New York governor basically legalizes gay marriage statewide
posted at 9:15 pm on May 29, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Why “basically”? Because only the legislature can formally legalize it and all attempts to push a bill through have stalled so far. Which means gays can’t get married in New York … but they can, of course, now get married in California or Massachusetts and then come back to New York, where, per Paterson’s new executive order, their marriages will be recognized with full faith and credit (the same principle that lets straights run off to Vegas and then have their Nevada license recognized back home). Not the cleverest gay marriage gambit ever to be tried in NYS but still darned clever in how it (a) lets him argue semi-persuasively that he’s just following the law as it already is, (b) holds the virtue for most conservatives of at least being imposed by an elected official and not a court, and (c) nudges the legislature to make a move on passing a full-fledged gay marriage law of its own, especially since enforcement in the interim is apt to be messy:
It is less clear what the directive means for state policies that are not enforced by state agencies but by the courts, like those that govern child custody or protect a husband and wife from having to testify against one another about statements they made to each other while married.
I’m curious what the HA faithful think. Most of you are avowed federalists; here’s an example of the principle that might not cut your way. Opposition to the move is already stirring, meanwhile, which makes me wonder if the legislature won’t just duck the issue and let Paterson sink or swim on his own. Remember, too, that the Defense of Marriage Act (signed by Bill Clinton, don’t forget) says states aren’t required to recognize gay marriages in other states. I wonder if some opponent won’t try to argue that because no New York state law has been passed formally granting full faith and credit to gay marriages, Paterson’s guilty of improperly/unilaterally “requiring” the state to recognize them and therefore in violation of DOMA. Seems like a stretch since DOMA’s really aimed at courts interpreting the federal constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause, but any weapon to hand, I guess.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
thank you!
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 4:51 PM
You must not know Olaf. It’s his thing.
That’s a different question. Of course you will have missed a huge important influence on your life and will likely grow up missing that. It doesn’t make you a lesser being, but it can be harmful.
We see it all the time in poor households where mothers are left to raise children on their own. Obviously the ideal is that the father is there as well.
The question then becomes whether or not two women or two men is enough of a parenting difference that it actually causes harms children or if it can be acceptable.
I can’t answer that.
Ann Coulter still would. /joke
She only says that about Democrats.
Esthier on May 30, 2008 at 4:51 PM
Not that I care what you think, but I am not a liberal. Must you label anyone who disagrees with you? You have called me many things today, liberal is your latest.
Though I side with liberals on this issue, I suppose, I am still more comfortable among conservatives. If I had to guess, though, I would feel very uncomfortable in your fundamentalist church. What sect are you, Pentacostal?
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 4:51 PM
I can’t really deny this. From what I know of the gay agenda, and my personal experience with it, excepting a few outlying events (in which all of the charges were always dropped) I’m largely ok with the gay agenda. If something were to come to light that I very much disagreed with I may voice my opposition, but unless it was REALLY egregious I don’t know that I would totally change my position. I don’t think there’s a single “agenda” out there that I totally agree with.
I can say I really don’t think it will change the way I make money though, I work for a hedge fund, so I’m already just making money for people who already have money. I’m not going to turn down a gay investor who wants to put in $10 million because he’s gay. The finance world doesn’t really care about the sexual persuasion of their investors…it’s kind of petty when there’s money to be made.
beefytee on May 30, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Are you opposed to gay marriage for:
-religious reasons
-because there is no such thing as a gay person
-because our country wasn’t founded that way
-some combination?
JiangxiDad on May 30, 2008 at 4:54 PM
I know you’re OK with them coming for christians…but they day may come when they come for you…
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 4:55 PM
check this out:
In our judgment, it is difficult to imagine that a lengthy, highly visible, and ultimately successful campaign to persuade Dutch citizens that marriage is not connected to parenthood and that marriage and cohabitation are equally valid ‘lifestyle choices’ has not had serious social consequences….
There are undoubtedly other factors that have contributed to the decline of the institution of marriage in our country. Further scientific research is needed to establish the relative importance of all these factors. At the same time, we wish to note that enough evidence of marital decline already exists to raise serious concerns about the wisdom of the efforts to deconstruct marriage in its traditional form.
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200407210936.asp
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Very creative. I will remind you that even the devil can quote scripture. It does not make you a righteous person. In fact, based upon your comments, you do not seem very Christian at all. Is the rest of the congregation in your fundamentalist sect this judgemental?
Like Billy Joel, I would rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints because the sinners are much more fun
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 4:58 PM
and I’ll fight them to the frigging death with my AR-15, then when that runs out, my 3 russian made .223’s, then when they run out I’m move over to my compound bow, then to my trusty 9mm, and finally I’d bust out the kitchen knives if I was still lucky to be alive. Make no mistake, I have no intention of going quietly.
beefytee on May 30, 2008 at 5:01 PM
1) Obviously no one is. But that’s the standard Christians ought to strive for and the one we are held to. That you are not as good as He is does not excuse your behavior. Your manner of discussion does not emulate Christ’s.
2) I’m a believer and I have a working pair of eyes. When I see a brother in what I believe to be serious sin, I have a scripturally based obligation to let them know about it. What you are doing is causing people to stumble. It is possible to make your points without doing so, yet instead you deliberately provoke people and call it defending righteousness.
1 Peter 3:15 says:
You said:
Can you honestly tell me that you believe such speech to be gentle and respectful?
TheUnrepentantGeek on May 30, 2008 at 5:02 PM
In most circumstances kids would be better off with a homosexual couple than with, say, Christian Scientists who will let them die for Christ if they become seriously ill. Equally bad is to allow children to be brought up in that barbaric, retrograde faith that St Olaf seems to be preaching. Unfortunately too many young minds are being ruined by the imbecilic indoctrination practices of the parents.
I’ve heard the strict fundamentalists referred to as the ‘American Taleban’ and I can see why from some of the comments in this thread.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Ouch! That’s gonna leave a mark. Righteous Christian indignation in three…two…one…
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Sorry, I don’t have time to read that whole thing, but it seems to be only addressing marriage, whereas I was talking about raising children and what could possibly harm a child.
Esthier on May 30, 2008 at 5:12 PM
I’m not arguing about what Jesus Christ thought about gay marriage because Jesus never spoke on it at all.
He never spoke of bestiality either. By your logic, that means he was cool with it.
You cannot claim that jesus teaches you to judge a man immoral to marry another man. Jesus teaches you that YOU are NOT that judge.
Jesus does not teach that.
flenser on May 30, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Jesus was once asked if his ministry abrogated Mosaic law. Jesus replied that rather than replacing the law, he was the fufillment of the law.
Now quit trying to use religion to justify homosexuality or as a distraction to avoid the fact that the so-called gay agenda at work here is nothing more or less than a direct attack on the constitutional rights of American citizens in order to obtain money for those pushing the “gay-agenda.” You want money, benefits, etc. so you are trying to redefine marriage and in doing so convert homosexuals into a “protected group” with special “rights” ($$$) at the expense of trampling the Constitution and forcing the rest of the country to endorse and financially support your sexual proclivities. While were at it, why don’t we start mandating health benefits for Elliot Spitzers call girls. After all, he can’t help it, he was born that way right? And he was certainly committed to the relationships he established…
secarr on May 30, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Flenser: What are the origins of homosexuality?
JiangxiDad on May 30, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Flenser: Are you in favor of civil unions
JiangxiDad on May 30, 2008 at 5:21 PM
Jesus Christ did speak about homosexuality.
Christ’s ministry was confined to Judea, where homosexuality was already strictly shunned and covered by Levitical proscription. It was not until the faith expanded to such areas as Rome itself, where catemites and other homosexuals were common, that the issue needed to be addressed specifically, which is why the mention is made in Romans.
As far as the Jews were concerned, Christ covered homosexuality when he said that he did not change the laws by “one jot or tittle”.
As mentioned, Hebrew law strictly proscribed homosexuality, and so he supported that proscription when he endorsed Levitical law.
You must temper the prescribed penalties with Christ’s admonition that whoever is without sin should cast the first stone. In other words, while you may be justified in imposing the prescribed sanctions, you may or may not feel justified in doing so. However, that we are not required to impose the prescribed sanction in no way justifies the sin or removes your obligation to call it sin when you see it.
What homosexuals and their apologists do is to take the Christian charity of those who no longer impose the maximum penalty, as justification for committing the sin.
It’s like letting a thief off without cutting off his hand only to have him later claim that as proof that stealing is okay.
Finally, Jesus stated that anyone who rejects the teaching of his appointed representatives, rejects him as well. To the seventy disciples he said: “He who hears you hears me; and he who rejects you rejects me; and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke 10:16).
If such was the case with reference to that group, it certainly was no less true of the Lord’s apostles.
In this regard, Paul, the apostle of Christ, unequivocally condemned homosexual activity as one of the most heinous of sins of which humankind is capable (see: Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:10).
sinsing on May 30, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Liberal : Not strict or rigorous; not confined or restricted to the literal sense; free; as, a liberal translation of a classic, or a liberal construction of law or of language.
Conservative : disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
Interesting how there are those who are conservative toward the constitution, but yet so liberal with regards to the Bible.
I treat the bible just like the constitution, where the language is clear then its not open to interpretation, where it is vague, then comparing it to the intent of the whole, it should be interpreted to new circumstances. The big difference is the Bible cannot be amended. I’m amazed how some “liberal christians” can reinterpret clear passages to say practically anything. (Case in point: The infamous “Judge not..” quote.)
AverageJoe on May 30, 2008 at 5:45 PM
sinsing on May 30, 2008 at 5:35 PM
You are simply interpreting and inferring partly from history and partly from the Bible. It is one interpretation. There are many others.
Keep in mind that the word “homosexuality” was not coined until the 19th century. The idea and practice of same-sex attraction has also changed over the centuries. Even the ancient Greeks, who thought that male/male love was the highest ideal, married a woman for procreation. Furthermore, pederasty was the norm in ancient Greece. Now we find the idea immoral and illegal.
The New Testament was written 2,000 years ago, and the Old Testament is even older than that. Our world is completely different from Jesus’ time. As an omniscient and omnipotent God, Jesus would certainly have understood that times would change. However, he had a difficult enough time trying to persuade the Jews of his time to accept his teaching. He certainly could not have made the argument, “Learn these teachings and teach them to your children. However, my faith will grow and develop differently in different areas. Christianity will become the state religion of Rome (who would have believed that), and eventually Rome will fall and splinter. The descendents of my disciples will disagree and eventually even raise swords against each other. Centuries from now people will disagree with my Vicar and leave my Church to start their own sects based upon various interpretations of my words…etc.”
My point is that we in the Twenty-First Century must interpret Jesus’ words for our time. Everything changes. The only unchanging reality is God Himself.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 6:10 PM
Damn. The queers are running concentration camps for Christians? Do these camps include lessons in grooming and putting together a smashing routine of showtunes? Are the captives forced to watch endless Judy Garland and Ethyl Merman movies, and listen to Liberace all night long?
The horror! the horror!
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 6:17 PM
Uh, are you talking about the militant angry lesbians? I mean, really, just locking the door would probably be sufficient otherwise.
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 6:21 PM
Traditionally, a marriage that is never consumated could be voided or regarded as never occurring.
Your point is that some gay men have the physical ability to have sex with women, which is obviously true. It doesn’t follow though that all gay men can physically have intercourse with a woman. Some would simply not achieve an erection. Similarly, most straight guys couldn’t get stimulated to have sex with another guy.
dedalus on May 30, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Is it just me or does Paterson look like this guy?
GoodBoy on May 30, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Wow! Well we certainly don’t need you, a non Christian,homosexual, sinner of the worst kind, reinterpreting our religion for us.
Let me guess..you’ll tear out all the many,many pages that say that homosexual fornication is one of the worst kinds of sin that mankind can commit…and then you’ll change the creation story to Adam and Steve.
Thanks, but no thanks.
SaintOlaf on May 30, 2008 at 6:58 PM
the stupidity.
get a clue.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:18 PM
sorry, the pope isn’t His Vicar.
HE does not. therefore right and wrong does not.
translation: you just want to twist the bible to meet the gay, or any other agenda you approve of.
Solomon said nothing is new under the sun…same old sin, same old lies…
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Even though I’m neither gay nor christian I’m still curious to know whether your god the father was fornicating with his own male creation when he made that Eve creature. And their offspring had to be doing their own brothers and sisters (perhaps mommy and daddy too) to keep the party going; what do you call those sins?
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 7:27 PM
sounds like you have no problem with taking children of christians, or anyone else who doesn’t fit your ideology…my how ‘tolerant’ of you!! let me guess, you’re a good lib!!!
you can say that, even believe it, but its a lie. children do better with a REAL mother and father. and the aping of heterosexual relations that homosexuals do doesn’t cut it.
you don’t need ’scientific’ studies, although they all say that kids do better with a mother and father, just a bit of common sense, which has left you and those on the left.
its called projection, its what you nazi libs want to do to anyone who dares disagree.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:27 PM
this takes stupidity to a whole new level.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:28 PM
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Nope. It’s the insanity of your thinking that gays are “coming for Christians.” We’re talking about 2% of the population here, and most gays are not militant about wanting to change society or government or anything.
The rest of them are no more threatening to our way of life than any other kind of fringe weirdo….the Folsom Street Fair and/or San Francisco Gay Pride Parade participants are freaks, no question. But, honey, they simply aren’t a serious threat to you or to your church or family.
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 7:30 PM
I didn’t know it was your place to judge me!! have you let Jesus know He’s no longer necessary?
I didn’t realize I was in the presence of Holiness!!
could have fooled me….but then I’m not judging you..
what I said is true. just because you disaprove…who cares?
how about if I just said your like your father, Satan?? a liar and murderer from the beginning…
of course a good ‘christian’ wouldn’t say that now would he???? hmmmmm??
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:32 PM
its called the truth. I’ve already posted the links…they’re silencing christians in europe, canada, and the US for daring to criticize homosexuality.
so we’re talking about the tyranny of the minority…kind of like the communists. you really need to get a clue.
well sweety pie you’re a liar.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:34 PM
ludicrous. Who made you the ultimate judge of the relative evil of sins? Homosexuality is worse than murder? rape? adultery? kidnapping?
I’m beginning to think St. Olaf and right4life are clever atheists who come here to make Christians appear to be knuckle dragging creeps that the left would like everybody to believe them to be.
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 7:35 PM
you say I’m ‘judgemental’ but you have offered no examples. you twist the bible, like Satan does, what does that say about you?? hmmmmm??
I don’t think anyone would mistake you for a christian, no worries there!!
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Deeply disturbed.
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 7:36 PM
another wacko left-wing troll. don’t worry we know you left-wingers are a bunch of hate-filled lying wackos.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:37 PM
I’m beginning to think St. Olaf and right4life are clever atheists who come here to make Christians appear to be knuckle dragging creeps that the left would like everybody to believe them to be.
funky chicken
Nope, just examples of Poe’s Law
They are beyond parody.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 7:40 PM
I believe this is the first time I’ve ever heard anyone make this charge, usually the word “condemn” is in place of “justify”. The oddity of seeing this statement struck me as being quite amusing! :-)
JohnAGJ on May 30, 2008 at 7:42 PM
Very ‘christian’ of you to start the Nazi calling game and if you think that people like Barry Goldwater and Ayn Rand were liberals then I’m in that gang but I somehow do not think that was your intention.
One can only hope that not too many children fall victim to your nefarious belief system which truly gives a bad name to christianity.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 7:46 PM
you sadly, are immune to the truth.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:48 PM
truth hurts. this is what the gay agenda is all about. imposing their will on others, as a tyranny of the minority. they will silence all dissent.
would you be happier if I just called you a child of satan?? just curious.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:49 PM
and your alternative of course is the gay agenda…oh well they always need new recruits.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:50 PM
you sadly, are immune to the truth.
right4life
Nope, not at all. Truth is that you haven’t read a Bible and whatever interpretation you have has been spoonfed to you by someone else.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 7:53 PM
too funny! what foolish assumptions. tell me are any of you atheists/darwinists/pro-gay types not arrogant??
just curious.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 7:57 PM
You read too may comic books, some of them very, very old. There is no such entity as satan, but if name calling is your thing go for it. Many groups have agendas, even extremist fundamentalist cults masquerading as mainstream but don’t expect rational people board those sinking ships.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 8:00 PM
from your blog:
you are a darwiniac!! why am I not surprised? I remember you..I made you look foolish over evolution, not that its very difficult…
its no surprise that the worshippers of hairygod darwin are pro-gay! after all anything goes in evolution
so tell me, why hasn’t homosexcuality been evolved out of the population??? hmmmm?? just curious.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:01 PM
really? you know this huh???
you have no idea…and unless you are very careful you will find out to your horror just how real he is…the darkness is terrifying….
you lib pro-gay types are so sensitive is that why you want to shut christians up? or is it just your hatred of christianity and christians?
wisdom is known by her children…we’ll see who is right in the end…the day will show it.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:04 PM
As a Catholic, I believe that Pope Benedict is Christ’s Vicar on Earth, the direct descendant of Peter, to whom Christ gave the keys to heaven and earth. You boldly assert that he is not. What is your evidence? Did the guy that broke from the Church to start your particular sect say so?
I find your certainty very troubling. You seem to have no doubt whatsoever about your beliefs. You stand there waving your arm and making sweeping judgements about what is right and what is wrong. When confronted about Christ’s teaching on rigid judgementalism, you cleverly interpret Christ’s words to suit yourself.
Once again, I will equate your extremist beliefs with those of extremist Islam. It must take the same religious certainty to strap on a bomb to kill innocent women and children. After all, Allah told him to do so martyr himself for 72 virgins.
I am not calling you a terrorist, but I do find your narrow-minded, fundamentalist beliefs extreme.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 8:07 PM
LOL. So you are a proponent of ID. That makes sense given your crazy comments here. What a nutjob.
So you must believe that the earth is 6,000 years old, or some such nonsense.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 8:11 PM
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Pure childish drivel, and repetitious as well. If you really believe that crap you post here you deserve pity. As for that satan character you pretend to know so well call him down on me if you wish. I stopped believing in fairy tales may years ago.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 8:15 PM
if you had bothered to read the Bible, you would know that there is a test of an apostle:
2 Corinthians 12:12
The things that mark an apostle—signs, wonders and miracles—were done among you with great perseverance.
where are the signs, wonders and miracles from the pope? you want to claim the title?? better have the power to back it up.
this is too funny…you believe what the leader of your particular cult says about being a vicar. with nothing to back it up.
I’ve noticed that children of the world are troubled by the truth of the bible. my ’sweeping judgements’ are no more than what the bible says? why would that so trouble a ‘christian’ like you??
really? give an example. at least I don’t elevate the words of the pope to the Word of God.
yeah those that hate christians and christianity usually do this moral equivalence…kind of like the libs used to do with the soviet union and the US.
I find your views anti-christian, no matter what you call yourself.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:16 PM
I’m not an apostle, I can’t hand you over to him, as Paul did. Oh I don’t pretend…
and someday you’ll know much better than I do…
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:17 PM
I figured you were darwiniac. no surprise. you have just proven yourself a liar. you can’t worship your hairygod darwin and Jesus.
you darwiniacs are so lame, and so predictable.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:18 PM
btw: I noticed a good darwiniac like you couldn’t answer that simple question….you darwiniacs are good at fairy tales, and thats about it.
here answer me this:
why hasn’t the tuatara, with the fastest molecular ‘evolution’ ever seen changed in 200 million years…and is a ‘living dinosaur’???
take a shot at it, this should be amusing…
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:20 PM
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:18 PM
I very much believe the God created the world. I also believe in evolution. To me they are one in the same. The Bible teaches us that God created the world in seven days. What is a God day? 24 hours? 2,400 hours? 240,000,000,000,000 hours? Why is it so difficult to believe that God set the process in motion and guided it along the way? That disproves neither creation nor evolution.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 8:26 PM
thats your own little ‘evolution’ theistic evolution, its not what evolution is:
“Darwin developed an evolutionary theory based on chance variation and natural selection imposed by an external environment: a rigidly materialistic (and basically atheistic) version of evolution,” (- Stephen Jay Gould, Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History 33 (W.W. Norton 1977).)
Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.”
Provine, William B. [Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University], “, “Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life”, Abstract of Will Provine’s 1998 Darwin Day Keynote Address.
evolution and christianity are totally incompatible.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:30 PM
What the hell is a tuatara?
I just watched a wonderful lecture by Ken Miller, well-known biologist, that utterly destroyed the ID theory. If your faith can handle it, why don’t you watch it.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 8:31 PM
Well, I guess it is settled then. You have proclaimed it to be so, thus it must be true. When exactly did God imbue you with absolute knowledge? It must be difficult for you to deal with us mere mortals.
What a tool…
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 8:33 PM
ah yeah look it up. laughable.
oh yeah miller…he’s amusing. he even admits that to believe in evolution you must believe in philophical materialism.
you really are clueless. laughable.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:41 PM
why is that you ’scientists’ can never back up anything you say.
you’re an ignorant moron who doesn’t know how stupid he looks. pathetic.
all you darwiniacs are lame twits.
making you look stupid is child’s play.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:43 PM
I’ve already proven my point(s). you have only proven the depths of your ignorance.
when you graduate from grade school, let me know!
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:44 PM
too funny! what foolish assumptions. tell me are any of you atheists/darwinists/pro-gay types not arrogant??
just curious.
right4life
Here’s the thing: if I am wrong and there is a God and a heaven and all that crap and you are correct and you are going to be there, I choose hell. Seriously. I would rather not be in a place for all eternity with a bunch of folks like you. The smarm up there would be unbearable.
Yeah, so chalk me up as the scientifically minded atheist who bears no ill will to gay people and headed to hell. Also make note that your interpretations of every single Bible verse you have infested us with is incorrect, hate filled and genuinely disturbing.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 8:51 PM
If you’re right then christianity is surely false. ID and creationism are not science and have absolutely nothing to contribute to any scientific debate. Those who choose to believe these things should carry on their discussions in groups interested in superstition, cults and pseudoscience. There is no use in reigniting that discussion again.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 8:51 PM
I’d never get between a fool and fire..have fun.
you won’t be missed.
I understand, and I’m sure you have a final solution in mind for christians. no doubt.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:54 PM
I understand, and I’m sure you have a final solution in mind for christians. no doubt.
right4life
Godwin’s Law, I win.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 8:55 PM
actually darwinism isn’t scientific. you have never observed evolution (not micro, macro) and micro does not add up to macro, as in the case of the tuatara. evolution is nothing but a faith…you cannot see it, and you cannot duplicate it, but you believe it.
as I have shown, evolution equals atheism. and it is intolerant of any competing theories. if you were so secure in your ‘evolution’ then you darwiniacs would not have to try to silence, intimidate, and harass, all those who dare disagree.
that you do, speaks volumes.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:56 PM
actually you lose. big time.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 8:57 PM
actually you lose. big time.
right4life
Sorry, but Godwin’s law says I win. You like rules, and that’s an internet rule.
You know less about science than you do about the Bible. Seeing as how your Biblical knowledge is lacking even for a layperson, that would make you scientifically ignorant.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 9:01 PM
well enjoy your ‘victory’ you should get as much enjoyment as you can, in this life.
maybe, but you are unable to dispute what I say. other than mouth darwiniac talking points…care to answer the question about the tuatara??
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Of course Krydor won by invoking Godwin’s law but the joy cannot be too great given the nilpotent nature of the adversary who continues his gibberish about some lizardish reptile.
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 9:14 PM
right4life is a perfect example of the type of person who took over the GOP in Kansas, got evolution dropped from the state public school science curriculum, among other things, and thus helped elect Kathleen Sebelius governor…the first democrat governor in 6 decades…in the land of Alf Landon and Bob Dole.
funky chicken on May 30, 2008 at 9:14 PM
you ’scientists’ don’t even know what that is??? oh this is too funny!!
I would say try biology 101, but they’d never let you into college, obviously.
you darwiniacs are laughably lame.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:16 PM
and the land of late-term abortions…those republicans really made a difference (smirk)
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:18 PM
Extremists like that, being unstable, would be the first to flip to Islam if by some scenario its fundamentalist flavor grew strong in the U.S. What joy, stoning adulterers and apostates, chopping off hands of thieves after Friday prayer. But then, Islam got a lot of these ideas from the Old Testament (Deuteronomy, in particular).
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 9:23 PM
LoL! So according to your logic…Jesus was crucified and raised 3 days later or as you would say 5,760 quintillion years later..
Wrong.
A day in Genesis is a literal day…there was evening and then morning 1 literal day.
There is no getting around that.
You either believe in evolution or the Bible. You cannot truly believe in both.
SaintOlaf on May 30, 2008 at 9:25 PM
thats the next step for you ‘tolerant’ darwinaics. since sueing, harassing, and trying to silence, isn’t working.
can’t answer the question, obviously.
tell me, have you ever had an original thought?
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:28 PM
You have just proven that you are not a Christian. No Christian would so happily consign another man to hell.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Oh, geez, Olaf is back. Did you finish burning your cross already? Time to come back to bash more gays?
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 9:31 PM
reading is fundamental. I didn’t ‘consign’ him, he wants to go by his own admission.
those in hell will not be missed in heaven, nor will they be mourned. those placed in hell are placed there by a holy righteous God, and their being there is just.
I now you’re desperate for some ‘victory’ but you are unable to answer any of the points I raise.
you really need to get a clue.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:31 PM
you are a hate-filled lying piece of trash.
talking to you is casting pearls before swine. moron.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:32 PM
tell me DC, did you enjoy bending over for the priests??
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:33 PM
Wow….right4life, I do feel for you. How sad.
right4life may think he/she is a christian, but obviously has no idea what that means.
What are you people talking about that say evolution and the bible cannot both be believed.
Sure they can.
First, though, one must realize that some stories in the bible are stories told to illustrate larger/deeper concepts. Every person on the planet did not come from one couple.
bridgetown on May 30, 2008 at 9:35 PM
This person is Not a Christian, although I pray for you to open your heart to Jesus’ light.
bridgetown on May 30, 2008 at 9:36 PM
you probably think you’re intelligent. (smirk)
oh yeah, just because you say so!!
laughable.
post your proof, but you can’t. you darwiniacs think everything you say comes from on high, and needs no backup.
ever hear of doing research?? obviously not.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Yes they did.
Even secular scientists acknowledge that.
And no it wasn’t Adam and Steve.
SaintOlaf on May 30, 2008 at 9:38 PM
glad to see you’ve taken Jesus’ place. didn’t know you were qualified to judge men’s hearts.
my, how ‘christian’ of you!!
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:38 PM
What about the Christian churches that find the body of research around many of the evolution theories compelling. These churches don’t see a conflict with their Christian belief. You may disagree with their understanding of Christianity but you’d be wrong to call them atheists.
dedalus on May 30, 2008 at 9:38 PM
What say you Barry?
diogenes on May 30, 2008 at 9:40 PM
most of those ‘christian’ churches have gay bishops too, no doubt.
any that do believe in ‘theistic evolution’ newsflash: thats not evolution. do you understand anything about the theory you purport to believe?
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:40 PM
If there were an omniscient god he’d probably be tempted to commit suicide after realizing the quantity of gullible fools he created. BTW was that first day Sunday 23 October 4004 BC? If so I guess he was pre-celebrating the Second Battle of Philippi in 42 BC. (Poor Brutus).
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 9:41 PM
right4life and olaf, why don’t you go find a witch to burn so that the rest of us can talk. You clearly are beyond reason, mercy, and compassion. Your narrow-minded, extremist views do not belong in a modern world. Perhaps you would be more comfortable among your like-minded friends in Tehran.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 9:45 PM
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 9:45 PM
professing to be wise, they have become fools.
ps: its called projection, nazi boy.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:47 PM
The largest Christian church doesn’t have any openly gay bishops. I didn’t purport a position of belief, but was referring to how a Christian church recognizes the theory of common descent and the theory of natural selection without becoming atheists.
dedalus on May 30, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Doesn’t matter if you think there is a difference in evolution and creation.
What matters is that you fill yourself with hate for fellow beings on the planet because they do not have sex like you do. And you project that hate onto people here discussing the issue, in a very immature way at that.
If that is the peace that you get from YOUR interpretation of your bible and the teachings of Christ, I feel deeply saddened for you.
bridgetown on May 30, 2008 at 9:52 PM
You truly are a lowlife. To return the favor one could say “Vijak vaš lažni bog.”
Annar on May 30, 2008 at 9:54 PM
do you really want to there with catholics and homosexuality???
as I’ve said, by positing a theory called ‘theistic evolution’ its not evolution….its not taught in schools, and I would probably agree with dawkins about theistic evolution.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:55 PM
taken from a news story, I believe from 2005
(in my computer because I’ve had this argument with others before in email)
bridgetown on May 30, 2008 at 9:57 PM
of course. disagreeing with the gay agenda is ‘hate’ and should be punished as a ‘hate crime’
so predictable. and pathetic. do you ever really think about anything?
in your opinion. but of course everyone has one! who cares? your inability to deal with the issues, instead resorting to name-calling and lies, shows you are the immature one.
go ahead and tell us about this pro-gay marriage ‘christ’ of yours!! this should be good.
right4life on May 30, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Not satisfied with bashing gays, now you want to take on the Catholic Church as well? You are simply trying to provoke for provocation sake, aren’t you? How old are you? I would have to guess that you are a young teenager who likes to disagree with the adults just to be contrarian.
DCGamer on May 30, 2008 at 9:59 PM
maybe, but you are unable to dispute what I say. other than mouth darwiniac talking points…care to answer the question about the tuatara??
right4life
You know what I like? I like irony. That’s one of those Discovery Institute/AIG talking points. Guess what? It’s wrong. If the contention is that they have not changed over time, then that contention is incorrect.
You are quite mad, you know. You know what I hope keeps you up at night? The notion that Mormons are right.
Krydor on May 30, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Next »