Who’s the bigot: Christians? Or those attacking them?

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

An article came out yesterday that universally declared anyone who supported Chick-Fil-A, Christians, and believes in the traditional definition of marriage are bigots. No word on if the author felt Obama was a bigot up until a few weeks ago, when he flip flopped on the issue. And no word if the author considers himself a bigot for ostracizing all believers.

The other day, Glenn gave a response on air to an article attacking the owners of Chick-Fil-A as bigots for their support of traditional marriage. Glenn supported the owners, saying that being pro-traditional marriage did not mean you were inherently anti-gay. The author of the article responded by calling Glenn, and anyone who agrees with him, a bigot.

“I would assume that you guys are as well, have been labeled a bigot just because, you know, I say that a sandwich shop really can’t oppress anybody, I’m a bigot, you’re a bigot.  We’re all bigots now,” Glenn said.

“Dan Cathey’s a COO.  He does not command some sort of elite chicken police force that’s grappling down the sides of people’s houses.  He has an ad campaign where cows suggest people eat more chicken,” he said. “Besides the chicken, I don’t think he’s oppressing anybody.”

“We didn’t get into the same‑sex marriage.  We didn’t discuss sexuality at all.  What we talked about was not mentioned in the article.  What was mentioned is that now the year is 2012 and because it’s 2012, all bets are off.  Everything you once believed, everything that doesn’t fit the new and improved belief structure in this country is apparently no longer allowed because it’s 2012.  No punches will be pulled.  If you have a different point of view, it’s okay for you to be ostracized.  It’s okay for you to be ridiculed.  It’s okay for you to be demonized.  Even if you don’t actually say anything hateful, if you don’t even address anything about somebody else’s point of view, you’re a hate monger.”

“Keep in mind these are the same people that hate labels and hate to be labeled.  They are the same people who preach tolerance, yet they have no tolerance, especially for people who have a biblical view of the world.  They preach diversity, but they only want to hear their opinion.  No diverse opinions are allowed.”

“The left has the same problem with the Bible that they do with the United States Constitution. Every time they talk about the Bible, it’s old, it’s dusty, it doesn’t apply anymore. Every time they talk about the Constitution, it’s old, it’s dusty and the thing, it’s just, we’re an enlightened people now. Really? This is what enlightenment looks like? Then I’d ‑‑ I’d like to ask for a little bit more darkness if this is what it looks like in the light. Because look at what we’re doing to each other. Now that we’ve outgrown the cute, quaint little notions of right and wrong, good and bad, evil and righteousness, this is it? And because so many Christians refuse to let go of those crazy notions, we can’t tolerate them anymore. We have to be marginalized and demonized. Their scriptures have to be taken out of context, distorted, and shown how silly they really are in 2012.”

“The only problem, the only problem with the left’s theory is that Christians, the people who really do understand the Bible, still represent about 3/4 of this country. And you know what? I don’t know about you, but I am tired of being misrepresented. I’m tired of being ridiculed. I’ve taken it. We’ve all taken it. The country has taken it. And ‑‑ because we don’t hate people. And, you know, whatever. You want to say that? Whatever. But it’s time it stops. And it’s going to. But not through muscle, not through shutting you down. Just, we’re going to dismiss you now. You’re really pathetic. We’re sick and tired of hearing it, and it doesn’t work anymore. You keep playing your one‑note refrain of hate and bigotry and racism. Actually it’s not one note. Actually I think technically that’s three.”

 

  • w. Parker

    “racism and bigotry” is the liberal’s thing. This is why they constantly accuse others of it. They think they cover their own evils in this way. They accuse someone else of being a bigot. How can they themselves be a bigot at the same time? No, “racism and bigotry” is their prerogative. Racism belongs to the bigots–the liberals. “Racism and bigotry” is a terrifying alarm. It is a moral imperative. It silences all opposition. But the simple truth is, again, liberals are the racists and bigots.
    The world has turned upside down. What was criminal vice in the 1950s — homosexuality and abortion — is not only constitutionally protected, but a mark of social progress…Only in secularist ideology, however, is it an article of faith that all sexual relations are morally equal and that to declare homosexual acts immoral is bigotry…As late as 1973, the American Psychiatric Association listed homosexuality as a mental disorder. Today, anyone who agrees with that original APA assessment is himself or herself said to be afflicted with a mental disorder: homophobia.
    Thomas Jefferson believed homosexuality should be treated with the same severity as rape

  • http://www.artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

    The answer here is simple; look to their words and deeds, as the bigot professes one thing while doing the exact opposite.
     
    When a man states his oppinion, and then he and his business are condemned by the supposedly ‘tolerant preaching’ groups, the evidence is made manifest for all to clearly see. The leftists are the ones who are bigoted, as confirmed by each deed and word they speak. When a tree bears bad fruits, season after season, its a clear indication the tree is bad – thus it is with them…bigots who preach others as bigots.
     
    Support Chic-Fil-A.

    The sandwiches are wonderful.

  • w. Parker

    Snow, getting hungry, think i’ll try out Chic-fil-A tonight….

  • Anonymous

     Our scientific understanding of genetics has advanced tremendously since 1973, in fact our scientific and medical understanding of everything has advanced tremendously since then.  1950s is a bad decade to choose as your example if you’re trying to make a point- the military had just been desegregated, blacks were just now being allowed to play professional baseball, and the civil rights movement was just getting started.
    Just about everything has advanced since 1973 (except the music).
    Citing an old outdated APA diagnosis would be like saying schitzophrenics are all just possessed by demons.  That used to be the general understanding but medical science and the field of psychology knows much more about human brain etc etc

  • Anonymous

     and smart as Jefferson was, he still lived in the late 1700s.  Good for philosophy, not so much for modern science or medicine.

  • Anonymous

    Glenn is right.  It’s not fair to judge or attack religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam…the list goes on) or even promote more radical ideas based on a few lines of text that do not fit the moralities of society today.  You have to understand the times and the culture in which those events occurred in and various rules established.  To take something out of context, not just of the passage but of the world in which it was written and occurred, is wrong and leads to misunderstanding and false conclusions (the biggest victims of this in our country being Islam and Christianity though I’m sure in places like India and Pakistan you can throw Hinduism into that list).

    However, the idea that opposing same sex marriage, particularly as it pertains to the state marriage licenses which is very different than forcing churches to do same sex marriages, is what Christians believe in is very false.  Many many churches support same sex marriage.  Lutherans, Methodists, the Episcopal Church, to a certain extent Presbyterian church, the Alliance of Bapists support legal marriage but are not yet willing to allow same sex marriage services in their churches (which is really the most reasonable stance to take if you oppose gay marriage.) and the list goes on
    Really it’s just Roman Catholics, Jehovah’s witnesses, evangelicals, and Mormons who don’t think gay marriage should be legal.  A decent amount of christians (and groups that tend to favor legislating their morality) but this is definitely not something that can be labeled as a Christian issue, though those who support gay marriage often attack christians as a whole in their criticism just as many who oppose gay marriage claim to have an entire faith on their side.

  • w. Parker

    “The 1950′s is a bad decade to choose as your example”.  What do you know of the 50′s other than some liberal slanted book or program you saw – did you live in the 50′s from which to compare to present day??  It was one of the greatest decades in american history. ”Citing an old APA diagnosis would be like saying shitzo’s are all possessed by demons” – - you idiot, that was not the belief in the 50′s…You, are “ate up” with liberalism.  Your post to Snowleopard, your comment about Jefferson – You don’t even realize it, you’re so brainwashed with liberalistic ideals, you’re nothing but a walking, bumbling liberal robot. If you attend a church that teaches homosexuality is normal and morally correct, it is NOT a Christian Church 

  • Lawrence A Bergeron

    as it says in the bible that this will happen ,ive notice a few things heading our way look back thur history when God Him self took action and a patten has arose ive noticed when the human race has forsaken marriage and sexual immorality has gone crazy its not to long before all hell breaks loose as far as Christians getting misrepresented,ridiculed,shamed, tortured, and killed this has been foretold im in maine and i can see it coming a mile away obama should be impeached if i had a job and my boss watched over my work  and i  did as obama did lets see the company i worked for would be way in the red,the company would have lost a star half of my people would be devided on who makes what heath care would be shot and taxes on the company would be way high,i would get fired for sure and yet obama has done this with the usa
    if he doesnt get out hang on because its going to get rough thats my opinion we welcome yours

  • Anonymous

    Christians need to stand up for themselves. Who cares what a bunch of deviants and degenerates think?

  • Lawrence A Bergeron

    I concur

  • Anonymous

    Chic-fil-a is a successful business with a killer ad campaign. Regardless of the personal beliefs of the owner and his “not open on Sunday” policies, Chic-fil-a makes a great chicken sandwich and the best sweet ice tea on the planet. The chicken nuggets are worth fighting over, and often are, especially when they are served on a catered party tray. I could go on and on about the chicken sandwich, the chicken salad, the chicken soup (guaranteed to cue the common cold), green salads, ice cream and brownies. Chicken biscuits give new meaning to fast food breakfast.

    That being said, this is not about the chicken sandwich. This is about legislating religion and personal life-style preferences.

    Do you think this would be such a big deal if the owner was a Muslim who is against his muslim daughters dating white-anglo-saxon protestant young men? No, I didn’t think so.

  • Anonymous

    So race riots, Jim Crow was all a bunch of crap? What about the Cold War and the constant threat of nuclear war? The 50s were good but they were far from the paradise many people believe it was (it is natural to see the good ole days as much better than today. This is explained through psychology http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/greaseless/201107/the-good-old-days-were-awful , http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/11/why-we-get-nostalgic-about-good-old-games/
    Many people’s ideas of the 50s are clouded by dopamine. Sure some things about the 50s were better but many were much much worse. There is a great episode about the “Good Ole Days” from Penn and Teller’s series “Bullshit” but it’s a 30 minute commitment and I figured you wouldn’t appreciate it.
    With the schizophrenia comparison I used an extreme example to make a point about taking an outdated medical analysis and then whining that it has been changed due to advances in psychology.
    I’m not a liberal I’m a libertarian. My personal moral beliefs don’t affect what I think the laws should be, I would encourage others to follow my morals but I wouldn’t ever want to legally force them to.
    Jefferson was around in 1776, brilliant in Philosophy, but most people knew barely anything about medicine, the human brain, or genetics back then. What they did know medically we have used as a foundation to advance light years forward in an amazingly small amount of time. I hardly think saying Jefferson was a brilliant philosopher but shouldn’t be relied on for psychological analysis is far from an insult.

    and last time I checked you don’t get to decide what is and isn’t a Christian Church, however it is well within your rights to be a pretentious prick who looks down on those who disagree.

    The question isn’t the morality of homosexuality but if the government has any place to deny gay couples of a state recognized marriage. If your for bigger government fine, but personally I like to let be live the lives they want.

  • Karen Berard Ellis

    It doesn’t matter what any of these nut cases think or say; it only matters what God says, and according to the Bible it’s an abomination to God.  And when we draw our last breath, it’s God we will answer to… so who cares what they think or say..
      

  • w. Parker

    You’re a joke! lol..You speak as if you are an expert on the 50′s and you weren’t even an egg at the time.  “Many people’s ideas of the 50′s are clouded”??? It is your head that is clouded – boy.  “I’m not liberal, Im libertarian”, you can call yourself a Martian as far as i’m concerned, but you’re a “liberal” – .Who’s relying on Jefferson for psychological analysis?  We are relying on his wisdon, insight, morality, and exceptional intelligence, as Jefferson was not just a philosopher, he was a scientist, inventor, architectect, philosopher, lawyer, economist, congressman, diplomat, governor, astronomer, musician, etc and could speak Greek, Latin and French by age 9, etc etc…Hey, “I” don’t decide which church is Christian, Jesus does, as he has forbidden the “animalistic behavior”… Were you raised by a pack of Dingo’s??

  • Anonymous

    If you believe there is a God. If you believe that Jesus is the son of God and the third person of the Trinity. If you believe that he was crucified for our sins,died and was resurrected. If you believe that the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God, that it can be taken literally and is the foundation for living a Christian life today. If you accept the entire Bible as God speaking to us, to have a personal realtionship with us and are not a Cafeteria Christian who picks and chooses what scriptures he likes or dislikes , a christian not just in name only because you’re not a Buddist or Taoist or a pagan then you believe that we are living in the Last Days, the End of Days, the end times. Daniel and the Book of Revelation spell out God’s plan for mankind. God has a plan and whether we choose to  believe it or not–makes no difference. It is still going to happen.
    If you don’t believe in the God of the Bible and his son Jesus Christ and have accepted Him as your Lord and savior—Best wishes,good luck just keep in mind eternity is along time to be wrong. If I am wrong what do I loose? If you are wrong what do you loose?
    Jesus never said it would easy to follow him.In fact he said just the opposite. If the world crucified Him why wouldn’t those people want us dead too. All the apostles died as mryters save one. As Paul said “If we live we live to the Lord, If we die we die to the Lord. Whether we live or die we are the Lord’s”  Being a follower of Christ is not for wimps. The secular world has tried to replace God with sex,money,travel,drugs,material stuff, and a host of other things. They have removed God from the schools, the courts, the government, the work place and replaced Him with communism,socialism, totalanism and every other kind of ism—-how has that worked out for the planet?  Look at what is happening all over the world and explain why we aren’t better off. We are suppose to be better educated,smarter,wealthier,healthier,etc than our forefathers 200 yrs ago.
    Solomon said it was all vanity and chasing after the wind. The Roman Empire, the Egyptain Empire, the Greeks, the Persians all vanished. America is not mentioned in Biblical prophecy.

  • w. Parker

    Concerning your rants about homosexuality and genetics, science has yet to find a link in terms of it being a cause of homosexuality, although a common argument is that an inclination to homosexuality is inborn and immutable. It is widely believed that the public will become more accepting of homosexuality if they are convinced that it is inborn and immutable. For example, neuroscientist and homosexual Simon Levay stated: “…people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are also more likely to support gay rights.”  However, a genetic basis to homosexual desire does not prevent homosexuals from choosing not to participate in homosexual activities. So your type want to deceive us to accept homosexuality because you say, with no proof, it is genetic..Read it and Weep – liberal

  • Anonymous

    lets enter your world where your assumptions on choice vs. genetics are correct (and if genetics is even remotely involved then the idea that you can choose what does and does not attract or turn you on is ridiculous).
    In a world where homosexuality is a choice and two people are gay by choice and decide they want to be married. why is that any of your damn business whether or not the state recognizes that marriage? It’s not forcing your church to perform gay marriages, so your religion and morals are hardly being trampled on. We live in a free country, a republic not a democracy ruled by the majority, but a republic which is designed to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority and one of the worst things a country can do is legislate morality (besides if we can legislate Christian morality here then how can we even have a remote problem with Muslims wanting Sharia law in their own countries).
    You should live by your morals but you should not impose them on others, that is not what a free country does.

  • Anonymous

    You quoted Jefferson as an authority on homosexuality which he can’t be considered today b/c of the minimal knowledge any human being had of the workings of the human brain and body. You were relying on Jefferson, and either way what Jefferson thought of homosexuals has no place in this debate, almost all the founding fathers saw blacks as inferior too whites (a fair portion were against slavery but even they didn’t believe the two races were really equals).

    I’m sorry I wasn’t aware you and Jesus had discussed what was and wasn’t Christian. I would have figured he would have mentioned his complete lack of a stance on homosexuality, although Matthew does have him condemning divorce…and I think that’s perfectly legal.
    and last time I checked Jesus doesn’t decide what is and isn’t legal and is more concerned with the actions of individuals than what the government allows.
    I’m not a Christian. I was raised one however I found the idea of the divinity of Jesus unconvincing. While I do believe in God I would not go any further than that in terms of real religious convictions.

  • w. Parker

    You are exactly right, although i look at it this way, perhaps by spreading God’s will, He will take note of it.  The issue is out of control, all the Godless liberals are promoting it on all media, our children are being negatively influenced by it, as well as most of society.  Too few seem to be taking a stand against it.  The Left seem to have effectively stifled public opinion.

  • Anonymous

    I thought a Christian was someone who followed the teachings of Christ.  If a church teaches the truth of Christ,(born of a virgin, died for our sins, raised to life and is now seated at the right hand of God), and ALL He taught while He was here, that would be the definition of a Christian church!!
    SOOOO…. if you are a Christian you do not accept the ideology that being gay is ok. 
    And all those churches you spouted off, Lutheran, Methodists, Baptist, etc., if any of them has accepted the gay life style, they have been led astray and they NO LONGER PREACH the TRUTH of Jesus Christ!  Jesus Himself said that if you preach ANYTHING other than His Word, you are not of Him and are in darkness, and you serve Satan. These churches are no longer Christian.
    Christ-ianity= the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, or its beliefs and practices.
    This is how we decide what is or isn’t a Christian church.
    I do not look down on anyone who wishes to disagree with these statements.  I, with all humility, will just agree to disagree!
    I would add that this is only common sense.

    If in fact our country, making up the United States, was birth on the Christ-ian beliefs, how is it that these same states should be allowed to make gay marriage legal?

    Attacking a businesses practices based on it’s personal beliefs I find to be petty, and hypocritical. 
    Personally I wish we could go back to the time when ALL businesses were closed on Sunday! People used it as their day for family. Now it’s just about getting bigger and more stuff. 
    How many people today sit down for dinner with the family?
    When I was young I knew Sundays meant get togethers with grandparents, aunts,uncles, and cousins. Because they all had Sunday off. 

    NUMBERS 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

     your right God will judge us all as individuals.  We won’t be judged by the laws of our nation and in a free country you don’t legislate morality and you don’t impose your own morals on the rest of society.
    so who cares if it’s legal?  you’ll be fine and it will have no impact on you whatsoever.

  • Anonymous

    Well said dear brother!  Glory be to God!
    NUMBERS 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

     I did not mean to imply everyone was pretentious etc, it was in response to one specific individual.
    Personally I don’t recall Jesus speaking out against homosexuallity, I do know of one part in Matthew where he speaks out against divorce which I believe almost all churchs are ok with. 

    We are a country that was founded on Christian beliefs (but not on the belief of enforcing Christian beliefs, but the morals of Christianity and of the enlightenment movement guide the provisions of the constitution), or at the very least with a Christian flavor.  However, we above all else are a free country and in free countries morality is not imposed on individuals.  If such was the case then many of the social programs in existence now could be justified as the government carrying out christian values and imposing them on the populace.  Personally I believe government has no place in religion and should not be involved in marriage whatsoever- straight or gay. Instead offer civil unions to any two individuals who wish to have one.  If for legal and financial reasons two siblings who live together feel it would be better to have a civil union then good for them.  This keeps the state away from deciding morality.  When government decides morality nothing good happens.

  • w. Parker

    To edwardohare:
    There wasn’t an option to reply to your latest posts. 
    You can argue till doomsday and you’ll never change my opinion, nor will you change God’s.  Almost all my statements to you have been backed up with evidence and God’s word, but on the other hand, yours is but your own opinion.  I never claimed Jefferson was an expert on homo’s.  I never said i spoke with Jesus, smartass, but one has only to read the Bible to figure out how he felt about homo’s.  You’ll never agree, so i say adios, it’s time to move on

  • Sandie

    It is all about lefty loonies trying to castigate conservatives dishonestly. It is all pure BS

  • Anonymous

     we are better educated, smarter, wealthier and healthier…but on a more interesting philosophical note I’ve always been intrigued by the idea of Pascal’s wager which you use in your post.  Wouldn’t it be incredibly facetious and just as bad as not believing and not following the tenets of Christianity as it would be to believe and follow the tenets of Christianity b/c you’re scared of hell and want to avoid negative consequences?  Isn’t it more admirable to be an atheist (which I’m not) and not believe than are any consequences for their immoral actions and in spite of that belief still act just as morally as the best of Christians b/c that would be solely from the goodness of their hearts and not inspired even remotely by fear?

    The question of some of the nastier parts of the old testament and how one holds as strict a belief system as you and still works around them?  Do you eat kosher (pure curiosity I don’t aim to attack your beliefs)?

  • Anonymous

    God is eternal, constrained neither by time nor space.  He cannot be “outdated” and left “in the past”. He always has, is and will be eternally arriving.  Oddly, it is the “progressives” and “forward thinkers” that try to stuff God in a musty box.  The Progressives have constrained themselves, they have nothing better or new to say so they try in vain to destroy Truth and to become Gods.

  • Anonymous

     We invited fear into the world.  We fear because we desire it.

  • Anonymous

     I don’t think the issue with gay marriage is anti-religion at all (although it is undeniably an element).  The issue is more about whether the moral values of some should be legislated on everybody else, which in a free country they never should be

  • Kristi Baillie-Rice

    I bet Chick Fil A’s revenues soar for awhile, especially on Aug 1st.. I cant wait to drive 1 1/2 hours tomorrow just to eat there…

  • Anonymous

     you’ll need to elaborate

  • Anonymous

    Now, I AM confused.  Is it worse to be called a bigot?  Or a racist?   Oh, the choices one has.

    Bigot?  (Even if you’re not.)  Or racist?  (Even if you’re not.)   Guess it’s all in the name.

  • Anonymous

    But in all honesty isn’t that just what the government is in the process of doing right now? NOTHING good is happening with our government as it stands!  It has taken upon itself to determine  what our countries moral standards will be. They are imposing on the populace their anti-christian system.
    One example,  MY tax dollars pay for abortions!  WHY? That is not what the majority want. And, why can’t my tax dollars go to help fund Pro-Life organizations, just as they do Planned Parenthood….JOKE ORGANIZATION!…. As a majority of this country being Christian, the government should be working for us too, right?  But that’s just not happening.

  • http://twitter.com/pogonipnv kay tournay

    everyone remember: Aug 1 is Chick Fil A Day – go get some!

  • Anonymous

    you’re right federal funding should not go to planned parenthood, unless they’re working in tandem on some education project or whatever and even then the funds should not go toward abortions.
    It’s a very similar principle with gay marriage. legalizing gay marriage or just getting government out of the marriage business and into the civil union business creates freedom. You can continue to live by your freedoms, your church is not forced to perform gay marriage and a state marriage has no religious affiliation whatsoever.
    but if you can tell people who can and can’t get married then why can’t money go to abortions? my answer: don’t legislate morality- pro abortion, anti gay marriage etc. let people be free to decide for themselves. no matter what the morality government should not be imposing it on other people. (abortion is more sticky b/c of the question of murder and when does life begin etc and I would not apply this argument to legalizing or banning abortions, abortion is it’s own ball game).

  • Anonymous

    We have been persecuted for two millenia now, but we’re still here.  Newsflash, all you liberal bigots and racists- it doesn’t matter what you do, we’re still not going to go away!  The Pharisees tried, the Romans tried, the Gnostics tried, the Muslims tried(and keep trying, though I don’t know why- they haven’t succeeded in over 1400 years), the French tried during their stupid Revolution, Hitler tried(little known fact- Hitler exterminated over 2 million Catholics and other Christian denominations in his concentraion camps; isn’t it nice how everyone remembers THAT particular slaughter?)……are you getting the picture here yet?  WE ARE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY!!!  Besides, there’s more of us than there are of you, and we” continue to spread God’s Word no matter what, so just do us all a favour and pack it in already, willya?
    And much as I’d enjoy going to a Chick-Fil-A, the closest one is three hours away, and as I’m disabled I can’t drive that far anymore.  Bummer.
    I can recommend a very amusing clip on YouTube about Chick-Fil-A by comedian(Ithink his name is Eric?) Hawkins.  He’s a Chistian comedian and he’s ver funny.  Just type in Chick-Fil-A Song and I’m sure you’ll find it.

  • Anonymous

    Okay, his name is TIM Hawkins, and the video is Chick-Fil-A.  It’s his favorite place.  I hope you’ll check it out.

  • Anonymous

    It depends upon how one defines religion (caused, in part, by massive injections of moral relativity).  The word religion has become so generic as to become almost meaningless.  So-called “Gay Marriage” never occurs despite feelings and desires. While the two parties give the sacrament to each other, the parties do not get to decide on form and matter.  This is where “Gay Marriage” fails and becomes anti-God: it is incorrect form and matter.  It is at this point where some have chosen to stand still, that the word “marriage” has a definition and where as a society this is how they are defined.  Standing still drives Progressives crazy. Progressives will not stand still, they *must* be moving whether it be right, wrong, moral, immoral, constructive, destructive or chasing their own tail.  Woe be to the person that gets in the way.

    To try to circumvent God and keep moving, marriage is being dragged into the civil realm where it becomes very uncivil as many people struggle with their conscience and the definition of right and wrong.

    The laws of government created by these struggling people are the laws of people’s choosing whether it be the populace in general or a dictator.  Consequenty, morality and immorality is legislated all the time.  Freedom is very broad but it is not limitless — no one has the right to do wrong.  Anyone enslaved to wrong is not free.  Freedom and Free Will Choice are not the same.  A free country has limits an enslaved country is “limitless”.

  • Anonymous

     First love Tim Hawkins, you sir have good taste.
    As to the bigger issue why is gay marriage still being debated?  a better question why is government involved in marriage (isn’t it really somewhat in violation of the first amendment)?  Government should not decide who can and cannot get married and shouldn’t be giving out marriage licenses to anybody, marriage should be an official ceremony through a religious or other institution (atheists can have fun weddings too) and the government’s only business should be to give civil unions to those who want them.  It could be essentially the same provisions as a marriage license only open to anyone who thinks it would be beneficial for themselves legally, financially etc (like two siblings who move in with each other and want to combine heath or car insurance or something like that). 
    Government should never be involved in legislating morality, it only leads to messes like this.
    I would also disagree with the idea that christians are being persecuted in this country, I think many traditional christian moral viewpoints that have been turned into legislation are being challenged at the moment and certainly some opposed to the legislation or attempts to legislate will lash out at Christianity as a whole but i would argue most people in opposition just don’t want government deciding morality.
    In terms of the holocaust most people only know about the jews and not the handicapped, catholics, muslim gypsies among others.  though to say Hitler was specifically after christians is innaccurate as most protestants were left alone, just a traditional prejudice of the time against catholics.
    and we’re just not going to go into the muslim thing, the discussion would go nowhere fast and take way too long to have.

  • Anonymous

     Well spoken.It is always nice reading comments from others that hold the true knowledge of what was,what is, and what will be..And to others that might be reading this comment. Until you receive the holy spirit of God your understanding of the bible and way God works is extremely hindered so don’t try to strain your intellectual mind to much or it might break for good,and then your really in trouble.

  • Anonymous

    Say what you want about Chick-fil-A, but I’ve known two people that worked there and say it’s the best job they had.  How many people say that about a fast food place?  They’re clean, cordial, and the employees treat customers well.  They serve high quality food, esspecially when compared to other fast food franchises.  I don’t even eat chicken (though I do love their milkshakes), but I support Chick-fil-A and family-oriented companies like it. 

  • Anonymous

    At the beginning there was no fear.

  • Anonymous

    so then why not drag marriage out of the civil realm?
    If marriage and religion are so close then isn’t government involvement a violation of the first amendment. Why not have civil unions handed out by the government and the sacrament performed by the church? Everyone gets what they want, gay couples get the same legal recognition as straight couples and marriage is left alone. Civil unions could also be useful in other situations if two people living together (lets say siblings and one has a kid or something) and for legal and financial matters life would be a lot better if they had a civil union.

  • Anonymous

     that’s a fairly incomplete answer and really just a nonanswer, obviously you don’t buy into the idea of pascal’s wager.

  • Anonymous

    The words “Civil Union” are not enough, having the same legislated, civil rights as a truly married couple will never be enough.  They will never get what they want.  It is an unquenchable desire to be what one cannot be.  This is the source of Lies.

    Certain people do not want marriage dragged out of the civil realm.   The same people who want “government out of the bedroom” despirately want the government to put them there.

  • Anonymous

    For the most part I agree, the government needs to stay out of our relationships. The government needs to stay out of a lot of things!  BUT…If the government, for now, IS involved with legalizing gay marriage, it WILL become a slippery slope.  If anyone believes that they won’t try to force our churches to perform these marriages, they’re sadly mistaken.  The first time someone is denied, it will begin the first of countless law suits against the churches.
       The Boys and Girl Scouts was founded on Christian principles, but because someones child was gay, they made a stink about it and now the Scouts have had to compromise their values.  A Christian dating site got sued because they wouldn’t process gay applications. Unfortunately they too compromised their values. 
    Your reasoning sounds right, but, if we as children of the living God do not take a strong stand against all that is unholy, who then will we be serving and what will we become? 
    NUMBERS 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

    Well….actually…..I’m a girl, not a guy, but that’s okay.  I tend to be cautious on discussion groups so tend to leave my handle kinda neutral.
    I want government out of all church affairs, period.  For people to have to purchase a wedding license in order to marry is extortion of money from the church, imho.  If people of the same sex wish to have a civil ceremony, in order to have benefits, that’s up to them.  But, they are NOT to have a wedding in a church. That is forbidden by God.  The way this government is going that is what they are working toward, and that is an egregious violation of church and state.
    In regard to Hitler- do you not know that Catholics ARE Christians?  We are the originals.  All other Christian faiths descended from us.  So to say that Hitler was specifically targeting Christians, in addition to Jews is factually correct.  Hitler hated the Catholics as much as he hated the Jews, and don’t think all the Protestants would have gotten off.  Hitler was an atheist.  He wanted NO religion at all.  My general use of the term Christian was my attempt to be diplomatic, as whenever I mention Catholic specifically it seems to set off a nasty wave of hate posts from other denomiations, and as a devout Catholic, I get tired of the sneers and jeers from ignoramuses who do not understand my faith and don’t even want to try.  They would much rather mock what doesn’t quite make sense than ask for clarification.  But as I’ve said, we’ve been putting up with it for two millenia, and we’re still here.
    Believe it or not, my two young nieces turned me on to Tim Hawkins.  It’s so refreshing to hear somene who doesn’t use obscenities or vulgarities in his comedy routine.

  • Anonymous

    By their fruits…

    What fruit has the destruction and disdain for the traditional family and chastity borne? An astronomical number of unwed poverty stricken single mothers, broken homes, unsupervised amoral children, and rampant abortion and sexually transmitted disease. Yep, those are such good, respectable fruits.

  • Anonymous

    Democrats Are The Real Racists! Whatever They Blame Others against/for They Are! They Preach diversity but they themselves are racist…just like say ProChoice but they’re Not Pro-
    Choice They Don’t Want You To Have A Choice,They Want You To Choice Death! Its Pro- Death or Pro-Life! We’re Not An Enlightened People We Are A Dumbed Down Nation…a Nation Of Liberal Laws Not A Nation Of Men!! Take God and Love Out and Hate In…New World Order One World Government of Ameri-topia! Their dream world world where no one is happy and we have a Dictator-in-Chief! Mr Narcisisst-in-Chief!..if Hussein-Osama oops Obama gets reElected
    That is What We Will Have…No More Elections!!

  • Anonymous

    Being gay is not a sin. It’s the act. I truly believe there are people whose brains get wired differently and cannot help whom they are attracted to. It is acting on that attraction that is the sin. And mostly, it is the breaking of God’s law of chastity and virtue.

    I am going to make an analogy here, and y’all don’t read anything more into it. Being a pedophile isn’t illegal. Being an individual with an aberrant attraction to children isn’t illegal. It is the ACTING on that that is morally and legally wrong.

    (DISCLIMER: I am not saying homosexuals are child molesters. I am not insinuating anything even remotely close. I just needed an example that is comprehensible in its simplicity)

  • Anonymous

    yep.We’re Not A Democrat Nation We’re A Republic! They Just Changed,added that party to be like Hugo Chavez Democratic…So WE Can Have A Dictator-in-Chief! They Changed Our Traditions and our History…fundamentally transformed US in the Desert of Liberalism for fourty years…brainwashed US with the respected CommunistNews Network! to the lamestream Media which are not investigative journalists they are teleprompter reading models! and Husssein-Osama oops Obama is actingPrez to turn into the Dictator with the help of his adviCzars! he is the Face(ism)of Evil! they idolize Lucifer…their bible ‘RulesForRadicals’ dedicated to Lucifer! We Are In The Battle Of Good And Evil! Wake Up Republicans before we have no more elections with his reElection! Everyone Get Back To God Before It Is Too Late…God Will Be The Only One To Save US!!in this ultimate battle! God Will Bless America when America Blesses God again!! Know Truth Know God No Truth No God! 

  • Anonymous

    right!I know what you mean. like freewill! He Gives A Choice To Do Good Or Do Evil! well not saying homosexual is evil you’re born that way…but it is not a race. stop playing it as a race card! there are no special services for hetero why for homo? democrats are the racist people. the blacks so they have a card to play we do not see skin color we see the content of character..like Martin Luther King said Al notso Sharpton and Hussein-Obama just Play the race card to get what They themselves want!they don’t want to help blacks they want to use the black people for their own control!!a modern day slavery…Abe Lincoln Freed The Slaves and He was a Republican…Democraps are just out for their control.. of a dictatorship!!

  • Anonymous

    Liberals Are The Racist.Bigots.HateMongers though their words say other!The Left Always Has To Have Their Way! Where Does The Left And Right Come From? The Left And Right Hand Of Christ On The Cross! The Man On The Left Condemned Christ,The Man On The RightBelieved! The Left Doesn’t Believe in God The Right Does Believe In God! The Left Want to Be God.. …Hussein-Obama Even Said He Was Born in A Manger….First He says it than it is so.. say a lie often enough and it seems true… except Hussein-Obama’s bible is RulesForRadicals which is dedicated to Lucifer…so you can figure which god he is…

  • http://twitter.com/SnowOwlFan Herbert Shallcross

    Support free speech! Eat mo’ Chickn!

    Their lemonade is really good, too!

  • Pinago

    Let Chick-fil-a flourish or flush, based on the people supporting it or not. My guess is the majority will support them, and they will be just fine. So let them create new business and jobs in Boston and Chicago and let the people decide.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3VYWIVEIJ6G5GDXTAN2JOCQNEM Bozoe

    I see this as muddy water. Sharia law is still flourishing in the world, so the badly framed stand is poorly chosen. I don’t see Chik-fil-a as imposing it’s values demanding others take their view, that was 12th Century Christianity – the reasons for that are long forgotten or dismissed.

    Thankfully it’s a choice, not an imposition. If people don’t like Chik-Fil-A’s stand, they don’t have to do business there.

  • Anonymous

    if they try to force churches to conduct gay marriages then that would be a losing battle. Many churches are already willing to perform gay marriage and while my current priest won’t perform gay marriages he is more than happy to help gay couples find someone who is willing.
    Boy Scouts still don’t allow gay kids or adults to be involved and atheists are still banned from getting their eagle scout award. Having been in boy scouts I can tell you the gay rule is largely ignored by individual troops as those involved every kid should be welcome and be able to benefit from scouting.
    You can take a stand without imposing morals through the law.

  • Anonymous

    I had lunch at Chick-Fil-A today. It was crowded at 2:15 in the afternoon. 

    I wonder what would have happened if the company was owned by a Muslim instead of a Christian. Would the left boycott an anti-gay Muslim establishment? Or the building of a new Mosque? Not likely. The Chicago area has seen the building of 15 new mosques in the past decade. (Rahm must consider them inline with Chicago values.)  

    When Louis Farrakhan spoke out against gay marriage and against Obama’s “evolved” position, I didn’t hear a peep out of the left. In fact, Rahm has asked Farrakhan to help him fight crime in Chicago. So being against gay marriage isn’t the real reason the left is up in arms against Chick-Fil-A. The real reason is because they’re Christian. The gay-marriage issue is just an excuse the left is using to justify their hatred and intolerance toward Christians. 

  • w. Parker

    Question:  are you going by a different screen than the one you used earlier in the week???

  • Anonymous

    i don’t think so. I had one of these last year but I killed it, i guess it may have switched me back but I shouldn’t have.

  • http://www.facebook.com/elton.robb Elton Robb

    Jefferson wanted Homosexuals to be castrated, to be deprived of their members.  Washington had a homosexual soldier be dishonorably discharged.

  • Anonymous

    Parker he is not ate up by liberalism at all, resorting to name calling because someone doesn’t believe as you do is a liberal tactic, conservatives are supposed to be above this.

    It appears some conservatives are becoming as intolerant as the left, not very Christian is it?

  • Anonymous

    Mr. O’Hare,

    This thread, specifically your comments were recommended to me.  I too have had conversations with PARKER and company and they actually think I am a Liberal-Progessive, when in  fact I am conservative. (Ever read John Stuart Mill?) I suspect the reason for their perception of me is that I can make the case that religious and/or political despotism are equally as dangerous to an egalitarian culture and Nation.

    Moreover, are you aware that your discourse contains elements of a socio-legal theory called “Neutral Principle?” (“neutral principles”)  Originally posited in various of law schools, but lately entering other areas of Western, human interaction.  Such places reason ahead of emotion in codified legislation or adjudication.

    Anyway, from what I read you are a man who prefers reason as opposed to caprice?  You write well and your arguments are solid

    Purveyor of Rhetoric 

  • w. Parker

    Political Correctness Harbors Hostility
    Political Correctness Reflects Narcissism
    Political Correctness Masks Histrionics
    Political Correctness Functions as Instant Morality
    Political Correctness Wields Power
    Political Correctness Serves as Distraction
    Political Correctness Involves Intimidation
    Political Correctness Lacks Alternatives

  • w. Parker

    Who do you think you’re fooling…YOU and edwardohare are one, the same, the identical person who has changed your handle…All one need doing is examine your previous posts on another blog of Glenns – - Mr Philosopher

  • w. Parker

    Why not mind your own homosexual loving business

  • w. Parker

    I posted a question to edwardohare yesterday, on this blog, check it out, hours before your current post if you were going by another handle, and wa-laa…Just look at the posts on Glenn’s blog last week on Michele Bachman.  Now you say “ edwardohare’s thread was recommended to you”.. Right – .Anyone can compare his posts elsewhere on this subject and posts made on Bachman’s subject blog. where he claims he is a philosopher working on his Thesis.  He was criticizing Bachman for pointing the finger at Hillory’s muslim aide, etc

  • Anonymous

    You know, I noticed that, meaning your question to O’Hare. The one difference you will notice is “I” never use profanity or vulgarity to make a point, only in jest and then rarely. O’Hare is a bit more flamboyant in his choice of words.

    As for my thesis/theory I assert the use of neutral principle, meaning the use of consistent process and reason as opposed to emotion. All to often people will profess to being men or women of reason, BUT, “wait until your Ox is gored,” as we all have our pet issues or concerns?

    Law making and adjudicating is full of gored oxen and I’d like change that. The Constitution should be interpreted with a bit more consistency, don’t you agree?

    Purveyor

  • w. Parker

    Could that be because you were criticizing Michelle Bachman for questioning Hillory Clinton’s female muslim aide for possibly leaking classified secrets.  I didn’t like it nor many others

  • Anonymous

    Once again , you paint
    yourself in liberal terms, Parker. You are the one to project liberal derogatory terms onto someone you don’t know.

    What fascinates me, is you profess to be a “devout  christian,” and yet your first inclination is reliance on leftest tactics of derision, assassination of ones character?

    “My way or the highway,” I believe is the term, again a leftest inclination…

    I find it amusing you do this as you definitely know who I am. Homosexual tendencies of either persuasions is not who or what I am.  

    I also live my life according to His Word, yet  feel no need to vehemently run around the threads espousing such?  Passing moral judgement on either Christian (or not) is not our job, it’s Gods.

    So you can get off your moral high horse and allow others to share their views as the 1st Amendment states.

    P.S. I was the one to invite Purveyor to this thread, as you have a tendency to be  wrong in quite a few other instances, your accusations don’t surprise me, Parker.

  • Anonymous

    The “recommendation” was about my being part of a select web-site focused on neutral principle and other socio-legal-political and philosophical thought.
    Dialectic philosophy–questions and then discussion, followed by more questions. (Plato and Socrates would have approved)

    Our group engages in “applied philosophy” whereby we compare and apply philosophy of the past with contemporary issues. Don’t forget, Thomas Jefferson was influenced by the “philosophes” of the enlightenment, such John Locke.

    Purveyor

  • Anonymous

    You are wrong w. Parker, you haven’t a dang clue, with is typical. Who made you the moral Judge on this or any other thread?

    As for the trolls, yes that is a true statement, obviously you’re not well informed enough to tell the two apart, so I suggest you stop with the accusations….for you do know who I am- and I am not Purveyor or Edward O’Hare.

  • Anonymous

    Once again, you project your feelings of inadequacy? If you would read Purveyors “activities” when obviously you have not, you would not be flinging these asinine accusations around. You sir, have become what you purport to abhor-a troll.

  • Anonymous

    Not a chance in Hell, Parker. Wrong as always.

  • w. Parker

    Ok, i’m a painter, if you say so, what are you but a “camouflager” who claims to be christian/conservative but hides their true self.  I can tell you’re a upstanding christian from your hideous photo to the side of our name, not exactly a photo of Jesus!  Someone who lives their life by “His Word” - is someone who takes up for a freak who promotes marriage between homosexuals.  I made a statement originally and it was he who engaged me.  So, any rational person can conclude since you take up for, have an association wth, a person who promotes homosexual marriage, you are no christian, not by my definition.  As far as me “being wrong” on other instances, just proves, again, you are a “fake” conservative, and an immature child calling in “reinforcements” on the issue.  Perhaps i can loan you some paint to better camouflage your true political/spititual intentions.  What christian faction do you belong, to passively associate with someone who promotes homosexuality and passively and liberally points to the 1st amendment as their shield?  Coming from you, it does not at all surprise me that you disagree with some of my other positions, as im conservative – you a liberal.  Some advice:  change your silly photo as it is unbecoming as a christian, in fact it gives the opposite impression  

  • Anonymous

    PARKER,

    You are wasting your time. I am “The Purveyor of Rhetoric” I have always been such, I do not use another name…

    Purveyor

  • w. Parker

    You keep claiming i know who you are.  You’re a “liberal” defending homosexuality.  Are you “fearful” to expose your name??? Lol…See, another large difference between us and your “reinforcements”, i am not fearful.  I say what i mean and mean what i say.  I have no need, as a game-playing child, as you, to change my handle in order to “deceive” anyone. Obviously, you have a guilt complex 

  • The Craig Machine

    Have you ever thought of attending an anger management class? Just a thought.

  • w. Parker

    Hey call in all the reinforcements!  Pal, i’ve seen your idiotic photo and comments before.  Are you proclaiming to be the “devil” from your photo? LOL  Why should i attend an AMC, because i’m defending myself from 4 people at once who promote homosexuaity?  Craig, just a thought, have you thought of changing the photo?

  • Anonymous

    No Parker,

    I will not change my Avatar.

    It was given to me by a friend to “crack the whip” at such as yourself, though she supplied it in jest…and you truly know who she is.

    Unlike liberals, we conservatives are able to laugh at ourselves, and the irony contained within liberals posts
    purporting to represent others? Your whole tirade reeks of liberalism.

    OHara’s post stated not an advocacy of homosexuality, but the role of Government in that capacity to make the distinction of morality. YOU are the one who could not see, for YOU place yourself as judge advocacy for all of us Christians…your interpretation of such, a warped interpretation.

    My church is the United Church of Christ, we own our own “charter”, it’s well over a 150 years old, our congregation is most assuredly Not liberal, practicing
    His word as best we can as imperfect children of God…
    Not casting aspersions on individuals we don’t know- as you do.

    “Coming from you, it does not at all surprise me that you disagree with some of my other positions, as im conservative – you a liberal.”

    Projecting much? Who the heck do you think you are, accusing me of a false charge? You are lying and you justify those lies by invoking Gods name to justify your lies/positions?

    You are the one who does not practice His Word, you are the Liberal in this equation.

    Another point of contention with you, Parker….why do you feel threatened by a cartoon character- my Avatar- which only in your warped mindset has sexual connotations, where do you acquire your information of such, as it never occurred to this christian , except as
    funny animation. .

  • The Craig Machine

     No one is promoting homosexuality here, that is you having a knee-jerk liberal (emotional) reaction to a honest rational discussion. Why do you need the Federal Government to enforce your morality onto others? By doing so you are no better than those you profess to hate.

    I am glad you have seen my comments before because I have seen you racist homophobic rants before and am not impressed. I have yet to see where you meet the definition of being a Conservative. You try to suppress opposing views with irrational name calling and insults. In the freak occurrence that you are right it is for all the wrong reasons.

    Why would I think about changing my avatar when I know it irritates you?

  • Anonymous

    Parker-

    As I truly believe You to be the Liberal, no, I will not reveal my name. For I believe You to be of the Left persuasion, who do not have our interests at heart. Your use of Gods name, and espousal of His Truths are belied by your words.

    I believe you to be one of several others who feed the hysteria concerning this election; instead people use their God given rational minds, you seek to expand on the very real usurpation of our Republic, by fomenting this hysteria- invoking Gods Word, when your very words are a refutation of His message.

  • w. Parker

    “I will not change my avator” LOL  Don’t change your avator!! Let everyone who see’s it along with your liberal posts, know how idiotic you are.  You accuse me of “feeding” the hysteria of the upcoming elections.  You as a liberal surely doesn’t want me to say anything, as you want obama to win.  In your own words “I believe you to be one of several others who feed the hysteria concerning this election; instead people use their God given rational minds, you seek to expand on the very real usurpation of our Republic, by fomenting this hysteria”.  NO, you want conservatives to look at this election like any other, no  – sorry, i will not keep quiet.  Obama and people like you will ruin the country if he’s reelected.  Marsbars7 i will make fun of your avatar.  It is silly, stupid and a joke.  What are you going to do about it – cry?  You silly liberal fool.  I say again, you as well as your so called church is not christian if you all believe in gay marriage.  You are twisted and lost.  IF you weren’t a coward, you wouldn’t have changed your name – period  You and your “avatar” LOLOL 

  • Anonymous

    You are a fool, w.Parker.

    You grasp at straws, pulling from your arsenal of hatred every person YOU as a Bigot, deem to be your inferior.

    Once again, I am not MarsBar, though I have followed your debates, and your descent into vulgarity to press a point from sheer bigotry, and unchristian-like hatred.

    I voted for Mitt Romney last election, so any contention of liberalism is moot. And as I am directly involved with politics, I am in a better position to state my “facts” something I dare say you as an emotional saboteur are not.

  • Anonymous

    I have never read Mill but am aware of his association with utilitarianism, despite what little I do know about him he seems like the kind of guy I would agree with on a lot of stuff. Until now I had never heard of neutral principle but I would definitely be an individual who places reason well above emotion especially in terms of what is to become codified into law and as well as implemented foreign policy.
    I appreciate the kind words.

  • Anonymous

    I am still in college and am well aware that I have much yet to learn.
    My participation in this comments section is in part to expand my education, not just in terms of facts and theories etc but more so into how others think. For this reason I generally try to ask as many questions as possible when beginning a discussion. I understand very well that the internet comment sections tend to bring out the worst in everybody and no matter what I say anyone who disagrees with me will never be convinced.

  • Anonymous

    edwardohare-

    You’ll find Purveyor a reasonable man. A learned man….one I call friend, one I respect. Though there may be some who can not/will not be cordial, there are others of us out here who share a different view.

    I dare say a closer view aligned with our Founders original intent?

  • Anonymous

    I have a friend/client who’s grandsons education she is entrusted with. He is also a seeker of knowledge; #2 in the Nation, has met with variety of individuals as part of his achievements, not the least of which is Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Rush, Buckley and many others.

    Others, not necessarily Conservative in all aspects, yet Constitutionalists he seems to be drawn towards?

    He also relies on logical debate, for it eliminates largely the emotional aspects, which tend to veer off into irrational debate?

    This is what I noticed about your posts, Edward, and why I called attention to it to my friend Purveyor.

    Though we don’t always see “eye-to-eye” there is no animosity, a true sense of Freedom, more in line with what our Founders intended?

  • Anonymous

    That is one very impressive list. My own includes…Pete Rose (a hero in a very different realm). I couldn’t agree more with everything you’ve just said. When emotions get involved people become more convinced and extreme in their positions and unwilling to change as their understanding of the facts change. The discussion devolves into winning vs. losing instead of coming to an understanding of different world views. One of the more depressing things I see during any big election year is people cheering for their parties like it’s a sports team (for this reason myself and a few of my friends are doing a fantasy elections league). Even our founders who disagreed with each other on many things and even at times held a healthy dislike of one another (John Adams with any number of people would be good examples) they still all respected one another even if they weren’t always civil about it.

  • w. Parker

    Your own statement about Romney – “A man I voted for the last election cycle, but have educated myself on since that time period.”  One has only to look at your previous post to see in your own words that Romney is no different from Obama, according to “YOU” yet you say in your most recent post “you voted for him in the last election”, short of saying you’ll vote for him again.  You’re a liar, deceiver and coward.  You bring up the 1st amendment describing others on this subject and their right to disagree with me, but when it comes to my 1st amendment right, you attempt to stifle me or like most liberals refer to me as a “bigot” – a liberals defense.  You’re a liberal and inconsistant, twists and uses the constitution to your advantage and think you know more than everyone else.  A real hot shot nerd on the computer.  I could care less who the hell you are, really…Your twisted kind will only be pleased of Thomas Jefferson himself or R Paul were president and you lied and won’t vote for Romney.  So, you’re irrelevant.  With your type government our culture would evaporate over night into a lawless, anything goes, and i mean anything, country. Muslims would run wild along with homo’s, drug addicts, criminals, etc  Within a year it would be complete chaos.  You speak of your facts.  What “facts”?  You’ve given only opinion.  You’ve lied out right.  Why should i believe anything you say.   

  • Anonymous

    First off: Pete Rose! Cool

    Second, it may be two fold…for as Americans, we are a competitive bunch… factor in the natural inclination towards group think (pack mentality) and a natural inclination to conform, well…you end up with ones who get caught up in what I deem “one-up-man-ship”
    they get so caught up in the “game” of winning, they forget the core of the issue, though they tend self-denouement?

    This doesn’t factor in ones who have a vested interest in a particular candidate…

    Emotions running so high, fueled by fear and fed by individuals who prey on these fears for a multitude of reasons, (whether obvious or not) can alter the scenario whereby others who would normally be receptive and interactive sharing ideas to accomplish a
    a common endgame are forced to the defensive which is counter-productive to achieving a desirable outcome.

    Human behavioral characteristics not with-standing, isn’t this reason, logic should rule the day instead passion, caprice and subterfuge? The issue is beyond trivial idiosyncrasies, this is our Nation at stake, better to think with clear-eyed judgement than obstreperousness!

  • Anonymous

    Parker,
    You are the one who refuses to see, I actually worked in the trenches to elect Romney. I Voted for him, and held my nose at McCain, yet Voted for the same corrupt system that has not our Republic at heart.

    You are the one who resorts to name calling, denigrating my, and others opinions. I could list the adjectives, but would serve no purpose and be redundant.

    My objection to your posts are: you attack other posters who are conservative but don’t meet YOUR expectations of a Conservative. You are the first to attack, using language unbecoming of a Conservative- you are a Bigot, and a liberal cloaked in conservative clothing.

    Sorry Parker, your insinuation that Ron Paul would be my choice is absolutely false- he advocates anarchy. I sure as heck wish Thomas Jefferson was our President, or Newt, or Ronald Reagan- who I voted for.

    Romney has been introduced to us as the lesser of two evils, in that the contrast with Obama’s in-your-face Marxism makes Romney’s Fascism seem tame. He has a record for all to witness and you refuse to view such…which exactly mirrors Obama’s.

    I can’t be a liberal Parker, I will vote Conservative, but I will also NOT vote to continue the steady course this countries citizens are willing to settle for…you are the one who chooses to abandon our Founders- not me.

    I am a Constitutionalist…a registered Republican and by God in heaven I will not be a party to the destruction of my country by voting for a man who will allay your fears, and still march towards our ultimate destruction- while you breath a collective sigh of relief, and let down your guard having forsaken your duty as a citizen to protect and defend her.

  • Anonymous

    edwardohare-

    I forgot to ask, if I may?

    “for this reason myself and a few of my friends are doing a fantasy elections league”

    I’m interested, I know of a few others that may be as well.
    Generally my bets go to The Wounded Warriors Project, yet if memory serves me correctly, there may be added incentive such as beverages? LOL

  • Anonymous

    OK,  I can accept your list with little reservation.  Is such a product of your mind or did you find it while reading?  (attribution/quotation?)
    Respectfully, I might add “contextual” and “perception” to the list?

    Remember, I am a philosopher, I ask questions:  But, is there an objective, “neutral” concept of “political correctness?”  If so, how could those concepts, (principles) be found?  

    Through prayer, through the whim of a despot, or even misguided Judge?

    “When I was back there in seminary school, there was a person there who put forth the proposition that you can petition the Lord with prayer”   (Jim Morrison)

    Purveyor

  • Anonymous

    EDWARD, (Any relation to Butch, the Navy CMH recipient?)

    Mill’s essay “On Liberty” was one of my inspirations in undergrad. He was a bit of an iconoclast or recalcitrant in his time. He was, in my estimation, the father of Libertarianism. He was vehemently opposed to the temperance movement, but, at the same time a strong proponent of women’s suffrage.

    MIll wanted a “compelling social interest” to be met before morality was applied to codified law. His essay, “On Liberty” is a short, easy read, propelled by the fact that you likely will find yourself inspired, too.

    Purveyor

  • w. Parker

    All one needs to do is click your childish/outlandish “avatar” and look at your comments on Romney.  You’re trying now to crawfish from what is clearly obvious.  Did you read my opening post about the “bigot/racist” pointing?  You fall totally within that catagory.  You call me a bigot because i’m stating first, it is an animalistic sexual practice that is sick, second, because it is a sin, and third, because you approve of the practice, which makes you a liberal and unchristian.  It is as Glenn created the title, “Who are the Bigots, the christians or the people who are calling them Bigots?” You and your silly, liberal “college kids” who have monopolized the blog for your own personal social BS who are the bigots.  I will not debate you on such an obvious liberal notion – to defend homosexual behavior/marriage is a “liberal” stand.  What don’t you understand? Rather than continue to flap your gums about me being a bigot, can you give examples?  Name calling without evidence to back it up is another liberal tactic.  You are all mouth, without any evidence to back up your claims, because so far it is just your “word” and so far your word is proven not to be worth the energy you put forth to type your lies.  Also, this is not intended to be a social network media for you and your geek friends to chatter about daily events – everything other than the subject matter  

  • w. Parker

    The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.
    The Second Law of Philosophy: They’re both wrong
    Question: What is a recent philosophy Ph.D.’s usual question in his or her first job?Answer: “Would you like french fries with that, sir?”
    “Petition the Lord with prayer” – those are lyrics in a song by the Doors – yet you say someone proposed that question in seminary school. – you are a liar and BS artist – along with being a failure in life (a philosopher)  i make more money in one year than you will in a life time.  I have a “job” i’ve been to college, graduated long ago.  What’s your excuse

  • Anonymous

    As you know nothing of Purveyor, your character assassination carries no weight, for is based in ignorance of his accomplishments, of which you could only aspire to, Parker.

    You are so quick to paint a person as liar, unaccomplished; yet You in your vaulted opinion of yourself, are placed above and beyond others who you perceive as more? Envy is at root of your continued denigration of someone you could not possibly know.

    Once again you resort to a Liberal tactic of smear and besmirch for you are unable to carry on a debate without using this time worn tactic of the ill-informed and possibly uneducated.

  • w. Parker

     ”religious and/or political despotism are equally as dangerous to an egalitarian culture and Nation.” Are you comparing our religous culture and norms to Stalin’s form of government?  You’re quick to seek the shelter of the Constitution, yet you claim our founders were “out of touch” with present day culture.  You can’t have it both ways.  Who then chooses what’s acceptable – people like you where anything goes?  What about the 80+% of christians who make up the majority of this society?  What do you think or want our society to be, a gigantic hippy commune where anything goes, sex in the street/mud, drugs sold on street corners, and to hell with religion and social norms which has existed for 200 years?  You, like obama, want change alright – for the worse.  You want…you want…and you criticize…Have you ever done anything constructive for society to better it or defend it such as becoming a member of the military – i have, so that freaks like you can tear it all down and belittle it through your socialistic philosophy.  This is not a social network site to discuss with your little nerdy friends anything but the subject topic.  Take it elsewhere – get a life/job

  • Anonymous

    Well Parker, as YOU have now educated me and others on what you know of the supposed Avatars meaning to YOU, is more a reflection of where your mindset resides? lol

    You project a bias of college educated posters, I question your continued assault on posters who may possess a modicum of higher education and strive to continue to learn of the world that surrounds them; is not this what Glenn asked of us? Or Reagan: “Trust, but verify…”

    Glenn is a news and “social network” site for like minded citizens to expand on their world, to better understand the events that govern their lives, you have the temerity to say how others may post? Who appointed you judge and jury? What/who gives you the right to place importance on who/what is to be discussed? You directly reflect the topic of this thread, Parker.

    You won’t/can’t debate the topics, for you are blinded by your sense of self-righteousness, passing judgement on others when you could not possibly know how they think…you discard my/others words to the contrary in your zeal to paint us as bigots, homosexuals, all the many labels YOU place on them.
    Your continued deprecation of others is a direct reflection on YOU.

  • Anonymous

    “religious and/or political despotism are equally as dangerous to an egalitarian culture and Nation.” Are you comparing our religous culture and norms to Stalin’s form of government?

    1: a belief in human equality especially in respect to social, political, and economic rights and privileges.

    2:a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people.

    Since you have a college education, you should understand Purveyors original intent? Or do you choose to to remain obstinate in your interpretation of his actual words, Parker? You are displaying an extraordinary penchant for cognitive dissonance, the hallmark of a bigoted Liberal?

    Are you now going to enter a phase of your dialog whereby you converse on a pleasant field of thought? This would be the wiser choice, for you are painting yourself into a corner, Parker. By your very own words.

  • Anonymous

    No relation, mainly b/c edward o’hare is not my real name, however, I did choose that as a screen name b/c Butch’s story and that of his father Easy Eddie is one of my favorites.
    I may have to move that to the top of reading list, especially since it’s short.

  • Anonymous

    Unfortunately this is a very unsophisticated effort and will likely involve myself and a few friends sitting in a common room in october with an excel sheet to do the draft. However, I’d be more than glad to give you the format I’ve come up with so far.
    Haven’t decided yet how big rosters should be and maybe even have say 45 roster spots and 20 starters. Semantics I’ll work out once I get back to school and can talk about it with my suit-mates.
    My intention is on election night go to the pub where the college democrats and republicans will each be cheering on their own parties and we’ll be sitting their with spreadsheets cheering for whoever happens to be on our roster.

    House of Representatives- 1 pt given or taken away for percent gap for or against.- all 435 seats up for grabs (will need a cap here)
    Senate- 4pts given or taken for “ “- 33 of these (can probably draft for all of these)
    Gubanatorial- 10pt given or taken “ “- 13 of these- 11 states, two territories (count as half? Or maybe same)
    All doubled if winner beats incumbent ( so positive x2 if you pick non incumbent to win, -x2 if you pick the incumbent to win and he loses).
    X10 if independent or third party ( maybe Joe Lieberman doesn’t count or he just becomes the automatic number 1 overall pick)
    We draft everyone running in these capping it at X number (30?)
    Or come up with some sort of starting lineup deal

    Presidential- each state is worth 5 pts if you guess correctly.
    10 pts for picking winner
    5pts if margin of victory (percent wise) is correct.
    Also each draft 1 independent party that’s not the libertarian or green party (clear advantage so not a good tiebreaker) as tiebreaker or we could give it a pt value for whoever’s party gets most total votes. (obviously not feasible if a large group is participating)
    Draft in October and fill out electoral maps.

  • Anonymous

    A side note to the over all point, I’ve always found it somewhat amusing in a sad way that people tend to complain about politicians not being willing to compromise, get pragmatic, and work together to get things done and yet as soon as they do compromise they are labeled a DINO or a RINO and tend to get eaten alive.
    It is also a bit humorous to see all the bad things people say and level about politicians as a whole for the way they campaign and blatantly pander for votes, but frankly it’s our fault. If it didn’t work than the politicians wouldn’t do it.

  • The Craig Machine

    By all means Parker, keep ranting away. You are only proving to the world that your arguments are not based in reason but emotion…….hardly Conservative.

  • The Craig Machine

     Really Parker?

    Let me enlighten you if that is even possible. First if you will notice the quotation marks around: “When I was back there in seminary school, there was a person there who put forth the proposition that you can petition the Lord with prayer”, that means whatever is in those quotation marks is a quote, which is then attributed to the author (Jim Morrison) of the Doors. I am glad you recognized that it is lyrics to a song by the Doors but what you failed to remember is that “When I was back there in seminary school, there was a person there who put forth the proposition that you can petition the Lord with prayer” is the very first verse of that song, not Purveyor saying when he was in seminary school.

    Are you sure you went to college?

  • Anonymous

    The only time I apply the R.I.N.O./D.I.N.O. label is when either side works actively (whether by knowingly or unknowingly) against the oath they took to uphold the Constitution/Bill of Rights. At that point they Are the problem.

    I believe if we were to return to “the people” remembering WE are the Government, righting much of what has contributed to our decline, through apathy?

    We wouldn’t find ourselves in this predicament.

    We have allowed the ones we elected to represent our voices, (trusting them to do the right thing) instead doing our due diligence as a citizen to follow up on what we thought they were doing, instead what they tell us they are doing.

    Human nature being what it is, this is a “no brain-er.” For our Nation to have arrived at this juncture is the fault of “the people” we are the Government, not the other way around.

    The solution resides in our collective voices rising in opposition to the totalitarianism we find ourselves on the brink of.

  • w. Parker

    I paint pervert and yourself a liar, because you both are.  Is pervert unable to answer his replies and you must do it for him?  Just how well do you know one another LOL.  Obviously when i catch one of you in a lie,  the other takes over in an attempt to distract.  “My vaulted opinion of myself”? LOL Look at yours and perverts comments!!  Plato might not approve LOL  You, and your ”avatar” which is meant to give others the impression you’re into leather and whips, along with your feminine attributes.  You, oharry and Plato, the 3 liberal stooges are the only one’s advocating homosexual marriage on this subject blog.  You speak of a debate – when you avoid my questions, and each stooge answers questions for the other.  What’s the use continuing.  You’re 3 homosexual loving losers without even a job.  The 3 nerds sit behind your computers in the safety of your college dorm.  You’re so fearful you change your name to disguise yourself. What happened you got into too many altercations with others because of your liberal views? Why would you change your name then LOL – coward.  Homosexuality is sick and anyone who defends their rights are liberal, and you sure are going out of your way to do so.  If you care for the constitution, why aren’t you “man” enough to join the military to defend it?  They now allow homosexuals in the military  

  • Anonymous

    This is going to be a fun and entertaining election, regardless the seriousness?
    This spreadsheet also serves to engage others,
    in this way everyone participating?

    Humor is a trait we could also use more of… traditionally a hallmark of conservatives? Though my brother belies this observation unknowingly, obliviously not recognizing his idea of being informed is “Dancing With the Stars” – seriously. LOL Also an Obama supporter…yet we love him anyway, LOL.

  • The Craig Machine

    Parker, when will you be man enough to admit you are a bigot and racist of the highest order? What are you doing besides sitting behind the safety of you computer hurling insults at anybody who you disagree with? Your attitude and “philosophy” (if you can even call it that) reek of fascism/Nazism. You think only your views should be protected and all others illegal. You may be a sorry excuse for a Republican but you are no Conservative.

  • w. Parker

    Hey mr freak with a freak “avatar” LOL  Pervert said, “There was a person ”there” (any rational, non-pervert would conclude there was a person “there” – at the seminary school) who put forth the propsition that you can petition ….for a baloon head supposedly working on his thesis could write better.  He didn’t say “while at the seminary school, i heard a song by Jim Morrison…..”  When i was “back there” in seminary….is improper english anyway, mr critic.  If i’m a man – you are a liberal cowardly ”punk” with an avatar of a moron to prove it.  Call me a fascist/nazi because i stand againt homosexual marriage? LOL  Well, can i conclude that you are also a homosexual?  look pal, i would prefer i wasn’t behind my computer speaking to your weasly ass.  You understand that, clearly.  Like i said, i wouldn’t be seeking to meet a female with that freakish devil of an avatar – LOL, then again you probably don’t have any desires for a female

  • The Craig Machine

    And what exactly would you do if you were not sitting behind you computer talking to my “weasly” ass? Entertain me with your hysterical body language?

    You remind me of a little pig called “Squeeler” I read about in a book……… or was it the sheep that ran around bleating “Four legs good, two legs bad”?

  • w. Parker

     My character assassinations – LOL i have not used one curse word little baby – sissy – momma momma  How will you make it in the real world defending homosexuality standing in front of someone? You’ll clam up without saying a word or run like a bat out of hell LOL…Why do you avoid the military question LOL Momma can’t accompany you? or they wouldn’t have you 

  • Anonymous

    Lol Parker you are coming unhinged. Your whole diatribe is a reflection on you and is not worthy of response.

    As Purveyor is busy with his brand spanking new Bloodhound, and as I also know he utilizes “no comment” when a reply isn’t germane nor worthy of reply-for veers off into “La La Land?” Is not surprising he has not responded.

    You are amusing, for others here know who I am, and also know you are the one fixated on homosexuality?

    You refuse the evidence of my words and claim your own as truth, “me thinks you doth protest too much,” Parker.
    Or you truly are as I say…

  • Anonymous

    Good grief, Parker! Are you to paint everyone who disagrees with you as homosexual? Lord, get a grip, man.

  • Sandie

    Looks like you have a shallow minded humanoid there, possibly afflicted with the same disorder as Victor Tiffany.. . good luck with him.

  • Sandie

    LMAO . . . as Purveyor would say . . . OUCH!

  • Anonymous

    Parker-

    You really are clueless aren’t you? I know you won’t appreciate the irony of your words, but Lord you provide loads of fodder, and genuine laughter at your attempts to subjugate and/or appeal to my masculine pride, HA HA HA HA.

    It won’t work for I am very secure in who I am, the question : “Are you?” LMAO

  • Anonymous

    PARKER,

    Are you responding to my comment about your list? (which I liked) If so I fail to see where you engaged me in any meaningful dialogue related to my post, even the “list”? Anyway, it seems you owe somebody a letter because you sent the wrong one to me…

    Note: Your question about comparing “Our religious culture and norms to Stalin’s form of Government,” was germane to my post. However, the “comparing” was of religion in general, not just American religions. Also, I referenced “despotism” in general not just the “Man of Steel’s. The Divine Right of King’s and Socialism/Communism have both been responsible for despotic behavior including conquest and murder.)

    Isn’t it obvious from a simple perusal of America’s Governmental treatises, that the Founders desired REASON as a legal predicate, as opposed to the whim of a King, Pope, or Dictator?

    Purveyor of Rhetoric

  • Anonymous

    PARKER,

    JIm Morrison was the lead singer/songwriter for the Doors. The quote regarding “seminary school” was off the album and song of the same name–”The Soft Parade.” (Note: This would be an appropriate place to say something nasty to you, but…)

    Furthermore, I always attribute my quotes as properly as possible. I asked you about your “list,” whether it was yours or the product of another? You declined to answer my rather benign query, hence, I ask who is the actual BS artist?

    Finally, you are an unpleasant individual to attempt a conversation with. You appear defensive to the point of paranoid and I do not say this as pejorative, only an objective observation. Ergo, I will most likely decline to engage you in the future.

    Allah u Akbar, or whatever turns you on?

  • Anonymous

    BONES,

    If I didn’t know better, I’d have to say Parker is trying to funny? “Character assassination,” (Maybe you should have said “cast aspersions?” LOL) but really, “Character assassination” and profanity/vulgarity are NOT mutual requisites?

    Heck, you and I have been assassinating Parker’s meager intellect for two days… LOL

    Purveyor

  • http://www.barackobama.com/ Nut Romney

    Both

  • w. Parker

    I have thoroughly enjoyed the engagement.  I’ve enjoyed each and every and every time you willingly took the bait as any unsuspecting mouse.  How much of your time has been devoted to me? LOL! Stop, and think about it.  Now who’s lacking the intellect?  What would you think about engaging someone investigating internet crime (hackers, people who initiate viruses, etc)?  

  • Anonymous

    NO COMMENT

  • The Craig Machine

     Changing your posts now Parker? That is not very ethical now is it? You have proven yourself a man of no honor.

    Thankfully I still have a copy of you original post:

    “Hey mr freak with a freak “avatar” LOL  Pervert said, “There was a
    person ”there” (any rational, non-pervert would conclude there was a
    person “there” – at the seminary school)
    who put forth the propsition that you can petition ….for a baloon
    head supposedly working on his thesis could write better.  He didn’t say
    “while at the seminary school, i heard a song by Jim Morrison…..” 
    When i was “back there” in seminary….is improper english anyway, mr
    critic.  If i’m a man – you are a liberal cowardly ”punk” with an avatar
    of a moron to prove it.  Call me a fascist/nazi because i stand againt
    homosexual marriage? LOL  Well, can i conclude that you are also a
    homosexual?  look pal, i would prefer i wasn’t behind my computer
    speaking to your weasly ass.  You understand that, clearly.  Like i
    said, i wouldn’t be seeking to meet a female with that freakish devil of
    an avatar – LOL, then again you probably don’t have any desires for a
    female”

    Parker you are no Conservative, you are an ignorant racist masquerading as one. 

  • w. Parker

    You have a very hard head.  You just don’t learn very well. LOL. I think it was real innovative of you to repost my comment – I’m throwing your a peanut, you little monkey.  To repost a rather degrading msg, to you is rather funny and kinda dumb. lol  If you knew who you were typing to, you’d crap in your panties, lol.  Ms Craig - bring it on, as i’m on salary while chatting with you

  • The Craig Machine

    I know exactly what kind of person you are “Parker”. You are an ignorant racist with as much class as a primate throwing feces. Once again you have tried to throw a thin veil over your “subtle” threats. Your use of fascist tactics to try and coerce me into silence proves everything I have said about you: You are no Conservative, you are a fascist thug that is continually wrong.

    I would like to thank you for warning me that I should be scared of you and how a rational person such as yourself might view me as a threat all for exercising my First Amendment Rights. Your threats will justify my use of Deadly Force in protecting myself if I ever do have the misfortune of ever meeting you. You really do have me scared for my life w. Parker, I live in fear now because of you.

  • w. Parker

    In spite of your stupidty, Mr Romney will become our next president.  What do you have to say about that?

  • The Craig Machine

     If that is the case, then why are you wasting your time defending and campaigning for Romney? Why bother to try and refute what I say if Romney is going to be our next president anyway? By the way, nice attempt at subterfuge, but it doesn’t negate the facts about you.

    1. You are a racist and bigot.

    2. You have fascist tendencies.

    3.  You try to threaten and or intimidate people whom
    you disagree with.

    4. You have gone back later and altered your posts in an attempt to re-write the history.

    You are no Conservative, you can’t hide what you truly are Parker.. So please, start being honest with yourself and stop this unsuccessful charade of yours..

    PS: Since you asked, if Romney wins don’t expect anything to change, things are only going to keep getting worse while people like you think they saved this country. Romney and Obama are but two sides of the same coin. That’s what I have to say about that.

  • Anonymous

    I know, it is crazy. As a mom to three young men in scouts, I am being called “bigot”, “hater”, “intolerant” because I do not want my three sons exposed to this lifestyle in the scouting program. I was accused of being “afraid”… I told them I was not afraid, but against what this movement is trying to do to America, our children, our families. They want us to take this lifestyle as the “new normal” and that it is “OK”….the Bible is clear, OLD and NEW Testament. It is a sin. Black is black. You can not even rent a children’s cartoon movie without an “accidental” kiss between two male characters in the movie, A CHILDREN’S MOVIE!  It is disgusting.  They accuse me of hiding behind the cross. Well, in actuality I AM hiding behind the Cross of Jesus! All sinners saved by grace are! :)