convenience?
“Fine, just keep your mythology in your own home and church and OUT of government and all other public venues as our founders clearly intended.”
Really? Why are you allowed to voice your own opinions but others are not? Which founders made you the arbiter of whose opinions may be voiced publicly and whose may not?
I suspect you have never READ the BIBLE .You are simply repeating what talk radio tells you .
Actually I have read it twice through, I also understand the difference between the new and old testament. The difference between us is I believe every word of the Bible, know that I need Jesus sacrifice because I am flawed like everyone else that has every lived. I do not hate anyone who is a homosexual, or gets an abortion, I hate the sin and love the person. That is what Jesus taught us though his life and miracles.
The bible says far more in support of slavery than it says against homosexuality.
How *do* you proceed logically from “God says he knew us before we were in the womb” to “a baby is alive at conception?” I cannot see any necessary connection between the two ideas, especially given that God knew us before the universe began.
It would be nice if we heard of a bit more support from the “normal” Christians. It wouldn’t hurt them to clean up their own house and try to educate the loony extremists in their ranks. Their silence seems to the rest of us to be tacit approval.
After awhile, it gets old and you just stop trying. No matter what “normal” Christians say, people assume they know what/how we believe anyway. It really wears you down to the point where you read stuff like what is posted on here about Christians and just shake your head. Nothing I can say will change the fact that atheists will think I’m feeble minded or the fact that progressives will think I hate gays and women. I probably should keep defending my beliefs and “normal” Christians, but I’m at the point where if people want to act like they do on here, I really don’t care what they think of me. I guess that makes ME that hateful Christian – and really, you can think that without knowing me, that’s fine at this point.
I certainly can appreciate your viewpoint. I am on the other side trying to figure out why these people think they have any say over what I do and how our secular laws should be modified to comply with their particular religion.
I have never had a problem with people believing whatever they believe in their religion. I really haven’t. I grew up in a town with a very diverse number of churches and synagogues. Everyone got along fine because everyone seemed to respect the others’ views. “Live and Let Live” ruled the day.
In my discussions with religious people, I see basically a couple of camps. There are those who attend church in no small part due to the social and family aspects of church plus the tradition of it. They may or may not believe in the hocus-pocus part of religion but believe the teachings bear some value. In the case of Catholics, there certainly is a dichotomy between the teachings of no contraception and the fact that 98% of the laity practice birth control. This also was confirmed by a 50-ish Catholic woman friend of mine who told me, “Oh, no one believes all the supernatural stuff and all the pronouncements against birth control. We attend because we always have and I get to visit friends and so forth.” She is what I call the “Stephen Hawking” version of religion – a social collective of people bound by tradition and social interaction, not particular focused on the supernatural. Interestingly, in her church, which is very progressive Catholic, she says the priest is fine. The Bishops are completely out-of-touch and no one pays attention to them. Her words, not mine.
On the other end of the scale, you have the literalists. These are the people who seem to take the bible literally to the exclusion of all other opinions. It is pointless to even try to discuss any issues with them. God told them something in the bible and that is good enough for them.
That said, I am dumbstruck why what I think is this small group gets so much attention today. Perhaps, they are just the noisiest.
There is a big argument that the churches in the 1960’s were instrumental in achieving civil rights for blacks. They certainly were. I agree. So, there was church involvement in changing secular laws back then. Now, of course, there is a big backlash that churches, again, want to change secular laws.
However, what seems to be missed is the difference between the efforts in the 1960’s and today. Back then, the idea was to provide equal access for all to voting, restaurants, buses, accommodations, etc. The goal was equality. Today, on the other hand, rather than be inclusive of all with regard to our secular laws, the religious crowd wants instead to exclude people from what is a civil issue. Marriage may well be a religious rite, but it certainly also is a civil right and may have nothing to do with religion as is the case for couples, straight and gay, who opt for a civil ceremony that does not involve any church whatsoever.
I keep hearing how the ultra-conservatives feel their church is being taken over by intruding secular government edicts. I just don’t see it. To the contrary, I see the churches trying to influence, negatively, the civil rights of a minority. As long as there is this confusion by some of the separation of church and state, we will continue to have this seemingly never-ending argument.
There will always be a pendulum effect I think. As far a literalists and different brands of Christians… I think people latch onto what they can understand. I think that’s true of any group. We have varying degrees of literal vs figurative in any religious group and we can’t really say one group is right and one group is wrong. We also have people who are non-religious that will take words they hear on the news, from peers, or other sources as “fact” with no research which causes problems as well. I don’t think religion belongs in government and I don’t think laws should try to enforce morality. Personally, I think abortion is wrong – but I don’t think it should be illegal – I just personally wouldn’t get one. I think we have many laws that should not be because the gov’t is protecting us from ourselves and our “human-ness”.
I have to agree with you. I tend to be pragmatic and as factual as possible. I am not sure those traits are held by others, especially by those who, as you quite correctly stated, latch onto what they can understand. It is surprising to me how many people cannot think either logically or philosophically, in original meaning of the word. Some cannot think in concepts and abstractions and instead can only think in black and white. Grasping infinity or quantum mechanics is just not going to happen. I suppose that is why so many people actually believed in the whole Rapture event from last summer. They were going to shed their clothes right where they stood an be shot into space. It is right up there with those mass suicides a few years back when the “mother ship” was behind some asteroid and they needed to transport back to the mother ship. Uh-huh. Well, more proof of Darwinism, I suppose.
Another unfortunate concept is this idea held by the religious crowd that morality is within the sole purview of the church. Far from it. I think of myself as a moral person, fair to others, and so forth. Of course, morality is subjective. I have friends from China who were raised under Mao with no religion and they are very moral. They have a hard time understanding the “hocus pocus” part of religion (as do I). But, if this is what you have been told since you were born, under threat of eternal damnation, I can see why people believe it but not Santa Claus, the toothfairy, or the Easter Bunny.
As far as laws go, times change and laws should be reviewed from time to time. What is troubling to me is the ultra-religious, ultra-conservative crowd seems to miss the Libertarian concept of “no laws unless necessary.” For a crowd that speaks of religious freedom they have an odd way of wanting to enact laws against people to suit their version of morality. The idea in the USA is that we are permitted to do as we please, except where prohibited by law. We don’t have laws to allow us to do something. We have laws to prevent us from doing things when it is deemed to be in the best interest of the public. Bending to their version of morality is not what I would call “freedom.” The same is true of same-sex marriage. All we want in the marriage law is to remove the same-gender restriction – in other words, provide more freedom, and not less. A concept that seem alien to many of the religious crowd.
The difference between the 1960 and now is this;
http://youtu.be/MgdZgBwMjIc
Their numbers are so hard to nail down because the leadership is covert and count
lots of people who do not even realize that are supporting this movement.
The notion that America and Founding Fathers were Christians so America must be
a Christian Nation with laws to enforce that is the best example of these people’s covert
influence over American Christianity.
We all have seen that revisionist PR ballyhoo, haven’t we ?
How many of the people who argue that point have no idea they are supporting this
agenda or these demon hunting people … the new age “apostles and new profits”
( dare I say these heretics, 4 real ? ) that reject the Rapture, (they aren’t going)
but are actively working to have their religion take over “the Seven Mountains”
by covert divide and conquer tactics, where if you do not understand the objectives,
so what, that just means you a tool of the movement but not a real “apostle”, yet.
Because they have to fight the Anti-Christ, eventually, naturally, theses “christians”
want to get control of ( transform) the US Military ( one of their Seven Mountains)
and use it as part of THEIR God’s Army.
So if they say they say they speak for all Christians, but normal Christians do not know them,
the fact is you “normal” Christians are letting them speak for you.
Worse, have you even been repeating their message too, unwittingly, perhaps ?
The reason 4reals says:
” After awhile, it gets old and you just stop trying. No matter what “normal” Christians say, people assume they know what/how we believe anyway. It really wears you down to the point where you read stuff like what is posted on here about Christians and just shake your head.”
… is that he just does know or understand what he should be countering,
what he should be speak out against. I feel his pain, so I educated myself.
The bottom line is that these people do not believe in regilous pluralism.
Period.
So you are with them if you understand and accept their goals , or generally,
you are against them if you do not accept them as the only Christian church
“THE Church” in these “the End Times”.
One might also be just a tool to them, but not an “apostle” too, I suppose, 4Real.
But is that your Christianity ?
Here this is them speaking for themselves ; http://www.reclaim7mountains.com/
Just think about how this nice slick presentation might appeal to many
but if you do not realize what their world view is not pluralistic how easy it would be
for you to be tempted to become an “agent” of something, that these “NEW Prophets ” *
are calling “god” .
What Jesus .., (the Last Prophet, or not ???? … That is up to you in our free Country.)
… What Jesus DID say about new prophets is;
Matt. 7 – 15 to 23.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=NIV
The two main moral issues at contest of course are abortion and homosexuality. While some people rely upon religion as a basis for opposing both, it’s not necessary. A person can look at the way the world is made and human nature and come to the entirely rational conclusion that abortion kills a prenatal human being who is no different in essence than a born human and therefore should have the same right to life. One can also conclude that homosexuality is an aberration for human beings. Religion may or may not serve as a basis for opposition, but it is a motivation, responding to a call to love one’s neighbor, which includes being a good citizen in affecting social policy.
I respectfully disagree. Both issues you cite are based upon the mores of the culture involved, probably influenced by religion, but, as you stated, not necessarily so. The mores under Mao, for example, are not religion-based, but they are the mores of that particular culture. Your view states abortion is against morality because you believe that a “prenatal human” is a viable life. That is your definition. That definition may not be shared by others. Your rational conclusion is based upon your morality, however that morality was obtained. As a contrast, if we looked at the morality of other cultures, they certainly could point to us and call our willful taking of a human life by means of capital punishment as extremely immoral (a “rational conclusion” on their part), yet often the same people who are anti-abortion also are pro-execution. The same could said about euthanasia – moral in one culture, not in another. Was the decision to allow Terri Schiavo to die a moral one or not?
(On a personal note, I am not a big fan of abortion but the religious crowd refuses to support tested and proven methods to reduce the number of abortions because they feel sex outside of marriage is immoral and a sin and solving that stops abortions. It is unrealistic and proven impractical.)
With regard to homosexuality, I am inclined to look at history and today’s science and conclude homosexuality has always been in existence and always will be in existence. As such, I do not see how a person can draw a “rational conclusion” that it is an aberration of nature. It is a part of nature. Therefore, demonizing people who are homosexual is contrary to your “good citizen” statement and certainly contrary to the “golden rule” which existed in society long before Christ ever appeared.
Your argument against homosexuality draws an incorrect conclusion that it adversely affects society, and that loving one’s neighbor is achieved by supporting social policy that excludes what is your definition of this societal aberration. Again, I respectfully disagree. I have seen no more adverse social impact with homosexuality than I have with heterosexuality. The scales are quite even, but perhaps different. Moreover, homosexuals are here and will continue to be here as long as mankind exists. How you decide to treat them is up to your definition of your morality, no matter from where that morality originates.
One can also come to the opposite conclusion on either or both of those… again whether or not they’re working within a religious framework.
Too true.Craziness sells and always has.I have a good friend who is pro life and “walks the walk”She spent her Easter at a shelter instead of at home-and she’s not a young woman.She well deserved the day of rest.On the other hand,another friend’s father is a rabid anti choicer.When I asked him about the clinic bombings,he said”You have to save the babies”
Guess which one was in the paper(not BDN)this year?
Please read what I posted to Chuck.
it fits better there,
but I wanted you to get a notice of a reply, too, because I understand and hope I addressed
your point.
Thanks.
The same could be said about the GOP Big Tent, too, and the excuses are the same.
The bottom line is that if extremists say they speak for all _____________ s and no ____________ s stand up and say no you don’t, then in fact they do speak for all.
Didn’t you just belittle people with a diffent point of view in a most non chalant way? John the Baptist and the Decipiles were extremist also, and looked what the puplic at large did to them. Interesting how history tends to repeat itself. Though I am not sure if I agree or disagree with the pictures, they are factual.
Did I just “belittle people” IYO ?
Who ?
Which people,and how ?
Quote it please, because I think not.
Prove me wrong, though, if you can, please.
If you can’t, or won’t do so, then, for sake of discussion is casting false aspirations more belittling to the caster or the castee, do you think ?
So you are offended by it being pointed out that genocide = murder? Lynchings of blacks? Murder. The Holocaust? Murder. Cambodian killing fields? Murder. But abortion is not? Get real – not for the sake of Christian teachings. Just for the sake of innocent unborns being slaughtered, mostly for the sake of convenience.
Sure Sunshine.
Especially when it was done by non students and abortion has how close to
next to nothing to do with the student’s gay pride, planned actively.
Common sense, does so matter.
But who is like more Hitler and who more like Pol Pot, exactly, in your mind, Sunshine ?
Have a great day.
“… mostly for the sake of convenience.” Sounds like judgement to me… I thought xtians were not supposed to do that?
Successful social reformers have always used horrifying images to help skeptical people see the humanity of the victim of injustice and the inhumanity of the crime. Thomas Clarkson used a diagram of the slave ship Brookes. Abolitionists in the US used images.
Lewis Hine put together a traveling display of photos of children forced to work in coal mines and textile mills. In his memiors, he said that some people were more angry at him for showing the pictures than at the industrial bosses for abusing the children. On this page, I see people more angry at CBR for showing the pictures of abortion than at the abortion for butchering the children.
If abortion is such a good idea, why do pictures of it make people so angry?
Bully for them.
These comments makes no argument about a subtantive issue. They’re ad hominems. Abortion kills a prenatal person. However wrong you think I am does not change that fact.
The trouble is, “abortion kills a prenatal person” depends on how you define “person.” The way to proceed, then, is not to reflexively define “person” so that it fits the conclusion you want, but to look at what makes a person a person.
Looking at the other end of life, being brain-dead is usually considered reason to remove life support, as there’s really no longer anyone in there. To me, it makes sense to apply the same criteria as the body is being formed. But for those wanting to ban abortions, that’s inconveniently late in a pregnancy; long after most people who want an abortion will have gotten one.
What grounds are there for the “at conception” definition? Keeping in mind that you haven’t answered my question about the “God knew me” argument, and without that answer, that argument is worthless.
SD shouldn’t have been flagged.It needs to be put back up.He/she is 100% right.
>>>>
Many people in this generation do not have the knowledge to make the right decision. Thats why we need laws.
Just this generation? And you do?
That is very funny. This generation has more access to more information then any generation that came before it. Why do you think Christianity is losing followers? The information the church wishes to hide is now easily available. Information is knowledge, what we do with that information determines whether it is wisdom or folly.
That’s why Focus On the Family is running around Uganda killing people at will.The Church only grows in areas where illiteracy and misinformation are highest.As soon as people learn the facts of civilization,religion falls by the wayside to be replaced by facts.
How about the right of the baby to live? I can not believe anyone that has seen the video’s could actually believe it is not murder. I we have become a liberal state.
commenters here dont care bruce, sorry. – they are too pumped up over gays being able to marry. its pathetic
And your life would change how if gays are allowed to marry?
You seem to be ignorant of the facts of the matter. Have you gone back and re-visited the arguements made at the time Roe v Wade was before the Supreme Court? How a fetus was scientifically defined under law? How the rights of the individual to choose a legal medical procedure trump the rhetoric of the group? Please stop insulting the intelligence of those of us who have.
You mean the lady after all those years, changed her mind? The rights of the individual? The vast majority made that choice when they got pregnant. If I recall only 1% of abortions are out of necessity (I know I will be corrected if wrong). I do not have to re-visit any arguments before the court, that does not mean they are right, that means that is the law. You use science, now there is a farce, since it is always changing. Also I do not judge them when they do, but I believe it is wrong. We still live in the U.S. do not we? I do have that right do not I? Sounds like you do not beleive people have a right to have an opposing viewpoint.
A woman changing her mind after the fact has no bearing on this arguement in my opionion. It is certainly the right of any individual who gets pregnant to abort their pregnancy rather by choice or necessity. There is no distinction under the law. Suit yourself as to rather or not you choose to give your arguement credence by putting it into perspective with the original arguements made that led to the law being set as precedent in the Supreme Court. Your broad comment regarding science is pointless in this arguement. The science that defines a fetus has not changed at all. Yes, you have every right to your opinion but you do not have the right to force it upon others. This arguement was made before the Supreme Court of the U.S. and it was settled and will never be changed. You and other opponents of the law need to move on. No one is telling you to engage in the medical procedure. Abortion is not a forced action it is an individutal choice and that it what proponents of the procedure world wide continue to argue. No, in fact I welcome opposing viewpoints as well as opposing actions.
“How about the right of the baby to live?”
So why do so many of you conservatives oppose universal health care, then ? How funny is that all the conservative political “christian” movement’s concern seems to end at the moment of the baby’s birth.
Who said that, I do not approve of forcing someone to get Obamacare. How many abortions are out of convenience.
Where did I say YOU specifically ?
But I guess you are one “so Many conservatives” whose concern for the child ends at its birth, given that relate so well to my point.
Do you support the death penalty?
Is your that point that State kills someones baby, each time it executes someone, but conservatives condone that ?
Ask the 243 families of those Rick Perry executed.Ask anyone who has had a family member murdered what they think of the gun nuts.
The big lie is that most abortions are preformed when the “baby” is a zygote hardly larger than a dime.
I oppose the “death penalty” I am also pro choice. I see ABSOLUTELY no conflict here.
Good point.Did you mean “performed?”
Freudian slip!
I understand.It happens.
Interesting analogy. Tell that to the premies who are alive and live productive lives when they could been aborted.
I struggle with it as with most people. I have a far less struggle with believing in abortion is wrong. As with abortion I am not the one that will be the judge.
As I recall the real problem with the anti abortion laws were that could not be enforced, did not stop abortions, and many of the illegal when bad, unto reckless homicide, and still people got away with it, making a mockery of the law.
It was never really about morality.
Abortion sucks.
Who does not hate needing one ?
I re-call a lot of that back in the 60’s and early 70’s with all the free love and everything. Though today with so much out there to prevent it I have a great deal of difficulty supporting it where it takes a life. Especially late-term abortions. I can not fathom even a doctor doing it, it is beyound comprehension. If 99% of abortions are done for convenience and seeing the millions that are done and multiple ones it seems some do not have a problem?
many times a baby that is aborted came here to experience the energy of the mother and knew when he came here that he would be aborted. Do you believe in a vengeful God that leaves a baby in limbo forever? If the person is meant to have a life here on Earth she will come back to another woman and be born.
Wow. Limbo? Consciousness before birth? Reincarnation? Doesn’t soundlike even Catholic faith tenets, more like something mystical.
Something *delusional*.
I do not believe in re-incarnation. I believe life at conception, or else I would not believe in the Bible (especially Psalms)
Really?
>>>>
Do you believe in partial birth abortions where the child is partially delivered and then they inject a needle (I won’t go into the gory details) Have you ever seen the video of the baby re-coiling up into its mothers womb to get away?
We have not become liberal enough.
Not only do people and should they have the right to choose , people do have and should have the right to choose to “sin” in America.
Just because some Christian’s (Adventists) think it a sin to eat pork or shellfish, should bacon, clams and lobster be banned or should you be allowed to “sin” according to some other Christians point of view because we live in a free country ?
So remember what the option to legal abortion was ?
Abortion being illegal did not ever stop it, ever.
Most likely only prostitution is older than abortion.
I am sorry you believe in “sin.”
One doesn’t have to “believe” in sin, I doubt that most do. It’s another thing for mortals to define sin. For example, The Church has not a very good job on “Original Sin”.
the bible says everyone sin have you ever been to confession and before you say it i have read the bible
You don’t ?
So are you a Christian or not ?
““I know [the students] are angry,” said Jeffrey Sneddon, a Genocide Awareness Project volunteer from Richmond. “I would be more concerned if people weren’t offended.”
Sneddon said people should be offended and outraged by the images ”
… which is why all these non-students go on campus, to offended and outrage the students.
In a high school their objectives would be a crime and the school would be locked down, like it was under attack.
I sure hope the medievalists are not advancing again. Last time this happened it put civilization back 600 years.
On that note, at least Santorum no longer has a chance in the hell he would have us fear, to get the White House.
Santorum never had a chance, it was a manufactured news story to make the Republican primary newsworthy. Personally I would have preferred Huntsman or Ron Paul, but it’s Romney’s turn, apparently.
It has been Romneys “turn” the entire race, he is the only one who has had consistent in popularity.
It’s a real shame that neither major political party can offer a real leader !!
We agree… At this point I don’t have a realistic candidate for which I can vote. Romney is John Kerry on Steroids (I voted for it before I voted against it) and Obama is in water so far over his inexperienced head we’ll all drown.
The funny thing is, on a personal level I like both these candidates far better than ANY of our recent Presidents. They both seem like sincerely nice family men, Maybe that is not what we need now. Maybe it is time for another John Kennedy, WHOM if he were running today would be considered a conservative.
Santorum’s out as of today.YIPPEE!!
Yeah, but then the GOP is going to run a Mormon bishop for POTUS.
It will be fourth election in a row that it can be said about someone near the top of their ticket that their personal religion is supposed to be an important qualification for the office.
No,Harry it’s your viewpoint that is medievalist. Can you imagine a woman choosing to snuff out a human life growing inside of her because the child may be physically or mentally handicapped, gay,wrong sex, poor. Wow what kind of medieval world do we live in?
By the way didn’t you make a living helping the physically and mentally handicapped?
Thank UM for allowing another viewpoint on campus.
“Can you imagine a woman choosing to snuff out a human life growing inside of her because the child may be physically or mentally handicapped, gay,wrong sex, poor.
Speaking for myself, only if she has to deal with current economic realities and how the Calvinists think the wealthy deserve more tax cuts, but a poor child is on his own.
How medieval is it that once born, they don’t matter, in fact, they are just a problem to those conservatives who prefer tax cuts for wealthy, to the general welfare of the Nation ?
Just so you know the statement “conservatives who prefer tax cuts for wealthy, to the general welfare of the Nation” is false.
It is like saying that liberals hate rich people and want to take all of their money and give it to lazy people. See the spin there?
Actually it would more like saying ” liberals who hate ” … there is a difference, it is matter of degree, my dear extremist.
Glad I’m not a Calvinist. Most conservative know will always be there for the people who truly need help.
The labels are all wrong. Classifying people (conservative, white, Straight, gay, black liberal) limits how and what they think…. often unfairly. Many people support and disparage me on this board as a “liberal” I am an atheist, pro choice, and not firmly capitalist. Many more people see me as a stone-age conservative for my support of the right to bear arms, my anti welfare viewpoint, and my stance against allowing undocumented aliens to remain here illegally.
I trust that most people (at least the ones who can read and write) have positions which span the labels. I am going to try to stop using them myself.
Help from other posters would be appreciated.
That was a pretty weak retort.
We should all be as smart as Kevin.
He is very observant when it comes to serial weak retorters.
I agree, allowing another viewpoint on campus was a good move. Howver, for these two groups, they should be careful for what they ask.
The difference between his point and yours is that he’s making his living without taking away people’s choice and free will; you’re advocating the exact opposite under the guise of being holier than thou.
And THAT IS very medievalist.
I didn’t quite “make a living.” I fostered children some of whom were physically and mentally challenged. I adopted six of them.
It is for this reason that I FULLY support a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy.
Exactly how many of these children have you adopted? The question is rhetorical, as I can’t verify anything behind an anonymous poster.
Thanks for “walking the walk”for those kids.VERY few people can do that,especially multiple times.
“I sure hope the medievalists are not advancing again. Last time this happened it put civilization back 600 years.”
I hope they have reached their political high water mark, and the tide changes this November.
It will if good people vote them all out.TP support is dropping fast.
Today, I am celebrating my 13th anniversary with my husband (for that is how I think of him in my heart). On our first date, he fixed a hole in my sweater. On our second date we updated the pot and pans in his kitchen and shopped for TVs. We have been through a lot in 13 years, but he is still my best friend and the only person in the world who accepts me, warts and all.
IT is because of our love for each other that I would like to be able to marry him. Civil Marriage affords us a platform to celebrate our commitment to each other as well as affords us the many protections that civil marriage brings to a partnership of two people.
I don’t want a religious ceremony. One of the first friends we made together as a couple has become a notary to marry us when the time comes. I find that to be one of the best pieces of having a wedding ceremony, so that our friends can join and be a part of the actual ceremony.
thanks for reading. My fingers are crossed for November.
Regardless of the outcome Seth you will be able to marry the man of your dreams one day. Hopefully it will happen in the next couple of years though.
Edit: Forgot to add my congrats to both of you.
http://www.mainersunited.org/
Thanks for the link and I signed the pledge. Cannot make a donation at this moment but when I get paid I should be able to make one.
Congrats and very well said!
20 years here and going strong!
Congratulations to both of you.As a heterosexual male,I’m proud and happy to work with Mainers United For Marriage.Good luck to you and we will win in November.
http://www.mainersunited.org/
How do these people have the time and energy to just hate on personal decisions that in no way affect them?
They think they are making the world a better place.
They are, for themselves, as they make a living off of it.
No–making $$$ off the backs of women!
That is why conservative R women are such a mystery.To go against your sisters and their children and hold them back is an abomination.Choice now,choice always,choice forever!
Because people like that believe that they are right and everyone else should agree with their opinion.
And that they call doing that “christian” is really offensive to many, and would be to many more if they were to stop and think about it.
“God’s will,” and they’re flat broke!!
Busybodies have existed since the beginning of time.The rest of us have to work for a living.How many single mothers and pro choicers weren’t able to get their voices heard?
Correction, BDN— the 2009 referendum was a citizens veto, and it passed.
This is the first time gay marriage supporters have brought this issue before voters via referendum.
Who gives us the right to decide what makes people happy? Is it our job to judge others? If people don’t interfere with my life why should I interfere with theirs. Who cares what people do These are working people paying taxes, If we are going to interfere lets get the people off welfare so my tax dollars don’t have to pay for that anymore.
You are 100% correct. It is absolutely none of our business to interfere in how others should live their lives.
“Is it our job to judge others? ”
I hear your point, just leave others alone.
But do you know that according JC himself, yes it is our job to judge for ourselves
when the wolves in wool suits say they doing his work.
He said you must judge them by the worldly fruit that their works bare.
I guess in this case that would be:
“The Genocide Awareness Project, an effort of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, is an outdoor display of billboards and photo murals that liken abortion to the Holocaust, lynchings of blacks in the Jim Crow era and the Cambodian killing fields.”
I read their game book from a political point of view.
Much as Gandhi said, I have no problem with Christianity, it just is that I have problems with many of the so called self-aggrandizing “christians” who would be earthly kings.
I still lack the gift of faith, but do others with it, understand and agree with Mr Gandhi and my point ?
How about interfering with the childs life to live.
there are many children who would have been better off aborted when you see the families they come from, no dad or no one who cares about them. very sad
Once the fetus becomes a child, how about their right to live?
I wonder if the pro-lifers are for gay marriage? After all, who knows a lesbian who’s had an abortion?
I know a lesbian who didn’t…
Well, so do I. I just think of pregnancies among lesbians as happening either by force (in which case, most sane people are in favor of permitting abortion anyway), or by choice. Let’s just say that consenting lesbians never have unplanned pregnancies.
Usually, these same pro-lifers also believe being gay is a choice, yeah? So let’s take that to its logical conclusion. If they want to decrease the amount of abortions, then they should promote people choosing to become gay, thus reducing unplanned pregnancies. With luck, they will be so successful that we all become gay and never have issues with abortion again.
Ahh. Cognitive dissonance. You’re a Republican too, right CV? I think I remember that from the Q1 debates. What the heck happened to our party? I’d like it back.
Also, lesbians bring children into relationships from past marriages or whatnot. But you’re right that most lesbians in committed relationships plan a pregnancy or adopt.
Your logic about pro-lifers is spot on, it’s also puzzling why they oppose contraception as that reduces the need for abortions as well.
Yes, I’m still a registered Republican, I’m reduced to voting for moderation in the primaries and then looking to independent candidates at election time, it seems.
I don’t know if the republicans are going to fracture, or jettison the religious fundamentalist wingnuts who are swinging the party so out of step with mainstream America. Interesting times…
Lesbians reject men, and their babies can’t be sold for $$ in the lucrative adoption market (Catholic Charities Maine).
Lesbians aren’t immune from being raped.
“This is how a REAL man does it” crap.
It’s a civil rights issue.
Heath & Madore are flat broke–their PAC has no $$$ to speak of.
Love it!
Flat broke? Great, couldn’t happen to a nicer duo. Did they think they were going tgo raise any money on campus?
Free news media attention–like this (It’s Pride Week @UMaine).
Heath’s Facebook page is a real hoot (5 subscribers)!
Their PAC isn’t even registered as yet.
Don’t worry about their finances.There’s plenty more bag men nationwide who will pony up for them.
For the record, I’m pro life and for gay marriage. So yeah, people like that do exist. Maybe I’m the only one?
Hopefully you aren’t the only one.
Thanks.
Note that the gay denouncers tend to ignore lesbians. Can’t find anthing to condemn them for, I guess.
“We love lesbians! We love lesbians!” – Jerry Springer crowd shout
The united States prospered under faith. As the Pope stated, the new faithless world knows not right from wrong. They will create their own dark world. Ignorance is bliss? Not in this case. Vote no in November or you will pay the consequences.
When did the US prosper under faith? As for the pope, he should worry so much about what those in his charge are covering up.
What concequences do you expect we may face if gay marriage were legal? How will it effect your life or my life? Please convince me that letting two men or women marry each other will cause me (or you) consequences.
In truth, the United States has been on a steady decline since the Christians began voting in droves. One of the unfortunate side-effect of faith is that it makes people very easy to manipulate.
The Christians have always voted in droves and they used to vote Democrat. Immediately after LBJ’s Civil Rights Act, they began voting Republican, even though it was against their own fiscal interests.
Complete lies. Under President Eisenhower, LBJ opposed every proposed Civil Rights law- from military integration to voting rights. The truth hurts, huh?
It must be terrible to go through life so scared.
How sad. I pity you,
I love the mentality that a person is incapable of being moral unless they are of faith.
Unfortunately the priests have made a dark world for the children they raped
Oh, I’m shaking from fright.
Sorry, but I absolutely know right from wrong. It is wrong to deny Maine families the protections civil marriage offers, for example.
It is very hypocritical to focus on sins you have no struggle in avoiding (homosexuality) while ignoring Jesus’ teachings about love and acceptance.
” Vote no in November or you will pay the consequences. ”
Is that a threat, Pilgrim ?
Will the Inquisition come again ?
Should it be flagged ?
The left has never been open to another viewpoint.
And the right has?
The NO COMPROMISE right , do you mean ?
>>>>
There are many Christians on the left. Thus, you’re wrong.
A whole raft of them on the way-out fringe left!
” A whole raft of them ( Christians) on the way-out fringe left!”
Your own fringe position is showing, Harry. How foolish is to call out the left wing fringe, as if the right does not have one ?
Oh.
Sorry.
I had to think about it, but now I think I understand.
Is it that you can’t see the right wing fringe, from where you are standing in it ?
:-}
Such as?
and the Right has always been open to the viewpoints of others?
Liberals are always open to another viewpoint. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t really be liberal.
Of course, the left wing is comprised of many ideologies and mindsets, not all of them liberal, and some just as dogmatic as any form of right-wing fundamentalism.
I always thought of liberalism and conservatism to be points at opposite polls on a circle. If you go too far right, or too far left, you meet as happened with Terry McViegh and Cathy Wilkerson, The Symbionese Liberation Army, and the Ku Klux Klan.
ANYONE who thinks their side is pure, hate-free, or has no blood on their hands has not read much history, OR they refuse to recognize how inflammatory rhetoric can push some unstable people to gun down abortion doctors, or Kill innocent civilians, as in the Fraunces Tavern bombing of January 24, 1975.
Yeah, where else could all the poor RINO’s no go after the extremists on right belittled them so ?
Well … we are just talking politics, right ?
You disregard the likes of Martin Luther? Martin LutherKing?
Which left? The one on your right?
“People like these [expletive] idiots give pro-life people a bad name. I apologize for their hurtful words. — Sensible pro-lifer.” What they meant to say was, “I’m prolife at church, but when I’m on campus I want to fit in so I ignore the fact that many of the people I hang out with have been personally involved with snuffing out a human life.”
What does it mean to be prolife? Does it mean that you work to eliminate the armed forces of the US, as those branches of the military are intended to kill? Does it mean that you must by definition oppose capital punishment, as that is killing as an arm of the government? I know many prolife people who support both the military AND capital punishment.
*anti-choice*
I am against war, capital punishment and abortion.
The students should be outraged and offended by the fact that abortion is legal in the USA. A society that brutally murders its helpless unborn infants is barbaric beyond imagination. Thank God at least one student was converted to the reality of abortion.
It is the kind of place that would spend twice as much on National Defense and whole rest of the world combined.
Isn’t it just ?
The foreign policy of this nation is evil, also. Bring our soldiers home, and let them patrol our own borders. Let other nations live in peace within their own territory. A defensive war is a just war, but the USA is on the offensive most of the time. It’s no wonder that many people in the rest of the world hate us.
Ah, but they apparently weren’t. Real critical thinking at work, perhaps?
She wasn’t converted.She was already anti choice with the exception.She just threw away the exception and took away the rights of her sisters.
i have the right to remain silent , and hate anybody i want.
Matthew : 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. The gate that leads to damnation is wide, the road is clear, and many choose to travel it. But how narrow is the tate that leades to LIFE, how rough the road, and how few there are who find it!
Quoting the Bible is fine if you understand that the laws in this secular country are not based on it.
From the Book of Luke, Chapter 4 ANH: “Don’t try to frighten us with your sorcerer’s ways Lord Vader. Your sad devotion to that ancient religion hasn’t helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find the Rebel’s hidden base”
See, I can quote fiction too.
What a thought provoking day at UMO – I stood on the front steps of the library today watching the emotions unfold on the mall in front of me. I looked up at the United States flag I was standing under and thought about what a special country we live in. There before me were a variety of opinions and attitudes; everyone was/is sure their position is the right one. Then I realized the most wonderful opinion of all is the one that allows this level of diversity to co-exist. My wish for all of us is that this freedom lasts forever.
UMO doesn’t exist.
That’s funny…the Christians didn’t seem to have a problem with genocide during the holocaust. The Catholic church was one of the biggest Nazi sympathizers during the early days.
Outright leftist lie. Pope Pius XII, who was pope during WW2, was Papal Nuncio to Germany for 12 years before he became pope. While in Germany, he gave 43 public speeches, and he denounced the Nazis in 41 of them. The Nazis were anti-God and murdered many Catholics, including priests and nuns. They murdered over 6 million Catholics in Poland alone.
Hitler was a Catholic.
Hitler stopped practicing the sacraments of the Catholic Church after childhood. After publishing Mein Kampf he promoted a “version” of Christianity that purged the Christian religion of its Jewish roots and replaced them with Nazi philosophy. Depending on the source he either held negative views of Christianity or was a committed believer.
So, was he ever excommunicated?
Not that I am aware of. Your point?
Kind of a powerful point. Excommunication is the highest censure the Catholic Church can impose. Many women have been excommunicated right up to the 1970’s for being pregnant before marriage, yet Hitler wasn’t…
The Holy See pursued a policy of aiding as many people, Jews and Christians alike, as they could as secretively as they could. The decision was made to minimize public opposition that would have had no benefit except to cause the fascist leaders to retaliate even more harshly.
It’s easy now to look back and fault them for not being outspoken, but the reality was their words in opposition would have had very real negative consequences. The Church does not have an army and does not wage war. Mussolini could have overtaken the Vatican, imprisoned all the priests, bishops, cardinals and the Pope and continued on his way persecuting Jews and others with no organized resistance from Catholics. The Pope’s public reticence ensured that Catholics throughout Europe could organize to assist persecuted peoples.
This seems to be Rachel’s response on how much she hates the Catholic Church.
you seem a tad upset.
it would be nice if a Pope would denounce the practice of raping children in the USA by priests. Oops, that would cost too much money in law suits. Some of these popes will burn in Hell for their actions.
The Pope has already denounced the abuse perpetrated by clergy on innocent children. Repeatedly.
Words are cheap. The official policy remains that the Catholic Church hierarchy will settle any civil claim RATHER than permit any priest to give testimony under oath.
Yes he did, but he did not excommunicate them, he gave them better jobs in the Holy See. Talk is one thing, actions are another.
Exhibit #1-Bernard Law.
Do you have proof of that? I seem to remember priests being de-frocked and/or removed from any ministry involving children.
You don’t get excommunicated for committing a sin unless you do not repent of the sin and you continue in it publicly–and even then, excommunication is very rare.
Cardinal Law, the letter marked “Strictly Confidential” to the bishops of Ireland from the Apostolic Nuncio Luciano Storero telling the bishops that mandatory reporting of offending priests to local law enforcement is against church doctrine… Face it, both Benedict and John dropped the ball on this one.
Maybe so, but he retreated significanlty once he was Pope. Then again, he was surrounded by Musselini’s (sp?) gang.
Mussolini.Great points about Pius.
Pius only denounced Hitler after the invasion of Poland.
And not every Christian is Catholic…
I actually agree with this statement. Very well put.
I’m all for gay rights as long as it’s not shoved down my throat like it was in Provincetown, MA. On abortion, I will listen to what the doctors have to say, but not the clergy.
Yes, make sure you follow the money, and not your Redeemer who endured a horrible death to try to save you from going to hell for eternity.
I am responsible for my own “sins” (oops, I don’t believe in sin) and I don’t believe mine are wiped away. sorry
Know what I did on Easter? I played Xbox and killed zombies. It seemed appropriate.
Just out of curiosity, what happened in Provincetown, MA?
You mean you’re offended that gay men and women have the AUDACITY in Provincetown to walk arm in arm? God forbid!!
Yeah, like wearing wedding rings and such? Enough with “shoved down my throat” garbage. Don’t like it? Look away. I generally turn the other cheek when I see bigots coming my way.
why on earth would you go to P-town if you feel that way?
http://www.mainersunited.org/
PIZZA’S NOT FOR BREAKFAST!
Can’t handle the truth, or the fact that one day you will appear before God and be judged accordingly. It doesn’t matter whether you believe or not, but it is a fact that the judgement event will take place. Hats off to the demonstrators for doing what’s right and sharing the truth at the same time.
Which so called god will I be judged by? There are over 8000 of them so you do have a lot to choose from.
Or are you simply in the camp that loves this saying: God said it. I believe it. That settles it.
Think about this quote from Mark Twain for a moment: “I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.”
If amconservative is talking of the christian god….he/she also believes that a man should kill his wife if it’s discovered that she’s not a virgin; and slave ownership is okie-dokie. Hey, it’s in the bible…..must be ok.
But they will claim that is in the Old Testament and doesn’t apply anymore.
They do it all the time but they also love to quote Deuteronomy when it is convenient for them.
Believe what you will but I don’t take the Bible literally. Many years ago scribes copied the Bible. If they left a dot off the top of a letter, the entire meaning was changed. then people came along who translated the Bible. Many things were changed in the translation. The Bible consists of many books written by various people. there are many contradictions in the Bible.
I’m well aware of that fact.
In addition, many writings about the Hebrew and Christian faiths never made it into the Bible. Didn’t pass muster from the Church heirarcy, possibly too threatening.
Look up “original order bible”. Also History Channel did a series some years ago called “The lost books of the bible”
And we all know that the History Channel is the guideline for everything.
I didn’t say that it was.You can watch it and agree or not.But the fact that it’s out there is worth noting.
And many agree with each other.
The most famous of these “errors” being; “Spare the rod and spoil the child.”
The authors were speaking of shepherds and their sheep and the similarity to parents and their children. The word “rod” being very similar, in Hebrew to the word “crook” A shepherd’s crook is used to lead, not to punish. A shepherd does not normally carry a “rod”.
Very good Harry ,your definition of rod is the same as what I was taught. See there’s no need for you to be an atheist. God loves us and only wants the best for us.
Ben Franklin (one of my heroes) said: ” Ale is proof that there is a God, and he wants us to be happy.”
The amount of drinking that went on the Colonies was,pardon the pun,staggering-even at breakfast!
Thank God for Ben’s father, Ben was his father’s 15th child. I’m glad that your hero was allowed to be born.
Yeah, but for every “Ben Franklin” there are hundreds of Charles Manson’s. His mother did not want him from the moment she became pregnant. When He was five-years-old, his mother used Indiana’s “suborn child law” to have him committed to that States reform school system where he was physically abused and raped repeatedly by inmates and guards alike.
Ben was wanted… That makes me happy.
Wouldn’t society, and charlie have been better off if his mother was offered an option?
His mother did have an option, if she didn’t want a child she should have not have had sex. We are not animals, unless she was raped, she did not have to have sex. She was 16 when she had Charles, she too mostly likely had been abused. They weren’t the only ones to have had crappy lives. They had options, but they chose the dark side of life.
Thank you for telling me what I believe. Where would I be without you guys.
Thank you for telling us all where we are going… where would we be without you?
Show me where I said where you were going? Show me where I took it upon myself to judge someone? The only one who just passed judgement here was you – and the 2 people who agreed with you.
Don’t worry they like to put words in peoples mouths.l
You should read Acts then.
The old Testament is prior to Jesus birth. When Jesus died to pay for our sins…yes, yours Kevin of Bangor, and MINE. In order to believe you need to have faith, faith is believing without seeing.
The conservatives are selective on what verses in the Bible they observe. The pronouncements on homosexuality are in the OT.
Read Acts also.
Could you quote chapter and verse please .
Deut. 22:13-21 – which basically says that if a man claims his wife was not a virgin when they wed, and this is found out to be not true he is chastised and fined, and may never divorce her. BUT, if it is found to be true, then she will be publicly stoned to death.
Slavery:
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
There are many more verses in the bible on wives, and slavery. These are just two.
Here is the hatred of God which characterizes the homosexual rights movement.
Here is hatred of God and the fear of eternity.
Neither of which is the case. I think most of us were doing just fine until the people who portend to speak for God and/or Christ felt is was their right to interfere in the lives of others. You know, sort of like one of those Islamic Imams who are trying to get Sharia law added to our secular laws.
We do not hate God or Christ. However, many of his followers have been dropped from our Christmas card lists.
Bumper sticker”Dear God-Save me from your followers”
I am not at all afraid of eternity.I’ll either be worm food or in a piece of pottery.Suits me fine either way.
So many likes from the homosexual rights movement?
Do that many people hate God?
Given that you do believe you will be judged, but you still are posting in support of people whose ” outdoor display of billboards and photo murals that liken abortion to the Holocaust, lynchings of blacks in the Jim Crow era and the Cambodian killing fields.”
I seriously suggest you review Matt 7, vs 21-23 ,
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=NIV
who is to say what is truth and what is right? I take it you have all the answers.
Just pray away the gay.That should work.
It certainly might help.
Read the RS article about school suicides in Bachmann’s district.The school did NOTHING to help.I feel sorry for her constituents for having such a poor representative in Congress.
Who let you out of the daily letters page? :)
Let’s leave your idea of judgement to your god, and leave the legal benefits of civil marriage to our government…?
Did it ever occur to you that you will appear before God and you will be judged on how you have treated your fellow man? I am not religious but I did recently discover the acronym, WWJD. And, from what little I know about religion [although atheists, myself included, scored far higher on religious tests than did the devout], the backlash and vitriol shown by the people who claim they know Jesus does not seem to be inline with what I have read of that Jesus would do. That is just an observation on my part.
Your mythology is far from “truth”…
Truth needn’t be wanted, but one must “want” to believe in your myths because there is no evidence, fact, or truth behind any of it.
“… it is a fact…” Good grief! What evidence do you have that supports this “fact”??!!
I do believe that you have every right to say that you are an atheist and do not believe in God. However, I do take offense to how you refer to Christianity. Have you read the Bible cover to cover? If so, congrats. If not, please do not criticize until you know what you are talking about.
A lot of atheist became atheist after they did read the bible cover to cover but I have to ask what version of the bible are you referring to?
I tried to read the Bible but the parts about incest were disgusting and I had to stop.
have read the bible cover to cover. i found it very interesting but not for me. i am not my husbands property. also in the bible it says that if a women dresses as a man it is an abomination (unforgivable sin) so if you live by the bible any women who wears pants is going to hell, or is it dresses because in biblical times men wore dresses. if you read hate into the bible it is you view . i take from it to be kind not to judge others and to show respect to other.no matter how you feel those pictures show no respect to anyone including to protesters. if the are so worried they should be out there making adoption easier. or adopt a few children .or even better work on making birth control more accessable that would really cut down on abortion. as for the gay thing i was raised to believe that you judge people by thier actions, that i am no better than anyone else, and to never judge unless you have been there. as for marriage opponants say gays marring would erode the basis of marriage. to me people who get marred 3 or 4 times are eroding the basis of marriage.have been married for 23 years the only people who have power in my life is me and him. i really want to know how someones life is so effected by people they dont know.
“adopt a few children.” does two count as a few, because then… check.
“make birth control accessible” wait, wait… do you want me involved in your procreation choices or don’t you?
“make adoption easier” i’m totally game! suggestions on how to do this by any chance?
Christians have basically cut off any leg they had to stand on when it comes to gay marriage. divorce and infidelity are as rampant in the Church as out of it (divorce possibly more so). one could argue, though, that cause of most divorce/bad marriages are things the Bible has explicitly named sin (adultery, abuse, abandonment) and Christians are not strangers to sin.
but true Christians are marked by forgiveness. God has shown me mercy and so i want to show mercy to others. love the person, hate the sin. show mercy. love one another.
After gay marriage is passed, I’m all in favor of a divorce tax, too.
After all the trouble over what marriage really means and how sacred it SHOULD BE, the State deserves about sometime in the low 5 figures in tax for all trouble caused by people who do not keep their words.
I have always found it fascinating how closely politics and religion resemble one another.
Secular fanaticism caused hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th Century and is equally as dangerous. Putting one’s faith in the Inquisition, a fanatical Mullah, or a tyrannical President spells doom for many.
Doing fine until you hit the last clause. Which President are you referring to?
Abe Lincoln would be my guess.
Yes, possibly. The recent recount of the number dead from our Civil War (remaining the largest body count of any of our wars), is up to 750,000 dead. In WWII, it was “only” 416,000, or 418,000 if you include civilians.
Lincoln must be the tyrannical President to which ChumbyP refers.
I am sure we could run the numbers, but I would guess far more have been killed as a result of religious justification/involvement than would be the Pol Pots of the day.
God has over 2.3 million deaths on his hands in the Bible alone. I guess it depends on your point of view as to whether or not they get counted in the Christian death count.
Abortion = 40 million dead Americans.
No wonder crime has been dropping over the past few decades.
The world is overpopulated. The
Genocide Awareness Project should being fostering a more positive attitude on the topic.
I tried telling Mr. Hardwick that. He seems to want to continue these ridiculous billboard scare tactics.
And yet the 19 children Duggar fundamentalists say it isn’t.Mother Nature will take care of things.
Nice to see BDN used the message I wrote on the Free Speech board.
People can be so ignorant – if you are against abortion, go adopt.
Yawn. The ironically-intolerant Elmer Gantrys of the Modern Church of Diversity Worship show their true stripes again.
(How many “well-educated” college students today would even get the Elmer Gantry reference?? LOL)
Come on, young people. Show that you aren’t sheep. You’re being USED by old hippies.
Hey now, just because Elmer Gantry was out while you were in college doesn’t mean kids don’t read it.
Sorry, bub. Came out waaaay before my time. (The old hippies had already taken over the colleges by the time I hit campus, however).
I’ll agree with the 1st two paragraphs but the last lumps all Christians together, conservatives and the more liberal. That’s not so.
You have to admit, Heath and Madore have guts daring to set foot on the UMaine campus.
No, they just have a strong desire to get free media attention.
and $$$ (didn’t happen)!
And the education they got today was free of charge.
if these people were in the sixties they would be screaming to keep segragation.
but they weren’t armed w/ weapons and technology. they were armed w/ free speech. the whole “live and let live” goes both ways, you know?
I am so sick of people trying to legislate morality (or their version of it.) Let’s worry about the ECONOMY or there won’t be anything to govern.
The men distributed pledges to passers-by that ask potential voters to oppose “sodomy-based marriage” in November and contribute to the political action committee.
I am curious how Mr. Heath is so familiar with what type of marriage a gay couple has if he is so against it. We all know what sodomy is. It can be done by a gay or heterosexual couple. Interesting that he continues to say that the committee for EQUAL rights is trying to FORCE people to change their minds, when in all honesty that is exactly what his group is trying to accomplish, force his bigotted views and hate based bias down everyone’s throats. Why is it that the religious community feels it necessary when they dont agree with something different from their way of life they need to organize and protest against it. Nobody is asking them change their minds. I never see people protesting against organized religion though even though we have had so many child molestation cases involving priests, ministers and church leaders. The whole animosity makes me wonder…How does god look down on these people and view their hatred? Because my god is just, forgiving, and loving, i dont think he would be very pleased at all.
Heath’s homophoboic “PAC” isn’t even registered–he’s hard up for $$$.
Look up FFRF.org.Freedom From Religion Foundation.Great people doing great work.
http://www.mainersunited.org/
very well put forth……it’s not semantics…it’s humanity.
A very-well-coordinated response to this hateful invasion is being organized by students at USM. If you want to help at the campus, just follow this link. The students are working nearly round the clock, in spite of full class and work loads to counter hate with loving action. Help if you can. Thanks.
The link did not seem to post. Try this instead: Want to help us out? We need people to direct students away from the GAP display. Sign up here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ar_Y5m2_4eO1dGY3VnI4YjVfQnBLVkhBWkM5X3kzSWc
There is only one true God, and the fact that “He said it” actually settles it, whether one believes or not.
No, it’s trumped on this plane by civil law.
plane or planet?
Plane, as in “plane of existence”.
OK thanks.
So, this one true god–is it the muslim god, the jewish god, the christian god?
What he said:
Love one another.
Also what he said:
Don’t judge each other.
Actually it’s “Don’t judge each other, or else”…
What surprises me the most is the same claptrap I hear today from this crowd could have come from any period in history! They never change. Take any issue: Women’s Right to Vote, Inter-racial Marriage, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – those or any others. You could find the bible-thumpers quoting the bible how it was “unnatural” for women to vote, for black (an inferior race) to vote, or (gasp!) the idea that blacks and whites would marry!
(Someone pass me my inhaler! I have a case of the vapors!)
“Think of the children!” was the battle cry against inter-racial marriage and women getting the right to vote.
This crowd has blinders pop-riveted to their skulls from birth. They have no sense of history, no sense of the concept of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” While they claim to live in this blissful world of milk & honey, I rarely have seen a crowd so wound around the axle about other people’s business. They really need to chill out.
EXCELLENT post!
Chuck, I remember those days, and how the victory in Maine was won when the grandkids told their Meme’ sure we know you are afraid of black people, we understand that, but how many do you really know ? …. and they are always nice to me, aren’t they to you, too, Gram ?
Sure, you have been told that they all alike and no good, but not so long ago didn’t … and don’t some of the same sort of people, STILL, say that about us, too ? Besides, Grammy, if they are not treated equally, if they don’t get the advantages you worked so hard for us to have, how can anything change for the better ? I keep trying to make the point, if you ask them what they want, ALL the Christians say they want people to respect their faith and let them practice it. I have asked them point blank, both in TRW and on the internet. That is what all good , normal Christian ever say. They have nothing to hide. Almost all of your good Christian neighbors, mean just that.Which is fair enough as it exactly what gay couple want, too. But the ones that don’t, won’t, answer that question , and can ever compromise on any point, political or religious, must want something different. It just logical. Whatelse are we to think when “do onto others” is not good enough for some ” christians” ? So I did my homework on what it is they really are preaching. Those others, the NAR appostle and new prophets of post denominational “christianity”, to whom what do want” means that you ALL must be subjected to my world vision, are not good neighborsto even our good born again Christian, neighbors. Them dang … Catholics, Adventists, Unitarians, whatever YOU are… might just be next up on the professional political ‘christian”, the Prayer Warrior’s, list of demons to be cast out, mightn’t you be? What needs doing, and is, in fact, REALLY defending Christianity, is to find how to say to our good and faithful neighbors that those others … those who would offend and provoke others in name of Christ AND WHO CLAIM THEY NOT ONLY SPEAK FOR ALL CHRISTIAN BUT ARE THE ONLY REAL ONES, are not on our good, normal Christians side, as they defend their political agenda of first National then world political domination, as if it were defending YOUR faith. They provoke attacks, like this article documents, then claim the heathen secular liberals, in our secular liberal Nation, are attacking all Christians, not just the political “christian”, no compromise, would be kings and religious political demoguges. Non-violent non cooperation political theory suggest that step one is to NOT be co-opted into the provocateurs covert POLITICAL mythologies. Now, sure I being political, too, and admit that before November it is politically important to learn how to speak to with our good neighbors, and deal with their unfounded fears, just like with
Grannies in the Civil Rights days. But that is just real respect, too, isn’t it, anyway ?
We need to get the ear of all our good Christian neighbors… be their good neighbors, respect them, as we point out we know they are different. But they they must speak out and say so, too, because otherwise, those who claim to speak for all Christian, actually do speak for all of you UNLESS you good normal Christians, our good neighbors, say clearly that their hateful ways are not representative of your faith. In the long run long voting as an American, according to what the Constitution intended, and against these POLITICAL (????) “christian” ( just think about that !!! ) , POST DENOMINATIONAL * agenda, might be how best to protect your right to practice your own Christian denomination’s faith. See: * “[This is the third in a series on Dominionism by Don Swift.]The most vigorous branch of Dominionism is the New Apostolic Reformation. Rev. Dr. C. Peter Wagner of Global Harvest Ministries in Colorado Springs, is the “convening Apostle” or leading light in New Apostolic Reformation, and he says the reformation or New Apostolic Age began in 2001.A former professor at Fuller Theological Seminary, Wagner is famous for helping develop the “growth model” that was to produce the huge megachurches that now dot the land. He and his followers aim for a post-denominational Christianity shaped by them. Their LEADERS ARE God’s new apostles and prophets ( ???? ) who have greater power than the original apostles and prophets. (?????) Spiritual warriors must convert adherents of other churches and seek political power. (WWJS ) They think the end times will see the perfection of Christianity and they will have a perfected religion to turn over to Christ, when he returns. They will be given great power and crush evil with a “rod of iron.”These NAR Dominionists look to the day when they and, above all, their clergy take over society”
http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/don-swift-rick-perry-and-new-apostolic.html
Don’t good neighbors, like me, warn you if might be being used badly and against your own best interests , even when, especially when, respectly, by Jesus, it is real hard to do so ?
If that “new age apostles and prophets who have greater power than the original apostles and prophets. ” not your Christianity, you’d best say so, ASAP.
They are “non denomination” … ie. no name, genetic, … by choice.
It is all the better if you want to claim you are only Christians, to remain nameless.
Politically their underhanded game is to keep your good neighbors from being able to say;
Oh , no not you, we know you are sincere.
We know you are okay, and even like you
… love you, like Christ said to, but we meant those political (????) Post Denominational “christians” , who think they should rule the world, like some ‘christian” Taliban might.
Do most good normal Christians know enough about them, yet ?
These anti-choice extremists are just that, EXTREMIST RADICALS, who just make themselves look like the liars and whackos that they are. How much time to they spend touting education and contraception programs to prevent unwanted pregnanacies? How much time do they spend lobbying state and federal lawmakers to invest in programs which help these kids once they are born? No. These fanatics stand there and screech about how much they love fetuses, then after the kids are born they write them off as “welfare riffraff” and their parents as “lazy useless welfare queens that should be left to starve and their spawn along with them.” That is the right wing for you. Hypocritical nutjobs.
Taking conservative messages to UMO is prob going to be as successful as selling hybrids at a NASCAR track. It doesn’t help that the messages they’re bringing are backwards and ridiculous to begin with.
SpruceDweller said it very well.
You could sell a million hybrids at a NASCAR track… as long as they will do 200 mph.
This is regurgitated clap-trap!
The claim that wars are primarily caused by religion is sheer nonsense.
Here is the body count from atheistic governments 1) 2 million killed in Cambodia 2) 30 million killed under Stalin 3) 100 million killed under Mao. Clearly, the worst genocides in history have been carried out by Marxists (the inventors of abortion and homosexual rights, by the way) and not by religion.
lol…
“the worst genocides in history have been carried out by Marxists (the inventors of abortion and homosexual rights, by the way)” Obviously, you wouldn’t know your butt from a hole in the ground, when it comes to abortion and gay rights. Stick to the crazy. You don’t have to make that up.
You are downplaying Stalin, even with the Crusades I still think this body count may be higher.
Crawl back into your hole.
And Steven Lake, who murdered his beautiful wife and his own two children, he’s the poster child for heterosexual marriage then, right??
Wrong.
Steven Lake did not publicly advocate for or against homosexual marriage.Bruce LaVallee Davidson did. When he said that he and his partner Buck “were married in the eyes of God,” he was lying.
By your logic, we should not give anyone any rights at all because criminals exist.
What these people did in no way changes the legitimate need for same sex civil marriage rights in Maine, and you know it.
Steven Lake did not publicly advocate for or against homosexual “marriage.”
Bruce LaVallee Davidson did.
When LaVallee Davidson said that he and his partner were “married in the eyes of God,” he was lying.
This is the type of madness behind the same sex marriage movement.
One man, and it stands for the whole movement?
LOL!!! You are one desperate and fearful little fundy. It’s fun watching you lose at the federal level so often.
DADT was first… DOMA is next. Wish I could see your face dearie.
The ONLY reason Steven Lake did not “publicly advocate” for hetero marriage is because he didn’t HAVE to. What he does stand for is the belief, still present in much of the world today, that a husband has the right, as long as he has the ability, to force his wife to submit to his actions, no matter how immoral, illegal, or “unchristian.” And if his wife doesn’t submit, well, then the ultimate sanction is an option. What an unbelievable view of hetero marriage…
The claim that wars are primarily caused by religion is sheer nonsense, regurgitated Marxist clap-trap!
Here is the body count: 1) 2 million killed in Cambodia 2) 30 million killed under Stalin 3) 100 million killed under Mao.
Clearly, the worst genocides in history have been carried out by those who banned religion.
Marxists also promoted, and continue to promote abortion and “homosexual rights.”
1. Magnus Hirschfeld: first legislative advocate of “gay marriage” and first doctor to perform a sex change operation, member of the German Communist Party.
2. Wilhelm Reich: inventor of the term “Sexual Revolution,” member of the Austrian Communist Party.
3. Harry Hay, “Father of the Gay Rights Movement,” card-carrying member of the CPUSA, the Communist Party of the United States.
” Marxists also promoted, and continue to promote abortion and “homosexual rights.””
History fail. You obviously have no idea what a “marxist” is or how they’ve treated homosexuals and women historically.
Methinks there’s a reason for your irrational fear: same reason Heath has which I posted above.
It depends on your point of view. If you count the Bible as accurate, you have to include Sodom and Gammorah, all the people killed in the flood, etc. God’s death toll in the Bible alone is over 2 million, then you add on top of that the Crusades, Inquisition, Dark Ages, bombing of abortion clinics, etc. Then if you expand that statement to religion rather than Christianity, then you add all the deaths committed by all the other religions in the wold. So in general, religion is a very dangerous thing.
Judging by the turn out few are buying the unpalatable gruel of the hucksters of hate.
I am liar says the girl below!
At least one student was moved by the display and changed her viewpoint as a result. Amanda Rivers, 19, a UMaine student from Stratton who is studying social work, said she always had been against abortion except in instances of rape or incest.
When she saw the images, “I instantly started crying,” she said.
After speaking with several volunteers for the Genocide Awareness Project, she said her mindset changed.
“It’s never right to kill a baby, under any circumstance,” Rivers said.
Amanda Rivers will never be licensed to practice (LSW, BSW, LCPC, LMSW, or an LCSW) with a homophobic attitude like that!
What about Allah, Buddah, and the other gods that have caused bloodshed? Your bias towards christains is sad.
All the more reason to ignore all of them.
Your rant sounds almost as bad as the fanatic christian right your bashing!
I agree so take down the rainbow flag and remove the symbol of radicalism.
Not surprising you’d be so intolerant.Note in the article how few supportive comments the anti choicers got.Your gang is shrinking and doomed.
Those that are judging others behaviors are hypocrites . It is Not up to us to decide how people should live. Right here in the Bible. James 4:11-12 ESV / 517 helpful votes Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?
Okay, so I’m going to go out on a limb here (and probably live to regret it) after reading most of the comments on this page. I consider myself Christian. I am a registered Republican, I believe it is none of my business what religion or belief system you have for yourself, I don’t care who you love or who you marry, I don’t think it is my responsibility to judge your situation or make your decision when it comes to abortion (although it’s not for me). I am a fiscal conservative, I am a veteran of the first Iraq war. While I’m offended that people will automatically judge me for my statements, I realize that some cannot help but live in judgement of others. I try very hard to be a good person, helping my fellow man, giving back to my community and being a good neighbor…all I’ve ever asked of any one is the same respect back. I don’t understand racial issues as the color of one’s skin is only on the surface…we all bleed the same. I don’t understand religious intolerance as I can think of so many issues that are so much more important. If we could all take the chip off our shoulders and have a civil discourse maybe we would come to at least understand (not necessarily agree) the opposing point of view…and if we could do it without name calling and finger pointing. I think this is what is wrong in this country right now…too much name calling and finger pointing and too little civil discourse. Just my 2 cents…for what it’s worth.
I am a liberal, progressive, Democrat and agree with you 100%! Thank you
Very well stated, thank-you for your comments……
Outstanding comments. Thanks!
Those whose interest is to cause division within society tend to eschew traditional fiscal definitions of liberal/conservative. Fiscal matters can be evaluated and argued about in terms of facts and figures. Arguments arising from personal beliefs, particularly faith-based ones are much more useful in creating a fiercely divided society. I don’t think we will see any kind of constructive discussion of fiscal matters as long as social matters remain such a dominating force in our political discourse.
And there in lies the shame of what our society has become (in my humble opinion).
Well said.
The homosexual children are caught in the middle of the arguments and their high rate of suicide should be of concern to us all if we want to protect children.
The documentary “Bully” is a graphic display of the life of a gay child, they feel crusified. People are born homosexual and are not given a choice, they are made that way. DNA.
The Church needs to realize how their behaviour affects these children, and take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. I would like them to protect these children not contrubute to their hell on earth.
Hey Heath… they’re on to you!!!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120406234458.htm
You can stop now. The truth is out.
Why do you hate God?
Where are the pictures of those killed and injured in clinic bombings?The buildings destroyed and families harassed including following children to their schools?The pro life media(which is almost all papers and outlets) NEVER covers these. Did you hear about clinic fires and bombings in 2012?Didn’t think so.Women who get abortions and their providers are heroes/heroines.
Call these homophobes and misogynists *anti-choice*, please?
They hate women & GLBTQ folks.
It’s Gay Pride Week at UMaine.
I do call them that in my other posts.You are 100% correct.Thanks for fighting for those who need help.
I’m a feminist–we “get” oppression and civil rights!
Been at it for centuries….
As a heterosexual male and a proud member of EMILY’s List,NARAL and the Center For Reproductive Rights,I salute and support you and your sisters and brothers!
I’m glad you have faith.
However, it is NOT US civil law, nor Maine civil law. If you try to use that in a court of law to defend your views, it will be summarily tossed out.
Try sticking to law, and stop forcing mythology on people.
I’m curious if the University has a list of flags that can not be displayed. Could the Young Communist club (if there was one) fly a flag that looked much like Russia’s or China’s?
Call and ask.
Anyone with half a brain probably wouldn’t touch that one! Who would you start with?
Then don’t throw the question in the air if you’re going to be lazy about it. If you actually want to know, then find out the answer yourself — you’re fully capable.
I’ll leave work and drive up there right now. I’ll call you a soon as I find out.
And these are the spokes persons for your kaiju-monster-god…
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/fundamentalist-christians-spanked-daughter-to-death-in-the-name-of-god/
They say I have a phobia because I won’t support homosexuals, that would imply a fear, sorry no fear here! just a very strong dislike. If I was afraid of them that would mean I have to A) Kill them like a snake or B) run from them, and as I do neither I’m sorry no phobia here.
So, it’s not fear, just uneducated closed-mindedness.
Gotcha.
Problem solved. You’re not homophobic, just a bigot.
Congratulations.
(Palm-clap)
Sounds like you could have a “complex phobia” rather than just a “simple phobia” .
This seems like a responsive gathering…
Those of you against gay marriage… can you detail for us your rational legal argument to defend your view?
So far, you’ve succeeded in putting forth none. We’re very curious what you think is a rational defense for your view and whether or not it’ll even stand in court.
I have a very good friend who escaped the Khmer Rouge. He would not appreciate the comparison.
Curious that anti-abortion folks align themselves with anti-gay folks.
I’m pretty sure that gay couples are unlikely to have abortions.
tilted my head a little at the headline, wondering why the gay agenda was against abortion.. then realized it was a combo and it was anti gay-anti abortion. Turn the page people nothing to see here! lol
It’s worth mentioning how well funded and secretive the “anti” groups are.I know you are well aware of this.NOM is primarily funded by less than a dozen people who will stop at nothing.
And let us not forget that NOM doesn’t care in the least about Maine campaign laws… they violate them every chance they get, even though SCOTUS has told them that their donors are not due privacy, but must be disclosed.
Sadly,true.They have plenty of help as well evading the laws.Keep up the good fight,my brother!
Just look at the flyer the “No Special Rights PAC” was handing out at UMaine. —
“10. Oppose the hellish doctrine that parents of the same sex make better parents than parents of the opposite sex, an evil doctrine which is now being advanced by the homosexual rights movement.
11. Pray that God will deliver our State and Country from this attack by demonic force, and that marriage between man and woman will be restored to its rightful place of honor, to the glory of Almighty God.”
Heath and his kind fall back on mythology because there is no rational basis for their views.
I find this very positive, as none of their views on mythology will help them in a battle of civil law.
The “No Special Rights PAC” does not *exist* as yet!
Hasn’t been registered with the Maine Ethics Commission at all.
Please correct the error, _BDN_?
Thanks.
http://www.mainersunited.org/
On a positive note, nobody really takes Heath seriously anymore, except his buddies in Africa.
What makes you think Heath will obey the law this time?
There are “stiff” (can’t resist the pun) penalties if he doesn’t (and he has NOT registered as yet).
There’s not much between the ears with either Madore or Heath.
Our desire to protect the lives we build together in love and support are very, very unlike the forcible rapes described in Jude.
Very hypocritical to stand so steadfastly against sins you have no problem avoiding, while ignoring the real messages of the bible of love, understanding and acceptance.
You prattle this offensive nonsense over and over, but it’s just not true.
Two people living their lives in support and love = marriage.
Says Steven Colbert: “Hear that the gays? It’s up to you to keep us from discriminating. Because once we know you’re gay, I have a natural desire to fire you. And, unlike gay, discriminating is not a choice.”
Gay marriage…will this debate ever end? Deny the rights like we previously did and move on!
I will continue to fight for my equal treatment under the law until I achieve it.
And I and many others will happily join you!
Aye!
Yep.
http://www.mainersunited.org/
There was nothing wrong with anything that Spruce said.
Seems members of the fringe right teamed up…
They’re not fond of facts.
What do you call a political PAC with no money and less power to achieve change?
A “Gospel Campaign”…
http://www.mikeheath.net/blog/no-special-rights-pac-is-a-gospel-campaign-not-a-political-campaign
Good grief… Heath is one obsessed and insane little man.
Heath is NOT a political PAC of any sort.
He’s yet to register with the Maine Ethics Commission **at all*, and I’m shocked that nobody’s reporting Heath and Madore as yet.
http://www.maine.gov/ethics/bqcs/forms.htm
Pope Benedict was in Cuba recently and gave a sermon, these were some of his words as he warned against those who “close themselves up in their own truth and try to impose it on others”. He went on to say: “such sinners are driven by irrationality and fanaticism.” and they are “like the blind scribes who, upon seeing Jesus beaten and bloody, cry out furiously, ‘Crusify him’ “.
He did not direct his words or mention anything specific in this sermon and left the interpretation of the message to the listener. I think he was talking about the Church and it’s leadership; it was a parable about homosexual people.
He also used the words: “irrelevant for today’s reality”, which describes the present position of the Church.
Jesus would be outraged at the bigotry and maybe he finally realizes this truth.
Heath & Madore are in violation of many things–primarily, they’ve yet to bother to *register* at all as a PAC (let alone, as “No Special Rights”).
Ooopsie!
http://www.maine.gov/ethics/bqcs/forms.htm
“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.” Albert Einstein
Heath & Madore “announced” their so-called “No Special Rights” PAC on March 20th (it still hasn’t been registered with the Maine Ethics Commission).
http://bit.ly/IeFGk4
Regarding the comment of student Kalie Hess in the above article – “it’s just women making decisions for themselves.” What a bunch of B.S. Unfortunately, while women are doing so, someone is DYING. They can’t seem to accept that this is the truth of the matter. If women want to make decisions for themselves, choose contraception, choose life if you get pregnant, choose to give an unwanted child up for adoption. There are many other choices to be made other than murder.
I think a lot of people would be willing to meet you halfway.
The contraception thing, though, many pro-lifers consider even THAT to be murder.
I’m basically pro-choice, but I’m a guy; I don’t have to live with the consequences of a woman’s decision, I just don’t feel it’s my right to tell her what to do with her body.
At the same time, though, I feel very strongly that as a society, we all need to support women that choose to bring a life into this world.
Why is it that so few people want to extend that care and support past the delivery of the baby, though ?
If you want a pro-life victory that’s enduring, call-out the hypocrisy of your own supporters.
I don’t see that happening, ever; nobody wants to take on the responsibility of all those “other people’s kids”.
Still, I can’t pretend that I don’t understand the pro-life argument: “hey, this is a potential human being. Are you REALLY going to just kill it ?!”
I think that there are many people that are as conflicted as I am on this one.
But, in the finally analysis, I can’t in good conscious agree with forcing any woman to be essentially a ward of the state, a prisoner forced to give birth against her will, and use the law and the courts to force her to do it.
It’s all bad, it really is; and I do not know how to “fix” it. I’m so sorry.
There are no silver bullets for the social problems that exist in society. All we are saying is that we shouldn’t use violence as a way to solve these problems.
You are telling me a late term abortion is not forced? If the child is viable it is only common sense not law that says it is a chld. I do not suit myself, and as far as the law goes; Liberals have made it so easy to disregard LIFE. I do not need to move on at all, you are tell ming just because my opinion is different than yours. This is not a Communist country yet (apparetly you feel so), I have the right to my opinion and to express my opinion in an forum. I do not believe murdering abortion doctors and those judge women who have abortions. I feel it is wrong, and the Supreme Court is wrong. You say that you welcome opposing viewpoints? Seems that is contrary to what you said in the previous sentence that “Opponents of the law need to move on.” Last time I new laws can be changed, whether you think it can or not. That is one of the unique aspects of being a United States Citizen. No argument how be-littled, is pointless if one believes in it.