Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
houstonmacbro

God, gays, genetics, and airlines

Recommended Posts

Jeebus, not sure if you know this, but Joel Osteen does not take a salary from his church. He is paid through his book sales. I am not sure about the other staff though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One question.

In your opinion, why is America's Christians more religious then their European counterparts? It would seem that they would be more secular afer having established 'freedom of religion'.

Also, why do Roman Catholics (incl. Latinos) tend to be the most religious of all Christians?

Lastly, out of curiosity, are any of you from the 'Born Again' Christians i hear about so much?

Thank You.

I dated a "born again christian" in college. She was hot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Educate us that are don't seem to know: What rights do you not have? I know you can't get married, but what other ones are still out there? Military? Adoption?

In some states I'm not allowed to adopt. In no state would my VA or SS benifits got to my spouse even if we had a civil union.

The last time I checked, there was nothing radical in wanting the same rights any other tax-paying and law-abiding citizen has.

Edited by nmainguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The last time I checked, there was nothing radical in wanting the same rights any other tax-paying and law-abiding citizen has.

I don't disagree at all. I'll be honest, and you (NMainguy) know this from personal conversations we've had in the past, but I'm not a big fan of "being gay". I'm a red-blooded, passionately heterosexual male that loves only women. Just the thought of two guys kissing grosses me out.

BUT..

I don't think that means gay people should not be given the same rights. I personally think that marriage should be left for churches, and civil unions for governments. In other words, no matter who you are, and who you're attracted to, when it comes time to file taxes, pass on social security benefits, pension plans, etc etc - you should be able to do so, via a government sponsored civil union. If you want to show God how much you want his approval by marriage, then take it to a church to get your approval.

I personally feel we need to remove God from the government completely. I think that would solve so many "moral" and "ethical" issues in one shot. Religion affects our political lives far too much. It should almost be a non-issue when dealing with matters of the government like: war, civil-rights, election platforms, politics, and most importantly - politicians. Instead, religious views take hold, influence, and even most times poison the entire process.

The only "gay" issue I'm still at odds with though, is a "non-traditional" (traditional being 1 mother, 1 father) family adopting. But I feel like my hands are tied on the subject as I know any gay couple would give their child a better home than even the best foster home could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally feel we need to remove God from the government completely. I think that would solve so many "moral" and "ethical" issues in one shot. Religion affects our political lives far too much. It should almost be a non-issue when dealing with matters of the government like: war, civil-rights, election platforms, politics, and most importantly - politicians. Instead, religious views take hold, influence, and even most times poison the entire process.

Careful what you wish for :(:(

That is a powerful wish. An America without G-D is a doomed nation, period! The very day this country, as a whole, throws out the G-D of Abraham-Isaac-and Jacob, we are done! That is a fact which is non negotiable!!!!!

I love this nation. My family loves this nation. I, and the majority of the male members of my family have volunteered to protect this nation in the past as well as the present. We as a nation are not perfect, but theres always room for positive change. The positive change which has occurred here in the past and present is due large in part to people that believe in the G-D of Abraham-Isaac and Jacob. Take away the influence of the G-D of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and you will invite chaos! In my experience, I have found that people that wish to remove G-D from everyday life in America rely on self propagated methods of reasoning to create a society of bliss. Without G-D this isnt possible. Each person of greater means of his/her counterpart will strive to be better without regard to anyone that might be crushed along the way. Self rule and self determination will be king and theres no law that would prevent it. Self Righteousness would rule the day. That is not an America i want to see happen!

As much as i love this nation and its ideals, it will NEVER TRUMP MY LOVE FOR THE G-D OF ABRAHAM-ISAAC-AND JACOB! Print it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only "gay" issue I'm still at odds with though, is a "non-traditional" (traditional being 1 mother, 1 father) family adopting. But I feel like my hands are tied on the subject as I know any gay couple would give their child a better home than even the best foster home could.

i don't think a gay couple would give a child a better home than a foster family. i think at most you can say they would give equal care.

i went to jury duty once and the attorney was asking the final 15 if they thought a police officer was more likely to tell the truth than the average citizen. i was number 12. i couldn't believe that everyone was answering yes.

when they asked me i responded that the police officer was just as likely to tell the truth as the average citizen. several jurors that had already answered raised their hands and asked to changed their answers. at that point i was struck from the jury and labelled too influential.

Edited by musicman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Careful what you wish for :(:(

That is a powerful wish. An America without G-D is a doomed nation, period! The very day this country, as a whole, throws out the G-D of Abraham-Isaac-and Jacob, we are done! That is a fact which is non negotiable!!!!!

I love this nation. My family loves this nation. I, and the majority of the male members of my family have volunteered to protect this nation in the past as well as the present. We as a nation are not perfect, but theres always room for positive change. The positive change which has occurred here in the past and present is due large in part to people that believe in the G-D of Abraham-Isaac and Jacob. Take away the influence of the G-D of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and you will invite chaos! In my experience, I have found that people that wish to remove G-D from everyday life in America rely on self propagated methods of reasoning to create a society of bliss. Without G-D this isnt possible. Each person of greater means of his/her counterpart will strive to be better without regard to anyone that might be crushed along the way. Self rule and self determination will be king and theres no law that would prevent it. Self Righteousness would rule the day. That is not an America i want to see happen!

As much as i love this nation and its ideals, it will NEVER TRUMP MY LOVE FOR THE G-D OF ABRAHAM-ISAAC-AND JACOB! Print it ;)

he said take god away from government only, not from the everyday lives of americans, and certainly not away from america. Take god away from our government and then EVERYONE can really have the freedom of religion.

That can also solve the problem of folks fighting over which god or which version, interpretation or denomination of god should be in the government.

Edited by webdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
he said take god away from government only, not from the everyday lives of americans, and certainly not away from america. Take god away from our government and then EVERYONE can really have the freedom of religion.

That can also solve the problem of folks fighting over which god or which version, interpretation or denomination of god should be in the government.

Still dont get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still dont get it?

That you would want a modern version of the middle ages.

I don't get why anyone would want something like that.

Edited by webdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That you would want a modern version of the middle ages.

I don't get why anyone would want something like that.

The government of the USA along with its laws and traditions are based on the ethics of Judeo-Christianity. To remove G-D from the government is to remove the government entirely. Revisionist and otherwise simple bastards will attempt to tell you different, but what i have told you is true. Print it!

An American government without G-D is doomed.

Education is a wonderful thing ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That you would want a modern version of the middle ages.

I don't get why anyone would want something like that.

Well, if the Catholic Church could pull off something like this production, then maybe it wouldn't be so bad ? :rolleyes:

Click the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAVJ9ZyghlA

Edited by TJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The government of the USA along with its laws and traditions are based on the ethics of Judeo-Christianity. To remove G-D from the government is to remove the government entirely. Revisionist and otherwise simple bastards will attempt to tell you different, but what i have told you is true. Print it!

An American government without G-D is doomed.

Education is a wonderful thing ;)

I can't tell whether you are being sarcastic or not. It seems so out there.

I see that you didn't say 'based on Judeo-Christianity', but rather 'on the ethics of', which is good and very careful, cause you are aware of the founding fathers deliberate attempts to keep religion separate.

And when you use 'on the ethics', you are aware that many different religions share the same kinds of ethics, they are not exclusive to christianity.

And lastly, labeling these people who tell you different as revisionists is like pot calling the kettle black cause we don't know for sure which side is the one trying to revise history. What you call truth, others call lies, what you call lies, others call truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't tell whether you are being sarcastic or not. It seems so out there.

I see that you didn't say 'based on Judeo-Christianity', but rather 'on the ethics of', which is good and very careful, cause you are aware of the founding fathers deliberate attempts to keep religion separate.

And when you use 'on the ethics', you are aware that many different religions share the same kinds of ethics, they are not exclusive to christianity.

And lastly, labeling these people who tell you different as revisionists is like pot calling the kettle black cause we don't know for sure which side is the one trying to revise history. What you call truth, others call lies, what you call lies, others call truth.

This mess you are preaching must be a constant source of personal amusement because it is cracking me the hell up :lol::lol::lol:

Theres no substitute for education. Education is a wonderful thing!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't tell whether you are being sarcastic or not. It seems so out there.

I see that you didn't say 'based on Judeo-Christianity', but rather 'on the ethics of', which is good and very careful, cause you are aware of the founding fathers deliberate attempts to keep religion separate.

And when you use 'on the ethics', you are aware that many different religions share the same kinds of ethics, they are not exclusive to christianity.

And lastly, labeling these people who tell you different as revisionists is like pot calling the kettle black cause we don't know for sure which side is the one trying to revise history. What you call truth, others call lies, what you call lies, others call truth.

It's difficult to have a discussion when logic is absent-which it always is when it comes to religion-unless someone can give me some hard-core facts to prove some of the mysticism used to reinforce their beliefs in the Bible; when a person spells God as G-D; when a person doesn't recognize the separations regarding government and religion in the Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or spreads the myth that English is our official language.

Ignorance can be a dangerous and damaging thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
or spreads the myth that English is our official language.

It is "unofficially" the "official" language of the USA. Some things are common knowledge and are just unwritten laws. Just like Judy Garland's "Over the Rainbow" is the gay man's "unofficial" , "official" anthem. ;):P

Edited by TJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's difficult to have a discussion when logic is absent-which it always is when it comes to religion-unless someone can give me some hard-core facts to prove some of the mysticism used to reinforce their beliefs in the Bible; when a person spells God as G-D; when a person doesn't recognize the separations regarding government and religion in the Constitution: or spreads the myth that English is our official language.

Ignorance can be a dangerous and damaging thing.

And the grave gets deeper...............

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is "unofficially" the "official" language of the USA. Some things are common knowledge and are just unwritten laws. Just like Judy Garland's "Over the Rainbow" is the gay man's "unofficial" , "official" anthem. ;):P

I'll admit it's the language of the majority but in no way has it ever been inacted as the official language of the US. There only seems to be one clueless troll on HAIF that thinks it is.

BTW, "It's Raining Men" holds far more sway over "...Rainbow" :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian Fanaticism..

You seem too influenced by your choice of religion to acknowledge that most of the government's problems come from too much involvement from Christianity. You can't even provide a valid counterpoint to debate without making reference to how the world will end without a Christian-based government.

Apparently you & you're fanatical Muslim counterparts have something in common when it comes to how to run the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't disagree at all. I'll be honest, and you (NMainguy) know this from personal conversations we've had in the past, but I'm not a big fan of "being gay". I'm a red-blooded, passionately heterosexual male that loves only women. Just the thought of two guys kissing grosses me out.

BUT..

I don't think that means gay people should not be given the same rights. I personally think that marriage should be left for churches, and civil unions for governments. In other words, no matter who you are, and who you're attracted to, when it comes time to file taxes, pass on social security benefits, pension plans, etc etc - you should be able to do so, via a government sponsored civil union. If you want to show God how much you want his approval by marriage, then take it to a church to get your approval.

I personally feel we need to remove God from the government completely. I think that would solve so many "moral" and "ethical" issues in one shot. Religion affects our political lives far too much. It should almost be a non-issue when dealing with matters of the government like: war, civil-rights, election platforms, politics, and most importantly - politicians. Instead, religious views take hold, influence, and even most times poison the entire process.

The only "gay" issue I'm still at odds with though, is a "non-traditional" (traditional being 1 mother, 1 father) family adopting. But I feel like my hands are tied on the subject as I know any gay couple would give their child a better home than even the best foster home could.

I apologize I didn't catch your response until this evening. I appriciate your support for equal rights for everyone-and I agree you have made that clear in the past regarding your stance on marriage vs. civil unions: a stance I hold as identical as yours. I may not agree with your stance on adoption but I think we can agree to respectfuly disagree. I've known of some straight foster parents who should never have been given the responsiblity to care for kids just as I have known of some gay couples who should never have been allowed to adopt kids. I think it should be on a case by case decision because there are just too many kids out there that shouldn't be denied a home and loving family based on the adoptive parent's sexual orientation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll admit it's the language of the majority but in no way has it ever been inacted as the official language of the US. There only seems to be one clueless troll on HAIF that thinks it is.

BTW, "It's Raining Men" holds far more sway over "...Rainbow" :lol:

We will have to get a consensus on that whole "rainbow" vs. "raining men" debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem too influenced by your choice of religion to acknowledge that most of the government's problems come from too much involvement from Christianity. You can't even provide a valid counterpoint to debate without making reference to how the world will end without a Christian-based government.

Apparently you & you're fanatical Muslim counterparts have something in common when it comes to how to run the government.

Refrain from the use of bogus quotes. I didnt say what was quoted in your response. Im suprised at you. Thats the sort of stuff in which the resident rabid homosexual will engage in.

I never said the world would end without Christianity. Again, thats something that would be the norm from the resident rabid homosexual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Church may not be taxed, but the people that work in these churches are.

Several years ago I read a newspaper article which stated that the Reverend Ed Young's Memorial area house received tax-free status. Apparently Second Baptist retained legal title for several years, thus side-stepping the taxes. Anyone here enjoy that benefit?

I guess the good reverend didn't take that "render unto Caesar" advice from Jesus very seriously. In fact, I think Jesus would be kind of peeved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never understood atheism.

And i think the liberal left's phobia of religion has a direct connection with the so-called Middle Ages. Its interesting too see that you only seem to find the 'type' in Western nations.

Atheism is more common than you think. One of my best friends is an Atheist who grew up a practicing Muslim. He married a Jew who was also atheistic, go fig. lAre they liberals? Hardly they preached Limbaugh to me on a regular basis. So that disproves that it's strictly a left's disease.

While I'm not an Atheist I'm a firm Agnostic and I consider myself a moderate conservative.

The world isn't painted with a left or right brush on issues. You might do yourself a proper service and not paint everyone with the same coat of paint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as god goes: The way the Christians, Jews, and Muslims are running the world, Satan save us.

I actually want a bumper sticker that says that. I don't believe in God but don't care what other people think or believe in.

As far as gays: I like women, when I see a fine looking woman it turns me on. I have no problem with gays. At first I was against gay marriage. I thought about it for a while and debated in my head, and really realized that there was no reason that they shouldn't be able to marry each other. I work with a person who is gay and he has become a good friend of mine.

As far as genetics: I think stem cell research is a good thing. I think we need more of it. I believe there is more potential in science saving lives then there is in worshiping some silly statue or ideal.

As far as airlines: I have never flown in an airplane so I cannot comment on that.

I probably come off as some liberal, commie, godless loony. But the funny thing is that I believe in the death penalty, I believe in the right to bear arms, I believe in lower taxes, and when Rudolph Giuliani is on the ballot for the presidency, I'm voting for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as gays: I like women, when I see a fine looking woman it turns me on. I have no problem with gays. At first I was against gay marriage. I thought about it for a while and debated in my head, and really realized that there was no reason that they shouldn't be able to marry each other. I work with a person who is gay and he has become a good friend of mine.

As far as airlines: I have never flown in an airplane so I cannot comment on that.

I probably come off as some liberal, commie, godless loony. But the funny thing is that I believe in the death penalty, I believe in the right to bear arms, I believe in lower taxes, and when Rudolph Giuliani is on the ballot for the presidency, I'm voting for him.

I'm not so much for religion sanctioned marriage; I'd just like to have a national civil union that affords my partner and I the same benefits that heterosexual couples have. I'm not asking for acceptance or approval-just for equal rights that raise me to the level of first class citizenship.

As far as genetics: I think stem cell research is a good thing. I think we need more of it. I believe there is more potential in science saving lives then there is in worshiping some silly statue or ideal.

I think any research is a good thing if it can combat cancers, diabities, HIV and etc. I have yet to decide that it should come from adults, discarded embryos or placentas. I do know that religious moralists object to using embryos for stem cells yet have no problem discarding them into the trash.

The death penalty? This may be the one issue I would come out looking more right wing than the left of center guy I am. If a person has committed such a hienious crime [Tim McVey?] do we really want to let him off the hook by killing him? Or do we want to keep him alive with limited or no contact with the outside world. Which is the more appropriate punishment for a man who parked his bomb-laden truck beside a daycare center at the base of a Federal building? It would be interesting to see if the Supreme Court ruled either punishment as cruel and unusual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Several years ago I read a newspaper article which stated that the Reverend Ed Young's Memorial area house received tax-free status. Apparently Second Baptist retained legal title for several years, thus side-stepping the taxes. Anyone here enjoy that benefit?

I guess the good reverend didn't take that "render unto Caesar" advice from Jesus very seriously. In fact, I think Jesus would be kind of peeved.

I would like to know how he pulled that off, perhaps he was conducting bible study at his home ? Maybe his house is attached to church grounds ? Or, perhaps he paid off an elected official. I wonder if Mr. Olsteen's home is "tax-free" ? Perhaps Robert Arnold should do one of his hidden camera reports on the good Doctor Young ?

Edited by TJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One question.

In your opinion, why is America's Christians more religious then their European counterparts? It would seem that they would be more secular afer having established 'freedom of religion'.

Also, why do Roman Catholics (incl. Latinos) tend to be the most religious of all Christians?

Lastly, out of curiosity, are any of you from the 'Born Again' Christians i hear about so much?

Thank You.

I'm a believer, but my personal and very private relationship with God is my business. I feel that there are many things that were done (and still are) in the name of religion that disturb me. And that goes for Christians, muslims, and Jews. Additionally, there were certain text that were basically voted out of the Bible (by people) ... so who knows exactly what the full story really is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to know how he pulled that off, perhaps he was conducting bible study at his home ? Maybe his house is attached to church grounds ? Or, perhaps he paid off an elected official. I wonder if Mr. Olsteen's home is "tax-free" ? Perhaps Robert Arnold should do one of his hidden camera reports on the good Doctor Young ?

Most likely he donated his house to the church as it's parsonage. That way its property of the church, therefore tax-exempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most likely he donated his house to the church as it's parsonage. That way its property of the church, therefore tax-exempt.

TAH-DAH ! I think you hit the nail on the head. I think most Preachers and Reverends do the same, their houses are usually located just next door to the church though. I don't think that's the case for the good Doctor. He has really expanded lately also. good thing he has that helicopter to get him around town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...