"Gay" kids books

[BigJohn&TheLions]

There are several on Amazon: King & King, The Sissy Duckling, Jack & Jim... Brings a new meaning to "Fairy" tales...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/1582460612/reviews/104-4491639-2617558#15824606127298

From School Library Journal
Grades 3-5--In this postmodern fractured fairy tale, a worn-out and badly beleaguered Queen is ready for retirement. After many hours of nagging, the crown prince, who "never cared much for princesses," finally caves in and agrees to wed in order to ascend the throne. Their search for a suitable bride extends far and wide, but none of the eligible princesses strikes the Prince's fancy, until Princess Madeleine shows up. The Prince is immediately smitten- with her brother, Prince Lee. The wedding is "very special," the Queen settles down on a chaise lounge in the sun, and everyone lives happily ever after.

[jeff061]

Don't care if someones gay, i'm not homophobic, and i am disgusted at our goverments anti-gay stances.

That said, i still don't want to promote that way of life, sooo "What the fu**?" :).

[Hurst2112]

i'll wait to post on this one til I am good and drunk...so I can piss some people off.

or not

[jeff061]

dola

Is it me or does that pic hint that Doug, from that kids cartoon show, grew up to be a gay prince?

[Easy Mac]

sex book for kids (http://www.goodvibes.com/cgi-bin/sgdynamo.exe?CODIV=0102&UID=2004031916103884&HTNAME=publishing/dtp/our_books/kfb/index.html)

[Flasch186]

i cant vote for any of the choices.

[famatu]

My son is 5 and he is in kindergarten. They read, "Heather Has Two Mommies" to him to try and "educate" him about "alternative" families and lifestyles. Please remember, my son is FIVE!!! I do not want him knowing what sex is yet, let alone a sick, repulisve, kind of sex that is against everything our family believes in!

I pulled him out of the government school that very day - and he will never return! Little Russ now goes to a private Christian school where they promote Jesus, the Bible, and do NOT talk about "sex ed", homosexuality being "normal and healthy" or anything else along those lines. I guess the people at his new school have a clue - he's five!

[BigJohn&TheLions]

sex book for kids (http://www.goodvibes.com/cgi-bin/sgdynamo.exe?CODIV=0102&UID=2004031916103884&HTNAME=publishing/dtp/our_books/kfb/index.html)
Just be glad it's not a "pop-up" :D

[BigJohn&TheLions]

My son is 5 and he is in kindergarten. They read, "Heather Has Two Mommies" to him to try and "educate" him about "alternative" families and lifestyles. Please remember, my son is FIVE!!! I do not want him knowing what sex is yet, let alone a sick, repulisve, kind of sex that is against everything our family believes in!

I pulled him out of the government school that very day - and he will never return! Little Russ now goes to a private Christian school where they promote Jesus, the Bible, and do NOT talk about "sex ed", homosexuality being "normal and healthy" or anything else along those lines. I guess the people at his new school have a clue - he's five!
Right! At 5 he should be at a stage where he's repulsed by icky girls. Not reading about boys liking boys. I remember when I was a kid, at that age I didn't know what gay was, or what straight was for that matter. All I wanted to do was play with my barbies and... TRUCKS! Play with my TRUCKS, and GI Joe, and Cars and I used to blow things up... OK, I did play with my sister's barbies, but it was to pull their heads off. :D

[Bubba Wheels]

My son is 5 and he is in kindergarten. They read, "Heather Has Two Mommies" to him to try and "educate" him about "alternative" families and lifestyles. Please remember, my son is FIVE!!! I do not want him knowing what sex is yet, let alone a sick, repulisve, kind of sex that is against everything our family believes in!

I pulled him out of the government school that very day - and he will never return! Little Russ now goes to a private Christian school where they promote Jesus, the Bible, and do NOT talk about "sex ed", homosexuality being "normal and healthy" or anything else along those lines. I guess the people at his new school have a clue - he's five!

Please note: By taking such actions as the one you've taken you are usetting the social engineering plans for the new world order and may possibly be viewed by your government as an 'obstacle' in the near future! You've been warned! (God Bless and good for you!) :)

[Suicane75]

If Heather has 2 hot mommies than I wanna be Heathers friend, and I want my son to be her friend too cause Heathers gonna wanna experiment in a few years.

[Bubba Wheels]

If Heather has 2 hot mommies than I wanna be Heathers friend, and I want my son to be her friend too cause Heathers gonna wanna experiment in a few years.

You say that in jest, but studies actually DO show that kids living in same-sex union households are MUCH more likely to experiment with homosexual behavior than other kids. And for more good info on what happens when you ignore God's will and plan for families/sex in marriage, look up on Drudge how Helen Gurley Brown (hardly a conservative) has just been vindicated for an article she wrote in 1993 and was villified for regarding the "Myth" of heterosexual AIDS. Apparently many interests, including the drug companies, have a vested interest in promoting this myth even though it ain't so. Heterosexuals do NOT contract AIDS in over 95% of all cases. Read it on Drudge.

[Easy Mac]

FALSE

[sabotai]

You say that in jest, but studies actually DO show that kids living in same-sex union households are MUCH more likely to experiment with homosexual behavior than other kids.

*holds back laughter*

[Suicane75]

Bubba, were you dropped on your head alot as a child?

[Bubba Wheels]

I know the social-engineering PC crowd won't like it, but sorry to say I've heard that studies have shown this as being true.

[Easy Mac]

I know the close-minded JC crowd won't like it, but sorry to say I've heard that studies have shown the opposite as being true.

[Suicane75]

I know the social-engineering PC crowd won't like it, but sorry to say I've heard that studies have shown this as being true.

You've heard? Do the voices tell you anything else?

[Bubba Wheels]

Studies were done by independent research firms. Will get the info but you won't believe it anyway cause it won't suite your predisposed ideology.

[jeff061]

Not to gross anyone out, but there is, uh, tearage in homosexual sex. This leads to bleeding, which leads to higher risk of contracting STD's. Has nothing to do with God's plan you god damn nut.

I hate religion. Think for yourselves for christ sake.

[Suicane75]

well, theres tearage in heterosexual sex too. If ya do it right.

[jeff061]

Not quite as much as butt sex.

I read blurbs here and there on this, no i haven't tried it :). I know someone was going to crack the joke.

[Crapshoot]

God- Bubba's the kind of republican which makes me want to be a democrat-almost...- and that's a huge frigigng achivement. Religion is not now and should not always be the overarching compass for morality.

[Subby]

I need people like Bubba Wheels around to remind me why I vote against the Moral Majority and Extreme Religious Right every chance I can...

Thank you.

[WussGawd]

Good topic, but a dumb one for a poll.

Hmm. Do I want my kids reading this? Well, not exclusively, and not necessarily. But...if I were gay and had adoptive/foster kids...or if I learned my kid might be gay or lesbian? You know, I think I'd want them to have the opportunity to read about people like themselves, with their own unique set of problems. Role models are important to people. It is possible to lead a moral life and be gay or lesbian. It is also possible to lead an immoral life and be straight.

For that matter, I wouldn't really have a problem if they picked one up out of curiosity. I would hope I'd be there to help set the context and that they'd be willing to come to me with questions or concerns.

[WussGawd]

Studies were done by independent research firms. Will get the info but you won't believe it anyway cause it won't suite your predisposed ideology.

Studies also show that religiously intolerant Christians eat small children for breakfast.

There, my statement is at least as credible as yours.

[Ryche]

God- Bubba's the kind of republican which makes me want to be a democrat-almost...- and that's a huge frigigng achivement. Religion is not now and should not always be the overarching compass for morality.

For anyone in Minnesota, I'll be doing my part tomorrow to get rid of our biggest examples of this in the legislature.

[Airhog]

You can never educate your children about sex too early. Kids will only learn what they are ready to learn.

[Sun Tzu]

Worst thread ever.

[sachmo71]

I don't understand the point.

[sabotai]

I'm not surprised that those who are completely intolerant of homosexuality have completely missed the point of having these kinds of books. To them, anything that deals with homosexuality in anyway is telling boys to go out and have butt sex and telling girls to go lick carpet. Not surprised one bit...

[nfg22]

Bubba, While I am a Christian AIDS was not meant only for gays. I dont beleive God is punishing them for that. Their time will come on Judgement day just like you and me when we can say "thank you Jesus, for saving us!". Kids reading that crap is not very healthy for them in my opinion.

Out of a Christian perspective and into another. You believe that the world evolved and people came to be through evolution. Then how do you explain homosexuals other than a disorder? you cant reproduce which is a natural thing to do, the reason why we live. So why would you? Arent most men attracted to women? then the few who arent have sumthing loose in their heads.

[Hurst2112]

Not to gross anyone out, but there is, uh, tearage in homosexual sex. This leads to bleeding, which leads to higher risk of contracting STD's. Has nothing to do with God's plan you god damn nut.

I hate religion. Think for yourselves for christ sake.

Why don't you shut the hell up. Better yet, don't post on this thread anymore.

You can bring a decent take to a subject like this if you try. You have not tried to do that. Once you start saying dumb shit like your last line, the gloves are off and the snide remarks start to fly.

I would suggest not posting without a sense of what you are saying, and who you are saying it to, again.

Get a clue.

[nfg22]

By the way I live in Minnesota, Gov. Pawlenty is the best thing since sliced bread IMHO. Next voting day we will have 2 republican senators hopefully. :)

[stevew]

Check this one out

Two Moms, the Zark, and Me

Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
This seriously flawed picture book blunders through a sensitive issue--the rights of homosexual parents. A boy is taken to the park by his "two moms," wanders over to the zoo where he meets a Zark (a sort of brontosaurus), discovers he's lost, and is picked up by Mr. and Mrs. McFink--ultraconservatives who go ballistic over his family's domestic arrangements: "It's wrong! It's a sin! Not at all how I think! / The only true family's a family like ours: / With a mom, and a dad, and two kids, and two cars." At last the Zark intervenes, routing the McFinks and reuniting the boy with his parents. Valentine's rhyming text is uneven and, highlighting as it does one of childhood's worst fears--being lost--has a nightmarish quality that's exacerbated by the weird proportions and skewed perspectives of Lopez's cartoonish illustrations. Lopez pictures McFink as a Jesse Helms lookalike, and just in case readers don't understand how rotten he and his wife really are (which would be difficult, given their perpetually nasty expressions), the McFinks are initially shown brandishing sharp instruments--although just exactly what they're doing at the zoo with an evil-looking nail file and a potato peeler is never explained. All in all, it's a mean-spirited, sniping approach to a topic that deserves thoughtful treatment. Ages 4-8.


Or this one.

Uncle What-Is-It Is Coming to Visit!!
Willhoite courts a repeat of the controversy touched off by his Daddy's Roommate with this uneasy mixture of political correctness and retrograde thinking. Tiffany and Igor have never met Uncle Brett, who is coming to visit tomorrow. When Tiffany asks if he's married, Mom "gets sort of a funny look on her face" and says, "Well . . . as a matter of fact, he's gay." But she is interrupted before she can explain, and Tiffany and Igor turn to a couple of doltish teenagers for the definition of "gay." One shows the children a newspaper photo of a Carmen Miranda impersonator marching in a gay pride parade (" 'Coochy, coochy, coochy,' squealed Shelby"). Shelby's brother, however, proffers an alternate vision of gays: "dressed up in black leather. Zippers and chains all over 'em. Dark glasses . . . Chaps!" Willhoite fills a few spreads with caricatures of transvestites and "leather queens" (there's even a multibraceleted limp wrist on the book's cover), and these exotic images are sure to make a deeper impression on young readers than the book's conclusion, which, of course, introduces Brett as perfectly ordinary dresser. Alas, this volume is stronger at defining stereotypes than at demolishing them. Ages 4-8.



Nice books.

I think Ill go read them to my 5 year old tomorrow.

[Crapshoot]

Hey, I dont think 5 year olds should be exposed to sex, and I think we can all agree upon that. I also don't think that a lovingly depicted family , be it gay or straight- makes a frigging difference.

[Ryche]

By the way I live in Minnesota, Gov. Pawlenty is the best thing since sliced bread IMHO. Next voting day we will have 2 republican senators hopefully.

Hoorah :)

[ISiddiqui]

My son is 5 and he is in kindergarten. They read, "Heather Has Two Mommies" to him to try and "educate" him about "alternative" families and lifestyles. Please remember, my son is FIVE!!!

And? Your five year old son doesn't know that some of his friends have a mommy and a daddy? What's so wrong about teaching him to be tolerate of kids in his calss who have two mommies instead? You don't have be a certain age to learn tolerance.

[famatu]

God- Bubba's the kind of republican which makes me want to be a democrat-almost...- and that's a huge frigigng achivement. Religion is not now and should not always be the overarching compass for morality.

ummm...what should be then? Your opinion? The "majority opinion"? That would make us a country of mob rule. Do you really want that? That is why the United States grew into the greatest country in the history of the world - our morality seeded in God!

[famatu]

I'm not surprised that those who are completely intolerant of homosexuality have completely missed the point of having these kinds of books. To them, anything that deals with homosexuality in anyway is telling boys to go out and have butt sex and telling girls to go lick carpet. Not surprised one bit...

EXACTLY! So you basically get the point you accuse others of not getting - what an irony!

[famatu]

And? Your five year old son doesn't know that some of his friends have a mommy and a daddy? What's so wrong about teaching him to be tolerate of kids in his calss who have two mommies instead? You don't have be a certain age to learn tolerance.

There's that word again - the word that WILL lead to the destruction of America as we know it - "tolerance" Yes, it's great to be tolerant of people who are different than you and even celebrate your unique differences sometimes - but NOT when it deals with morality!

The morals our church and our family teach to our children do not include "tolerance" of things that God specifically says to not do.

Everyone thought it was "not that big of a deal" that clinton was getting blowjobs in the oval office - does that mean I should teach my kids to be tolerant of me if I cheat on their mom and want to go get some blowjobs of my own? If society decides that lying, cheating, and stealing is okay, does that mean I should teach my children "tolerance" of people who do those things? Of course not! I would rather my family and myself be burned at the stake and reunited in Heaven for sticking to our morals that the Bible teaches us than being "tolerant" of things we KNOW are not right in the eyes of the lord!

I'm not a religous zealot who would love to convert you either. Although I'm sure God would love to save you, I have no interest in "talking to", "tolerating", or "converting" people like yourself. I hope for your own sake you get yourself straight with God but if you don't, it won't stop my family from eternal paradise! :)

[Crapshoot]

ummm...what should be then? Your opinion? The "majority opinion"? That would make us a country of mob rule. Do you really want that? That is why the United States grew into the greatest country in the history of the world - our morality seeded in God!


Spare me the jingoistic bullshit. The primary strength of the US is its tolerance and encouragement of the individual, and that should (and generally does) extend to religous beliefs. Primarily, Im of the belief that marriage should not be a government regulated institution anyway- its a sign of commitment that two people who love each other and wish to codify it take- what role does the government and religion have in that ? On a personal level, I admit my prejudices- something about gay couples/marriage used to bother me a little bit- and it probably a sense of "Difference". Having said that, my personal prejudices and yours should not be the basis of imposing morality- which is the idiocy you're arguing for, and laughingly accusing me of.

[Peregrine]

There's that word again - the word that WILL lead to the destruction of America as we know it - "tolerance"

Wow if we could only go back to the 1950, or better yet, back to 1850, we'd be all set. None of those damn women or blacks with the vote! I'm sure America would be better off then!

I would rather my family and myself be burned at the stake and reunited in Heaven for sticking to our morals that the Bible teaches us than being "tolerant" of things we KNOW are not right in the eyes of the lord!


I think gays are much more in danger of being burned at the stake (or tied to fence posts and being left for dead) than you are.

[famatu]

Spare me the jingoistic bullshit. The primary strength of the US is its tolerance and encouragement of the individual, and that should (and generally does) extend to religous beliefs. Primarily, Im of the belief that marriage should not be a government regulated institution anyway- its a sign of commitment that two people who love each other and wish to codify it take- what role does the government and religion have in that ? On a personal level, I admit my prejudices- something about gay couples/marriage used to bother me a little bit- and it probably a sense of "Difference". Having said that, my personal prejudices and yours should not be the basis of imposing morality- which is the idiocy you're arguing for, and laughingly accusing me of.

We're not talking about homosexuals getting married anymore. We're talking about your opinion that "morality" should be decided by mob rule. If you have something to say, at least stand behind it! Don't wimp out and hide behind another issue when someone calls you on a position in which you are obviously wrong.

[famatu]

I think gays are much more in danger of being burned at the stake (or tied to fence posts and being left for dead) than you are.

Quite honestly, I hope that never happens to a homosexual - because just like you and I, they are people too. But in all honesty, if our world comes to the point where I have to agree to be politically correct or die, I'll chose to die. Remeber the old phrase, "Give me liberty or give me death!" ? I guarantee you'll be hearing that a whole lot more in the next 10 years as the politically correct police start to target everyone who isn't with the agenda they want you to follow!

[Crapshoot]

We're not talking about homosexuals getting married anymore. We're talking about your opinion that "morality" should be decided by mob rule. If you have something to say, at least stand behind it! Don't wimp out and hide behind another issue when someone calls you on a position in which you are obviously wrong.


Wimp out when faced with the genius of your arguements ? Never. :D
I did get a little off-track there, undoubtedly. However, when you attempt to argue that the opinions of the people are irrelevant to morality (read your first post criticizing me), and that religion is the sole basis - you're not arguing- you're proletyzing. Morality is a human construct, and exists outside of religion- to argue that religion is the seed for morality is in essence to argue that before religion, life was essentialy ammoral.

[famatu]

to argue that religion is the seed for morality is in essence to argue that before religion, life was essentialy ammoral.

Exactly....because there was no "before religion" - remeber Genesis when God Himself created the first man? Do you think Adam didn't believe in God? And the very first act of immorality in history was when Adam ate the forbidden fruit. The rest is....history!

Now, if you argue the point that before man there were all kinds of animals and dinosaurs, etc.. then I would still have to say that no, there was no morality before religion because animals don't live by morals - they live by "animal instinct" - that is pretty much what seperates us from them!

So yes, what I'm saying is all morals are based on religion - I won't even pin it down to the religion I believe in - the Muslims kill Americans "because of their religion" Their Koran tells them to. That is why it is "moral" to the Muslims to kill innocent people. If you just start "making up" what th morals are based on what society wants to get away with by agreeing it is right then we're in for a whole lot of trouble! Imagine the day they make rape legal and they come and rape your mother, wife, and daughter - still want to make morals a "group discussion" ?

[Suicane75]

Man, you right wing bible nuts scare the holy fuck out of me.

[Peregrine]

Remeber the old phrase, "Give me liberty or give me death!" ? I guarantee you'll be hearing that a whole lot more in the next 10 years as the politically correct police start to target everyone who isn't with the agenda they want you to follow!

Famatu, while you certainly have all the right in the world to believe this, I think the crux of the dispute on this board is that many people feel that the way the country is trending, we're more likely to be told what to do by Christians who feel it's their job to have our government discriminate against things they don't like because of their religion. Believing that homosexuality is a sin is fine, I don't take that right away from anyone. But going to the next level and trying to work governmental discrimination into the mix is too much, in my opinion. We live in a multi-cultural, varied country of many religions. Saying things like tolerance will destroy America, in my opinion, just reinforces the idea that many Christians would like to railroad this country back to some kind of police state where the government tells us what to say and do because of a "moral code."

[Crapshoot]

Exactly....because there was no "before religion" - remeber Genesis when God Himself created the first man? Do you think Adam didn't believe in God? And the very first act of immorality in history was when Adam ate the forbidden fruit. The rest is....history!

Now, if you argue the point that before man there were all kinds of animals and dinosaurs, etc.. then I would still have to say that no, there was no morality before religion because animals don't live by morals - they live by "animal instinct" - that is pretty much what seperates us from them!

So yes, what I'm saying is all morals are based on religion - I won't even pin it down to the religion I believe in - the Muslims kill Americans "because of their religion" Their Koran tells them to. That is why it is "moral" to the Muslims to kill innocent people. If you just start "making up" what th morals are based on what society wants to get away with by agreeing it is right then we're in for a whole lot of trouble! Imagine the day they make rape legal and they come and rape your mother, wife, and daughter - still want to make morals a "group discussion" ?

This is ill-informed bullshit- to say Muslim morality is to kill innocent people is an ill-conceived attempt to tar all believers of a faith with the same brush- akin to me arguing that the churches' well documented abuses over the years are proof that Christianity does the same. The hijacking of religion by extremists is a tried and tested power play- nothing more.

As for the rest of your arguement, you scare me- you essentialy want a "theocracy"- which is against everything at the heart of the system.

[famatu]

Famatu, while you certainly have all the right in the world to believe this, I think the crux of the dispute on this board is that many people feel that the way the country is trending, we're more likely to be told what to do by Christians who feel it's their job to have our government discriminate against things they don't like because of their religion. Believing that homosexuality is a sin is fine, I don't take that right away from anyone. But going to the next level and trying to work governmental discrimination into the mix is too much, in my opinion. We live in a multi-cultural, varied country of many religions. Saying things like tolerance will destroy America, in my opinion, just reinforces the idea that many Christians would like to railroad this country back to some kind of police state where the government tells us what to say and do because of a "moral code."

I hope what you said is not the impression I've given you about what I want. In fact, a "police state where the government tells us what to say and do because of moral code" is something I would never support!

As a Christian, I just want the "not Chrisitans" or "Christian haters" to leave me alone. I seriously don't care if you are a homosexual or not. The point is, I don't want you pushing your sick books on my kids! I don't care if ANYONE does things I don't think are moral. Just leave me alone! I don't want any part of them! And by calling people like myself "intolerant" and a bunch of other nasty names for not wanting part of something I don't agree with, that is the exact definition of what you're saying you do not want me to do to you! Basically you are saying "convert and be PC" or you're a religious wacko! See how this can get out of hand real quicK?

And while we're talking about "crazy religious people"...The First Amendment of the Constitution clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" See, people get all carried away with that. We have freedom OF religion - not freedom FROM religion! Just because you don't want religion in our world doesn't mean you have the right to take it away from those who do want it. The Constitution of our country clearly states that!

[Crapshoot]

Remeber the old phrase, "Give me liberty or give me death!" ? I guarantee you'll be hearing that a whole lot more in the next 10 years as the politically correct police start to target everyone who isn't with the agenda they want you to follow!

Does anyone else catch the rich irony in this ? Famatu and his ilk would gladly have given Patrick Henry and co his death- how dare he disagree with their imposed morality ?

[Crapshoot]

I hope what you said is not the impression I've given you about what I want. In fact, a "police state where the government tells us what to say and do because of moral code" is something I would never support!

As a Christian, I just want the "not Chrisitans" or "Christian haters" to leave me alone. I seriously don't care if you are a homosexual or not. The point is, I don't want you pushing your sick books on my kids! I don't care if ANYONE does things I don't think are moral. Just leave me alone! I don't want any part of them! And by calling people like myself "intolerant" and a bunch of other nasty names for not wanting part of something I don't agree with, that is the exact definition of what you're saying you do not want me to do to you! Basically you are saying "convert and be PC" or you're a religious wacko! See how this can get out of hand real quicK?

And while we're talking about "crazy religious people"...The First Amendment of the Constitution clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" See, people get all carried away with that. We have freedom OF religion - not freedom FROM religion! Just because you don't want religion in our world doesn't mean you have the right to take it away from those who do want it. The Constitution of our country clearly states that!

See, this I agree with- I have no bones to pick with you here, other than the idiotic "sick boots" line. I think the state simply has no role to play when it comes to religion- neither to support or suppress it. I do support your right to raise your kids in a way you see fit- although I wonder, if you would have been the type 50 years ago to support a segreated system.

[famatu]

When the world hates you, remember that it hated me first. If you were of the world, the world would love you. But because I have chosen you out of the word, so the world will hate you. Remember what I told you? A servant is not greater than the master. Since they hate me, so they will hate you too. If they had listened to me, they would also listen to you. But the people of the world will hate you because you are with me, for they do not know the Father, who sent me. (John 15:18-20)

Written over 2000 years ago......it's going to have so much more meaning in the very near future

[Pumpy Tudors]

This type of thread sucks. Can't we go an entire month without one of these "debates" getting started? They're all the same, and ultimately, someone always comes out of it looking like a jackass.

With that said, I'll try to be the jackass this time. I may or may not support gay kids books, but I do support gay kids foods. My test kitchen is currently producing a new high-fiber breakfast cereal called Count Cockula.

[nfg22]

I want 30 boxes...wait nope, I dont sorry

[BigJohn&TheLions]

I jsut think the blatant, out, in your face, screaming "ACCEPT ME" is wrong, especially for children. I understand and accept that there are men and women who are gay, but the fact remains that the normal way of things is a man and a woman. The ONLY reason a child is here in the first place is because a man and a woman got down. If two people are going to raise a child and do it well it shouldn't matter which way the wind blows for them, just don't lay a load of B.S. on them that is is normal to have an alternative lifestile, because it simply is not (why is it called "alternative" duh!)

You don't have to scream, subtlety wins more points than anything else. Bert and Ernie don't need to come out the closet, we just accept them as they are.

[sabotai]

We have freedom OF religion - not freedom FROM religion!

Can someone explain what this really means? I see religious people screaming this all the time, but I have no idea what they mean by it...

[SunDancer]

Man, you right wing bible nuts scare the holy fuck out of me.

Same here...I lost myself reading.

[Bubba Wheels]

Funny how the Christian-haters in this thread and other places always have to use profanity to express themselves...which cannot help but give evidence to us Christians that some deep-seated influence in their lives is rebelling against Christ for all its worth...hey! Just like it says in the Bible! What a surprise!

[jeff061]

I rebel against all organized religions(not personal beliefs). So I hope you don't take it personally.

[sabotai]

Funny how the Christian-haters in this thread and other places always have to use profanity to express themselves...which cannot help but give evidence to us Christians that some deep-seated influence in their lives is rebelling against Christ for all its worth...hey! Just like it says in the Bible! What a surprise!

Yeah, because Christians never swear....

[Coffee Warlord]

Funny how the Christian-haters in this thread and other places always have to use profanity to express themselves...which cannot help but give evidence to us Christians that some deep-seated influence in their lives is rebelling against Christ for all its worth...hey! Just like it says in the Bible! What a surprise!

Show me where in the Bible it says saying 'fuck' is bad.

Folks like you piss me the fuck off. I have nothing but respect for other people's beliefs, and have made a concerted effort to study a wide variety of religious beliefs...until they start spouting how horrible anyone who doesn't agree with their beliefs are.

[Bubba Wheels]

Can someone explain what this really means? I see religious people screaming this all the time, but I have no idea what they mean by it...

Means that the so-called 'seperation of church and state' is a total myth. Came from the mistaken belief that there is some kind of 'wall' between belief in God and state functions. Our system of government is founded in Judeo-Christian ethics, values and convictions. Judeo-Christian philosophy, if not outright religion itself, was never meant to have been replaced by a 'Secular Humanist' form of religion (Yes, Supreme Court actually DID rule that secular humanism IS a religion) that now infects, infests and controls every aspect of our Govenment, Public School System, Courts and now is the basis for Liberal Social Engineering of every kind.

[sabotai]

Means that the so-called 'seperation of church and state' is a total myth. Came from the mistaken belief that there is some kind of 'wall' between belief in God and state functions. Our system of government is founded in Judeo-Christian ethics, values and convictions. Judeo-Christian philosophy, if not outright religion itself, was never meant to have been replaced by a 'Secular Humanist' form of religion (Yes, Supreme Court actually DID rule that secular humanism IS a religion) that now infects, infests and controls every aspect of our Govenment, Public School System, Courts and now is the basis for Liberal Social Engineering of every kind.

Oh...in that case I guess that means that statement is total bullshit. Thanks.

[Bubba Wheels]

Show me where in the Bible it says saying 'fuck' is bad.

Folks like you piss me the fuck off. I have nothing but respect for other people's beliefs, and have made a concerted effort to study a wide variety of religious beliefs...until they start spouting how horrible anyone who doesn't agree with their beliefs are.

Warn me before your head starts spinning around and around! :D

[ISiddiqui]

There's that word again - the word that WILL lead to the destruction of America as we know it - "tolerance" Yes, it's great to be tolerant of people who are different than you and even celebrate your unique differences sometimes - but NOT when it deals with morality!

The morals our church and our family teach to our children do not include "tolerance" of things that God specifically says to not do.

Oh, I love it when the bigots come out and play :p.

As said before, tolerance of the individual is what made this country great. Sure it took a while to extend equal tolerance of blacks and women, but eventually they were and it was by reference to our founding documents. Gays are the next group to achieve tolerance. You can be horrified over it. I'm sure Klan members were horrified when blacks got equal rights and mysogynists were horrifed when women got the right to vote. Oh, btw, yes, I DID compare you to Klan members and mysogynists.

And yes you do believe in morality being 'mob rule'. You are only against it now because your ilk don't make up most of the mob as they did in the past.

Man, you right wing bible nuts scare the holy fuck out of me.

Indeed.

[Bubba Wheels]

Oh, I love it when the bigots come out and play :p.

As said before, tolerance of the individual is what made this country great. Sure it took a while to extend equal tolerance of blacks and women, but eventually they were and it was by reference to our founding documents. Gays are the next group to achieve tolerance. You can be horrified over it. I'm sure Klan members were horrified when blacks got equal rights and mysogynists were horrifed when women got the right to vote. Oh, btw, yes, I DID compare you to Klan members and mysogynists.

And yes you do believe in morality being 'mob rule'. You are only against it now because your ilk don't make up most of the mob as they did in the past.



Indeed.

"Tolerance' is the new sacred mantra of the secular humanist new world order. Basically, 'Tolerance' is used to justify anything that undermines, undercuts and erodes traditional moral ethics and values. The next step is to slap the 'Bigot' label on anyone actually believing in traditional morality. This makes the New World Order Secularists feel virtuous and morally superior to the traditionalists, basically the secularist version of self-righteousness updated for the New Age.

[ISiddiqui]

"Tolerance' is the new sacred mantra of the secular humanist new world order. Basically, 'Tolerance' is used to justify anything that undermines, undercuts and erodes traditional moral ethics and values. The next step is to slap the 'Bigot' label on anyone actually believing in traditional morality. This makes the New World Order Secularists feel virtuous and morally superior to the traditionalists, basically the secularist version of self-righteousness updated for the New Age.

Good. Traditional morality is all bunk. Why follow something just because everyone else is? I thought individualism was America's strength? Somehow I can see you in 1865 saying we shouldn't free the slaves, because slavery is a part of traditional moral ethics and values. In 1910, we shouldn't let women vote because that undermines traditional moral ethics and values.

Why is this any different from those two cases? If you can't articulate a good reason then you are a bigot. Sorry, that's just the facts.

And btw, I'm anything but a secular humanist. Those bleeding hearts are a bunch of deluded losers as well :p.

[Bubba Wheels]

I define 'traditional moral ethics and values' as being Biblically based: Slavery is never mentioned as moral or approved of by God although it has been a way of life for many (Serfdom in Russia ended after slavery in this country, the root word of the word Slave comes from the word 'Slav", as in 'Slavic', so more white folks been slaves alot longer than blacks in other parts of the world...Greeks were slaves to Romans, ect...Bible acknowledges slavery existed by never condoned it.) Bible does state homosexuality is sin, however, along with most other new age ideas of 'tolerance.'

[QuikSand]

I know we've had largely this same discussion any number of times already, and at this point it takes quite a bit to really coax a reaction out of me when reading (which I ought to know better than to do at all).

But, this little gem:

But in all honesty, if our world comes to the point where I have to agree to be politically correct or die, I'll chose to die.

...that's just great. Well, at least you make your point.


edited to tone down

[Buddy Grant]

There should be some stats on the dullard to featherbrain ratio of this forum available in one of the top links. It's gotta' be at least a 2/1 dullard/featherbrain breakdown but it would be interesting to see.

[famatu]

The crazy thing about discussions like this is that it always seems like there are maybe two "right wing" CHRISTians vs. the rest of the atheists. That may be true and well on a message board but the numbers do not lie. Over 70% of Americans are some form of CHRISTian, whether they are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist...it doesn't matter - basically, over 70% of Americans accecpt Jesus CHRIST as their lord and savior. So in a small discussion forum like this, it might seem like the secularists are on even footing but they are not. Attitudes that are trying to destroy the CHRISTian values of America will not last long. People are starting to understand what is happening and when 7 out of every 10 people is part of the "persecuted" then that makes for a very big backlash that those 3 out of 10 will not be able to put down! Just something to think about....

[SunDancer]

The crazy thing about discussions like this is that it always seems like there are maybe two "right wing" CHRISTians vs. the rest of the atheists. That may be true and well on a message board but the numbers do not lie. Over 70% of Americans are some form of CHRISTian, whether they are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist...it doesn't matter - basically, over 70% of Americans accecpt Jesus CHRIST as their lord and savior. So in a small discussion forum like this, it might seem like the secularists are on even footing but they are not. Attitudes that are trying to destroy the CHRISTian values of America will not last long. People are starting to understand what is happening and when 7 out of every 10 people is part of the "persecuted" then that makes for a very big backlash that those 3 out of 10 will not be able to put down! Just something to think about....

I think to compare "right wing" Christians vs. rest of atheists is very poor view. It's more a "vs" of the right wing christians vs. the christian believers, but they live by the bible or may even be everyweek/day prayers, or church goers/ The majority of Christian Americans are the later.

[dawgfan]

Over 70% of Americans are some form of CHRISTian, whether they are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist...it doesn't matter - basically, over 70% of Americans accecpt Jesus CHRIST as their lord and savior. So in a small discussion forum like this, it might seem like the secularists are on even footing but they are not.

I think you're making a very large presumptive leap to assume that if 70% of Americans identify themselves as some form of Christian that they accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

It's one thing to identify ones' self as Christian when confronted with a check box; despite the 'tolerance' in our society, there are many places where openly admitting to being agnostic or atheist is cause for scorn, and when one grows up in a society dominated by Christians, and perhaps comes from a family of Christians, it's easier to call ones' self Christian then any other alternative.

It's a much greater leap to presume that all these people that identify themselves as Christian actually buy into the concept of Jesus Christ being their Lord and Saviour. I suspect that percentage is a fair amount lower...

Attitudes that are trying to destroy the CHRISTian values of America will not last long. People are starting to understand what is happening and when 7 out of every 10 people is part of the "persecuted" then that makes for a very big backlash that those 3 out of 10 will not be able to put down! Just something to think about....

What the hell is this supposed to mean?

[jeff061]

It means the christians are going to rise up and destroy 30% of the american population.

I only have 2 words for our christian overlords when this happens, forgive me ;).

[famatu]

I think you're making a very large presumptive leap to assume that if 70% of Americans identify themselves as some form of Christian that they accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

It's one thing to identify ones' self as Christian when confronted with a check box; despite the 'tolerance' in our society, there are many places where openly admitting to being agnostic or atheist is cause for scorn, and when one grows up in a society dominated by Christians, and perhaps comes from a family of Christians, it's easier to call ones' self Christian then any other alternative.

It's a much greater leap to presume that all these people that identify themselves as Christian actually buy into the concept of Jesus Christ being their Lord and Saviour. I suspect that percentage is a fair amount lower...



What the hell is this supposed to mean?

I knew the question would arise so that's why I put the CHRIST part of CHRISTian in caps - you can NOT say you are or "be" a CHRISTian without the belief that Jesus is your savior - that is the basis for all CHRISTian religions. And if you do a simple Google search, you will find the numbers breakdown - actually MORE than 70% claim to be CHRISTian of some denomination.

As for your second question, once again, it is simple math. If 30% continue to try to dictate the rules to 70%, eventually the 70% are going to realize they outnumber the 30% by more than a 2-1 margin and say, "screw you, we're not listening to you anymore" and that will be the end of the discussion because 30% will not "slap" the 70% back "into their role" It's a simple game of numbers at that point :)

[Telle]

The crazy thing about discussions like this is that it always seems like there are maybe two "right wing" CHRISTians vs. the rest of the atheists. That may be true and well on a message board but the numbers do not lie. Over 70% of Americans are some form of CHRISTian, whether they are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist...it doesn't matter - basically, over 70% of Americans accecpt Jesus CHRIST as their lord and savior. So in a small discussion forum like this, it might seem like the secularists are on even footing but they are not. Attitudes that are trying to destroy the CHRISTian values of America will not last long. People are starting to understand what is happening and when 7 out of every 10 people is part of the "persecuted" then that makes for a very big backlash that those 3 out of 10 will not be able to put down! Just something to think about....

Well, I think it's more like 70% of the people in this country went to Sunday school at some point as a kid and thus check off the Christian box on surveys. If a survey was done to find out how much of this country regularly attended church, read/studied the Bible on a regular basis, and considered Jesus Christ to be their "personal savior" I just betcha the percentage would be a whole lot lower.

And why are you assuming that anyone that doesn't agree with fundamentalist Christianity is an Atheist?

[jeff061]

Yep, not an atheist here. Haven't seen anyone say they were, may have missed it.

[SunDancer]

I knew the question would arise so that's why I put the CHRIST part of CHRISTian in caps - you can NOT say you are or "be" a CHRISTian without the belief that Jesus is your savior - that is the basis for all CHRISTian religions. And if you do a simple Google search, you will find the numbers breakdown - actually MORE than 70% claim to be CHRISTian of some denomination.

As for your second question, once again, it is simple math. If 30% continue to try to dictate the rules to 70%, eventually the 70% are going to realize they outnumber the 30% by more than a 2-1 margin and say, "screw you, we're not listening to you anymore" and that will be the end of the discussion because 30% will not "slap" the 70% back "into their role" It's a simple game of numbers at that point :)

To claim to be Christian and to be a "hardcore" Christian is differnet.

[dawgfan]

I knew the question would arise so that's why I put the CHRIST part of CHRISTian in caps - you can NOT say you are or "be" a CHRISTian without the belief that Jesus is your savior - that is the basis for all CHRISTian religions. And if you do a simple Google search, you will find the numbers breakdown - actually MORE than 70% claim to be CHRISTian of some denomination.

Did you even read my post? You do realize that many people that check off "Christian" on a survey are not practicing Christians and may not actually buy into the whole "Christ is my savior" dogma, right?

In your mind you can't call yourself a Christian without belief in Jesus as your savior, but there are those out there that don't. You may not consider them Christians, but if you were to use that criteria in defining a Christian then I guarantee the percentage of "Christians" in this country would be a lot less than 70% (assuming this figure is true in the first place).

As for your second question, once again, it is simple math. If 30% continue to try to dictate the rules to 70%, eventually the 70% are going to realize they outnumber the 30% by more than a 2-1 margin and say, "screw you, we're not listening to you anymore" and that will be the end of the discussion because 30% will not "slap" the 70% back "into their role" It's a simple game of numbers at that point :)

My question had to do with the fact you framed your initial statement in a form that sounded an awful lot like a threat.

In response to this version, I'll say this - maybe you're correct: maybe we're in the midst of an activist Christian revival in this country that will result in changes to our existing laws and cultural norms. However, I think that what will actually happen is that this right-wing fundamentalist Christian uprising that has been happening since Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell got political is actually going to result in a backlash where the majority of us that favor keeping overt religious beliefs out of our government will become better organized and counter the Christian Right's advance.

[ISiddiqui]

Slavery is never mentioned as moral or approved of by God although it has been a way of life for many

Does the Bible tell slaves to obey their masters? That sounds like approved to me.

You do realize that many people that check off "Christian" on a survey are not practicing Christians and may not actually buy into the whole "Christ is my savior" dogma, right?

Indeed. I know plenty of people who call themselves Christians because they were raised that way, but are for gay marriages and have no problems with sex before marriage... Hell, in fact most people I've known who call themselves Christian have had sex before marriage, which is a big no-no.

[SunDancer]

Indeed. I know plenty of people who call themselves Christians because they were raised that way, but are for gay marriages and have no problems with sex before marriage... Hell, in fact most people I've known who call themselves Christian have had sex before marriage, which is a big no-no.

The before marriage "sex" who are Christians is over half, atleast.

[ISiddiqui]

I would say it would even be closer to 75%, SunDancer.

[SunDancer]

I would say it would even be closer to 75%, SunDancer.

Why the bold of my name?

[Bubba Wheels]

Did you even read my post? You do realize that many people that check off "Christian" on a survey are not practicing Christians and may not actually buy into the whole "Christ is my savior" dogma, right?

In your mind you can't call yourself a Christian without belief in Jesus as your savior, but there are those out there that don't. You may not consider them Christians, but if you were to use that criteria in defining a Christian then I guarantee the percentage of "Christians" in this country would be a lot less than 70% (assuming this figure is true in the first place).



My question had to do with the fact you framed your initial statement in a form that sounded an awful lot like a threat.

In response to this version, I'll say this - maybe you're correct: maybe we're in the midst of an activist Christian revival in this country that will result in changes to our existing laws and cultural norms. However, I think that what will actually happen is that this right-wing fundamentalist Christian uprising that has been happening since Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell got political is actually going to result in a backlash where the majority of us that favor keeping overt religious beliefs out of our government will become better organized and counter the Christian Right's advance.

What I believe we are seeing is seperation...the just from the unjust, just as the Bible states will happen before the return of Christ. Revival IS happening, just not in the U.S. Korea is estimated to be now %50 Christian, and they are on-Fire Christians, the kind that go to all-night prayer meetings and then go to work the next day. Think about that one!

In our country, sadly, we now live in what many describe as "Post-Modern America." I can only describe this from a Christian perspective, that being the total rejection of Biblical Christianity (including the 10 commandments, what Andy Rooney would like to see replaced by the '7 suggestions'). This has actually been going on for some time, but now has the full cooperation of the federal government pushing its own brand of religion we call 'secular humanism." This is especially active in the public school system as indocrination works best on young minds, and secularists know this.

We Christians will sooner or later become the last obstacle to the New World Order, the One World Government that the global socialists (secular humanists) will need to eliminate in order for them to kill off individual freedom and have full control over everyone and everything. Already we see evidence of this when federal/supreme court justices use 'international law' as precedence in deciding court cases in direct violation of the constitution and no one says a thing about it. (Case escapes me, but one justice came right out and said this very thing is why they ruled as they did.)

The Bible clearly says "There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the ways therein are the ways of death." Bible means everlasting spiritual death in addition to physical death. God also says "My ways are not your ways." When we disregard the written Word of God then its easy for us to ignore what God's ways are and substitute our own ways, but we do so at our own peril.

[Telle]

I would say it would even be closer to 75%, SunDancer.

88% of people who have pledged themselves to not have sex before marriage do so anyways. 99% of those who have not pledged themselves have sex before marraige. I would assume that the majority of the first group are Christians.

[famatu]

In your mind you can't call yourself a Christian without belief in Jesus as your savior, but there are those out there that don't. You may not consider them Christians, but if you were to use that criteria in defining a Christian then I guarantee the percentage of "Christians" in this country would be a lot less than 70% (assuming this figure is true in the first place).

Just a couple last things then I'm done with this discussion - it's going in circles and when that happens, nobody learns anything (and isn't that the point of discussing things in the first place?)

First, you are correct, if someone calls themself a "Christian", in my mind they must believe in Jesus as their personal savior. If they do not do that, fine, I really don't care (although I know I should) but they can not say they are a Christian because the belief in Christ as savior is the key element to our (all denominations of Christianity) belief structure.

Second, I hope you do not think I'm trying to push some "extreme" agenda. It seems that any time a Christian expresses their beliefs, they are automatically "extreme" right wing. First and foremost, all I want is for the "anti-Christians" to leave me and my fellow Christians alone. If you don't like our belief in Jesus or the fact that we pray or anything else we do - that's fine...you are certainly entitled to your opinion - and believe me, I'm ALL FOR your right OF religious freedom! I can't speak for all Christians, but I personally will never try and run anyone down and "convert" them. There may be some that would do that, but I think a whole lot more think like I do - just leave us alone, let us practice our faith without trying to take down our crosses, monuments, and restricting our prayers and we're fine with you. We'll pray for you, hope you some day come to see "the light" but if you don't, no hard feelings. Now that is MY view of "tolerance" and I apply that view of tolerance to all people I do not agree with - I love everyone as a fellow man - but disagree with some of their actions.

[dawgfan]

The Bible clearly says "There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the ways therein are the ways of death." Bible means everlasting spiritual death in addition to physical death. God also says "My ways are not your ways." When we disregard the written Word of God then its easy for us to ignore what God's ways are and substitute our own ways, but we do so at our own peril.

In your view perhaps. Your right to believe this is guaranteed by the 1st Amendmant; however, the 1st Amendmant also clearly states that the government of this country is to remain neutral with respect to religion; thus your views are yours, and cannot be officially adopted by this country's government.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

[famatu]

In your view perhaps. Your right to believe this is guaranteed by the 1st Amendmant; however, the 1st Amendmant also clearly states that the government of this country is to remain neutral with respect to religion; thus your views are yours, and cannot be officially adopted by this country's government.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The crazy thing is, all this discussion about the First Amendment and religon is not worth it.

Congress has NEVER "made a law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting th efree exercise thereof." Until they do, everyone who tries to make a point by talking about that very statment you just quoted has no case.

I could be wrong...so if I am, please do link us to ANY law Congress has passed in regard to religion.

[ISiddiqui]

Why the bold of my name?

Cause it's your screenhandle and I'm talking to you.

[stevew]

So, tell me again about the gay books. Some of these sound kind of funny, but not really for kids.

[Franklinnoble]

This thread is gay.

[Frozenrope]

famatu.... go away. If you want to be left alone, then please go away.

Please.

Please.

[wig]

I think someone is just trying to pick a fight.

[CubsFan915]

The crazy thing about discussions like this is that it always seems like there are maybe two "right wing" CHRISTians vs. the rest of the atheists. That may be true and well on a message board but the numbers do not lie. Over 70% of Americans are some form of CHRISTian, whether they are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist...it doesn't matter - basically, over 70% of Americans accecpt Jesus CHRIST as their lord and savior. So in a small discussion forum like this, it might seem like the secularists are on even footing but they are not. Attitudes that are trying to destroy the CHRISTian values of America will not last long. People are starting to understand what is happening and when 7 out of every 10 people is part of the "persecuted" then that makes for a very big backlash that those 3 out of 10 will not be able to put down! Just something to think about....

I consider myself a Christian, even though I'm not a regular churchgoer. I believe that Christ died for our sins. I believe that he will return again one day. That said, I find myself more threatened by the Christian "extremists" (for lack of a better word) than I do the supposed 30% of nonbelievers. It's the unbending refusal to respect anyone else's choices that disturb me more than anyone. The blind acceptance of the Bible as the literal truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth disturbs me.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone still follow Leviticus?

Lev 25:44-47 "Both thy bondmen, any thy bondsmaids, which thou shall have, shall be of the heathen that are round you; of them shall ye buy bondsmen and bondmaids. More over, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with youwhich they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondsmen forever: but over your brethren the Children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor." (authorized King James addition; emphasis as in original text.)

So, if I have a family from out of town that may or may not be Christians, I'll be kidnapping them and taking them to my house, where I'll demand that they clean my house and cook my meals for the rest of my life. Can I count on everyone's support?

Edit: Again, I'd like to express that I fully consider myself to be a Christian. I just find that the people who express the opinion that the Bible is the literal truth conveniently leave out most of Leviticus. when's the last time anyone sacrificed a bull? (And I'm well familiar with the argument that Jesus' sacrifice overrides all of that. I've yet to find that anywhere in the Bible, however, and would appreciate somebody pointing that out. In the meantime, I need to set up my altar, then I;m off to farm country...

[famatu]

I consider myself a Christian, even though I'm not a regular churchgoer. I believe that Christ died for our sins. I believe that he will return again one day. That said, I find myself more threatened by the Christian "extremists" (for lack of a better word) than I do the supposed 30% of nonbelievers. It's the unbending refusal to respect anyone else's choices that disturb me more than anyone. The blind acceptance of the Bible as the literal truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth disturbs me.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone still follow Leviticus?

Lev 25:44-47 "Both thy bondmen, any thy bondsmaids, which thou shall have, shall be of the heathen that are round you; of them shall ye buy bondsmen and bondmaids. More over, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with youwhich they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondsmen forever: but over your brethren the Children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor." (authorized King James addition; emphasis as in original text.)

So, if I have a family from out of town that may or may not be Christians, I'll be kidnapping them and taking them to my house, where I'll demand that they clean my house and cook my meals for the rest of my life. Can I count on everyone's support?

Edit: Again, I'd like to express that I fully consider myself to be a Christian. I just find that the people who express the opinion that the Bible is the literal truth conveniently leave out most of Leviticus. when's the last time anyone sacrificed a bull? (And I'm well familiar with the argument that Jesus' sacrifice overrides all of that. I've yet to find that anywhere in the Bible, however, and would appreciate somebody pointing that out. In the meantime, I need to set up my altar, then I;m off to farm country...

You make a good point and your last paragraph, "Edit: I'd like to express that I fully consider myself to be a Christian" sums it up for you. Yes there are people that CONSIDER themselves to be a lot of things. But not all people who consider THEMSELF to be something actually are. Take that for what it's worth. I'm not condemning you or anything like that - just saying you are what you are.

[Ben E Lou]

Sheesh. Enough!