TEN THINGS I BELIEVE...in no particular order
“If there is a Hell....the Rev. Fred Phelps had best not die.” (Go ahead, google the name of this sad human being)
“If gays want to marry.... I'm thinking leave them alone.”
“I support the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.... and believe it will happen within the next ten years.”
“The cost of gasoline.... will plummet at least three months before elections.”
“United Flight 93, the movie....left me shaken to the core and angry.”
“There will come a time....in the not-too-distant-future, when many of these big beautiful houses in the affluent suburbs where I live will be left desolate and in disrepair.”
“Someone will blow up.... the nuclear reactors in Iran.”
“Receiving a “bridge and crown”.... is not a fun procedure.”
“A third-party candidate.... could very well be elected as the next president of the United States.”
“Maybe the answer to world peace....is a good dentist, for so many of these terrorists truly have bad teeth.”
05.15.06 (12:46 pm) [
edit]
posted by:
kowalski (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:21 am)
I reckon we should take warning labels off everything and let the problem sort itself out.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:24 am)
Reply to: kowalski
Warning labels, I think, are O.K. "Cease & Desist" orders from the federal government are my problem.
posted by:
rheeb (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:40 am)
On your second point, are you for gay marriage or not? And, on your first point--THAT GUY IS HORRIBLE!!! And, since hell is real, I hope he gets his act together.
posted by:
Misguided (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:47 am)
This world we live in has changed bottom line..as for gay's marriage i am for it...why do i care if 2 men marry...it might not be how things should be but alot has changed same goes for women if they choice 2 live there lives together then so be it..i live my life the way i want it so why would i judge on someone else life...
posted by:
babe4jesus55 (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:53 am)
I like your last one there. Made me *giggle* and nod in agreement.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (12:26 pm)
Reply to: rheeb
You ask me if I am for gay marriage? No. I believe gay marriage is sinful, self destructive, and negative for society. But I do not think it is the responsibility of the federal government to oppose it. It is the job of the church. I don't want the government doing the church's business.
Here's a good quote from Thoreau, "For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, there is one striking at the root."
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (12:34 pm)
Reply to: Misguided
I think you and I have the right to consider a matter of behavior, measure it according to what we believe to be a right standard, and decide if it is good or bad. I look at the gay lifestyle, measure it by the teachings of the Bible, and conclude that it is wrong. That is the right, and I think one of the roles of religion, to seek a behavior that is in line with a higher standard (God). I just don't think such is the role of government.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (12:37 pm)
Reply to: babe4jesus55
Catch a picture of this Mutada al Sadr (I am sure I butchered the spelling). Of course, I guess if your great aim in life is to blow yourself into tiny little bits, then oral hygiene does not much matter.
posted by:
rheeb (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (12:40 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Oh ok. I agree with you 100% :)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (3:56 pm)
Reply to: rheeb
Just on this issue, I presume. Nobody should agree with me 100% on everything! Heck, I even disagree with myself sometimes.
posted by:
ottomanprang (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (7:49 pm)
Fred Phelps...one sick little rodent.
posted by:
Kiwi in Zurich (
reply)
post date:
05.15.06 (9:43 pm)
Hello PastorDave
I've been in a gay relationship with the same chap for the last 8 odd years I guess, and have been married to him for the last two years. Marriage ensures that I we are both protected by the law in the event that something happens to one of us. Isn't it the role of the state to protect its citizens and provide them with rights. Surely then it is the role of the state to provide rights of marriage to its citizens. I accept you base your beliefs about gay lifestyles on the bible, but, putting God aside for a moment, I don't really see how my lifestyle is self-destructive (yes if turning my back on religion and the bible is self-destructive, by your definition, then I suppose I see what you are saying...but I'm interested in a secular rather than religious response to your statement if you care to provide one).
KiZ
posted by:
graceshaker (
reply)
post date:
05.16.06 (6:44 am)
im thinking im no better and no worse than fred phelps. its ez to look at his antics and make statements about how evil or sad or sick he is but i know myself all too well to think im in any way innocent or ultimately any different than this man - bc me and fred both need a savior.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.16.06 (7:31 am)
Reply to: graceshaker
Two issues here:
(1) You have a great need for the grace of God, just like Phelps,..."For all have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of God" - Romans 3:23. So, you are not better than Phelps in your need before God.
(2) I would hope that you are a man of better character than this person. Would you picket the funeral of a soldier, who died in service to his country and happened to be gay, and hold a sign saying something to the effect "this man was a fag and he is now in Hell"? If so, then you are a sorry human being. But I suspect you would not. You have a sense of decency, kindness, empathy, etc. that would compel you to act in a more Christ-reflecting way. I think most people are better than Fred Phelps. Thank God.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.16.06 (11:48 am)
Reply to: ottomanprang
Rodent - fitting word
I think there is a neded place for conservative activism, even active protest against such hot button issues as those opposed by Phelps. But he goes too far with his religion, appearing to relish in his perception that those who believe and live differently from himself will go to Hell. Is he the great and final determiner of all things godly? I think he is an insult to the true church.
One time, I had a church in Pensacola interviewing me for a pastorate. They told me that, every year, there is a large scale gathering of gays for a gay-pride-event. I was asked how I would want my church to handle the matter. I was told that some churches have protests, and "witness", and boycott the beach on those days. I told them that we could, perhaps, set up a booth on the beach and give out free water and refreshments. Maybe the church could invite everyone to attend their church on that particular Sunday. I told them I didn't think confrontational condemnation was an appropriate way to change the heart of another person. That church voted not to extend a call to me as pastor.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.16.06 (12:16 pm)
Reply to: Kiwi in Zurich
I appreciate your visit, and your thoughtful reply. Let's see if I can reply with the same kindness and honesty.
I think CS Lewis, in Mere Christianity, has a proper understanding of the marriage contract. He writes that the church should not force it's understanding of marriage upon the state. Therefore, there should be two types of marriage commitments, secular and religious. If the church performs a wedding, then the parties involved should clearly understand and commit to their understanding of marriage. So I believe as a conservative and evangelical Christian that it should be entirely within my right to define marriage according to my understanding of the Bible and my faith. Since I believe marriage is to be a contract before God, specifically to be between a man and woman, I would want my church to define marriage in only this way. But since my government is secular, seperated from the church, then such limitations should not be required by the government. But my church cannot be required to recognize and bless such secular unions.
You ask me how I consider the gay lifestyle to be self-destructive from a secular point of view? I may try, but it is almost impossible for me to view any issue from an entirely secular viewpoint. My faith, my Lord, color all things for me.
You are welcome to tell me if I am wrong, and I will consider a thoughtful reply, but is there not much promiscuity within the gay community? It does not seem emotionally healthy for anyone to take the most special human way of communicating and sharing and expressing love, and cheapen it with one-night-stands with virtual strangers- true no matter the sexual preference of the participants. Also, AIDS is not exclusively, but it is primarily a gay disease. I have had this fact denied to me by gay advocates, but it is a documented statistic.
So, in summary: The promiscuous lifestyle characteristic of so much of the gay community is not healthy emotionally, and associated disease is not healthy physically.
I know my quick little statements will most likely not be convincing to you. I've discussed this subject several times on my blog, specifically in relation to a young man I know who has "come out" as gay, and with a review of Brokeback Mountain. Some get raging mad toward me, and still others converse rationally and intelligently.
I would enjoy your continued input here on t-blog. Actually, I have only recently come to the understanding that the government does not need to be in the business of opposing gay marriage. So my beliefs are evolving. I am sometimes amused as how narrow and inflexible are some of those on the left, the very ones who throw such epithets my way.
posted by:
Kiwi in Zurich (
reply)
post date:
05.17.06 (11:35 am)
Hi PastorDave,
thanks for the response! I appreciate the non-religious answer given your position.
I guess my first point would be in relation to the issue of HIV/AIDS. Taken to its logical conclusion, the only marriage relationship the state could endorse if it was to use HIV/AIDS as a litmus test would be that of lesbians as the occurrence of HIV/AIDS within the lesbian community is virtually zero. Much lower than the occurrence of it in either the heterosexual or gay communities. Indeed I hazard a guess that should a lesbian be so unfortunate as to be infected with the virus, she almost certainly got it from a heteorsexual man....not likely from another woman. HIV/AIDS is a serious problem for everyone, but as you correctly point out, a huge issue for gay men. For me however, the solution is to educate all people about choices available to them other than unprotected sex, whether it is abstinence, protected sex or no pre-marital sex. For me each person needs to make a decision that best suits them but is at the same time responsible and respects their partner/s.
Which brings me nicely onto the point of promiscuity. It is something that I have thought quite a lot about and agree that getting gay sex is probably about as easy as a heterosexual man going into a brothel and purchasing sex, except that in the gay situation neither chap (generally speaking) is doing it in order to put food on the table/pay for a place to live or any of the myriad other reasons why a woman turns to prostitution. And this is probably the point that leaves me the most confused when I hear commentators oppose gay marriage. For me, one of the main purposes of marriage is to provide stability to a relationship where two people are prepared to commit themselves to eachother. Usually this means, where sex is concerned, to the exclusion of others. Wouldn't gay marriage go some way to answering so many of the things used to condemn gays and gay marriage? Being gay, I'm consciously aware that we have few good rolemodels. And it does nothing for one's self worth to hear people in positions of power attacking who you are. At the end of the day it doesn't change who you are, very often it just makes you feel bad about who you are or leads you into a cynicsm that would befit someone many years your senior. If the State is prepared to endorse gay marriage, while it won't change everyone's mind over night, just like slavery laws or discrimination laws, it does eventually help to promote change and therefore acceptance. In the same way I see a huge role of organised religion in this regard. Having grown up Christian, I was told that being Christian meant caring for eachother/loving eachother etc. At the same time that this message is passed on, there is a massive community of gay people out there that have been alienated by organised religion. Given the issues clearly identified by anti-gay or anti-gay marriage groups/people isn't this the group that such groups have identified that most needs support/help/guidance/education....without being condemned at the same time?
And, I agree that a church cannot and should not be required to paricipate in gay (or any) marriage. Churchs should be able to define themselves as they please, and if other people don't approve they are no more required to attend the Church than one should be required to join a workers union.
KiZ
posted by:
graceshaker (
reply)
post date:
05.30.06 (1:25 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
any good in my character is not inherent. it was a gift.
