All Comments (322)

Geez, another Pandora's Box. How about to the God of compassion, unbridled love, and conservatism when needed? Maybe Buddhism's Tara could be called in to consult and debate.

Religion, what a topic.

William

Good evening Starhawk. I am a 38 year old man with an interest in comparative religion that has been listening to an audiobook version of your Wicca-for-beginners teachings. It has truly been a pleasure to listen to it.

I feel as if I have to cut to the quick by broaching paranormal experiences and The Goddess. No matter the experiences of the psyche in normal or altered states, do you experience a direct relationship with a feminine being that has been described in some UFO literature (W. Strieber)? Do you know of what I speak?

William (Havonanow@aol.com)

"Just like the people that worshipped the false God of Ball"

Really, aren't we starting March Madness a little early? Or maybe you were referring to football, baseball, or soccer balls? :D

BAAL is actually the Canaanite word for "Lord". It was applied to several non-Yahwistic mountain, thunder, lightning, and fertility deities, including Hadad and Melqart. His consort was Astarte, who is related to Asherah.

i feel sorry for you that you need such a crutch as the bible. Some people are capable of making good decisions without any need for it.

I don't believe your hell exists therefore have no fear of it, nor do i have any need of your heaven.

and nope, never suffered any molestation of any kind, whether as a kid or adult. Nice try. Simply commenting on the fact that each one of those people was brought down by the very thing they railed against.

and your rants here fill that pattern as well.

i have no need of your book, your deity or your Jesus since there is nothing to be 'saved' from. Keep them, please, if you must, but stop pushing them onto other people who have no need of them.

I've often been accused of being a 'goody two shoes' in how I've lived my life.. and i can live with that seeing as how the only person I've ever been with I'm married to.

You have my pity.

Blessed be.

1. "and also, your book advocates incest, slavery, infanticide and mass murder. why anyone would want to take rules for living from such a book is beyond"

2. "Mark Foley- wanted to protect children from sexual offenders yet was trying to pick up pages on instant messaging for sex"

3. "Priests and clergymen decrying any sexuality that does not follow their prescriptions yet are afraid enough of their own sexuality that they have to express it by violating the youngest members of their congregations. over 500 MILLION dollars paid to keep victims mouths shut- and they still get to keep their positions"

"you know, once.. ok.. coincidence. twice.. maybe coincidence. three or more times.. a pattern"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well based on your theory of once, twice, three times.......that would make you guilty of having been subjected to the very thing that you referenced (3) times. It seems that you have an issue with "being sexually violated as a child" by your own method of judgement......
See a pattern here and a relationship.........?

Of course there is, based on your own theory and by your own addmission.

I truely pity you with your self-righteous mentality. Anyone that can stand in the face of God who holds the power to take you next breath and mock and trodden the blood that Jesus shed for you on the cross to have eternal life under their feet deserves God's wrath.

Call on your Lord and Lady to "save" you from the burning flames of hell when hell opens her mouth wide to take you in at the appointed time and see if they can prevail against God's judgment for you. Just like the people that worshipped the false God of Ball and was consumed by the fire of God in the following scripture your end will be the same if you continue as you are,

1 Kings 18:20-39, {20} So Ahab sent word throughout all Israel and assembled the prophets on Mount Carmel. {21} Elijah went before the people and said, "How long will you waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him." But the people said nothing.

{22} Then Elijah said to them, "I am the only one of the LORD's prophets left, but Baal has four hundred and fifty prophets. {23} Get two bulls for us. Let them choose one for themselves, and let them cut it into pieces and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. I will prepare the other bull and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. {24} Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the LORD. The god who answers by fire—he is God." Then all the people said, "What you say is good."

{25} Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, "Choose one of the bulls and prepare it first, since there are so many of you. Call on the name of your god, but do not light the fire." {26} So they took the bull given them and prepared it.
Then they called on the name of Baal from morning till noon. "O Baal, answer us!" they shouted. But there was no response; no one answered. And they danced around the altar they had made.

{27} At noon Elijah began to taunt them. "Shout louder!" he said. "Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened." {28} So they shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed. {29} Midday passed, and they continued their frantic prophesying until the time for the evening sacrifice. But there was no response, no one answered, no one paid attention.

{30} Then Elijah said to all the people, "Come here to me." They came to him, and he repaired the altar of the LORD, which was in ruins. {31} Elijah took twelve stones, one for each of the tribes descended from Jacob, to whom the word of the LORD had come, saying, "Your name shall be Israel." {32} With the stones he built an altar in the name of the LORD, and he dug a trench around it large enough to hold two seahs of seed. {33} He arranged the wood, cut the bull into pieces and laid it on the wood. Then he said to them, "Fill four large jars with water and pour it on the offering and on the wood."

{34} "Do it again," he said, and they did it again. "Do it a third time," he ordered, and they did it the third time. {35} The water ran down around the altar and even filled the trench.

{36} At the time of sacrifice, the prophet Elijah stepped forward and prayed: "O LORD, God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. {37} Answer me, O LORD, answer me, so these people will know that you, O LORD, are God, and that you are turning their hearts back again." {38} Then the fire of the LORD fell and burned up the sacrifice, the wood, the stones and the soil, and also licked up the water in the trench."

I am done discussing this issue with you. Only God himself can reach such a cold and harden heart as yours.

and also, your book advocates incest, slavery, infanticide and mass murder. why anyone would want to take rules for living from such a book is beyond me.

your god and i have nothing to say to one another. i have no need for such a deity.

I have the Lord and Lady who abound in all things.. and have no need for your book. sorry.

it's always the ones prosecuting the very things that they are caught up in. it's really quite fascinating.. and those are the ones that have gotten caught.

Priests and clergymen decrying any sexuality that does not follow their prescriptions yet are afraid enough of their own sexuality that they have to express it by violating the youngest members of their congregations. over 500 MILLION dollars paid to keep victims mouths shut- and they still get to keep their positions.

Larry Craig. railed against homosexuality, caught soliciting gay sex in a bathroom.

Mark Foley- wanted to protect children from sexual offenders yet was trying to pick up pages on instant messaging for sex.

and now Spitzer, the great prostitution prosecutor.. only did it because he wanted in on it.

you know, once.. ok.. coincidence. twice.. maybe coincidence. three or more times.. a pattern.

your rants.. fit the pattern.

what else is to be concluded?

ANONYMOUS @ March 10, 08 9:26 am,
"The first rule of Bigotry is to look directly at the person making such a statement because it's all about fear- either of themselves because they may be hiding aspects of the very same thing that they're bigoted against, or afraid of the unknown.
Selfishness and bigotry allows a false sense of superiority when in fact none exist.

All you've done is denigrate people that you know absolutely nothing about, probably because you have had such feelings for same sex members but cannot bear to admit it because of what that means for you.

Really, you have my pity."

----------

According to who, you? Remember it was your post that depicted the fear

It is ok for me to dislike and feel repulsed by the acts of same sex relationships/interactions.

You do not like the fact that me and many others, Christians and non-Christians alike feel the same about same-sex relationships and see them as sin according to scripture.

According to your theory God and Jesus "have had such feelings for same sex members but cannot bear to admit it because of what that means for you," because they view them as repulsive too.

You are the one to be pitied, really. You argument is with God talk to him about it. I didn’t write the bible he did.

You make me laugh..

I'm not now nor have I ever been gay and only have ever been with the person I am extraordinarily happily married to, of the opposite gender.

The 'revulsion' comes from a deep seated fear of some part of yourself that doesn't even want to admit that there are parts of you that you cannot even bear to begin to face. Otherwise, it wouldn't be so much of a big deal to you.

And that's just sad, pitiful.

anonymous @ 3/10/08, wrong, never has desired the same sex and never will.

To me it is an replusive act just like it is to God. I quoted scripture with about 10% of my post being my personal opinion and you critiize me as if I am the one that wrote the bible.

But my guess is that since you know so much about it you done well describing yourself, and it is just as I thought.

You are the one that needs to be pitied because you are in a trap of self-indulgance that you couldn't get out of on your own if you tried. It's called an addiction to perversion.

Malicious act of tribal-fusion disabled. Such evil in the world today in people's heart to hurt others over stupid ideals of anger. It only makes me never to want to be near them again.

The first rule of Bigotry is to look directly at the person making such a statement because it's all about fear- either of themselves because they may be hiding aspects of the very same thing that they're bigoted against, or afraid of the unknown.

Selfishness and bigotry allows a false sense of superiority when in fact none exist.

All you've done is denigrate people that you know absolutely nothing about, probably because you have had such feelings for same sex members but cannot bear to admit it because of what that means for you.

Really, you have my pity.

anonymous, "it has been proven that homosexuality is not a choice"

~~~~~~~~~

If that is the case then Jehovah God did the following because..........?

Genesis 19:1-13, 23-25
(1) The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. (2)"My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning." "No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."(3)But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. (4) Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. (5)They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them." (6) Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him (7) and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.(8)Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."(9)"Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge! We'll treat you worse than them." They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.(10)But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. (11)Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door. (12)The two men said to Lot, "Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here,(13)because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it……" (23)By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. (24) Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens. (25) Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. (26) But Lot's wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

Jude 1:7,(7) “In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”

2 Peter 2:6,(6)“if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly”

Romans 1:18-32,(18)The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, (19) since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. (20) For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.(21) For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (22) Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools(23)and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.(24) Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. (25) They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. (26) Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. (27) In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.(28)Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.(29)They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, (30) slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; (31) they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.(32) Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

This text is not from an old conservative woman going 20 miles and hour that hit an Atheist man who mistaken the highway for a large bed, this is from the living God who had determined that homosexuality is an abomination before him and sin. Those who choose to live that way, in the end will suffer the same fate as Sodom and Gomorrah. And you wonder why the studies prove that the highest rate of HIV and STDs are among the sexually perverted.

it has been proven that homosexuality is NOT a choice, it is something that is inherent to a person. It has nothing to do whatsoever with spirituality.

get the facts straight.

ttw, "Based on the abject unhealthiness (as of 1995) of those in bondage to this "unnatural" vice, according to the BRITISH JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE AND THE HIV/AIDS SURVEILLANCE REPORT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES:

1. “Homosexuals carry one-half of the country's syphilis, although they are only 1- 1/2 to 2- 1/2% of the population, and are fourteen times more likely to have had the disease than heterosexuals.

2. Two-thirds of all the AIDS cases in the U.S. are the direct result of homosexual conduct.

3. Homosexual young people are twenty-three times more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) than their heterosexual counterparts.

4. In San Francisco, the sexually transmitted disease rate is twenty -two times higher than the national average.” (Ibid)

You don’t have to be a Rocket Scientist to see the immorality in gay sex and its evil, when over 29 million gays have been exterminated by AIDS and STDs, and who knows how many have committed suicide, or been scared and mutilated by these diseases and aren’t quite dead yet. You do have to be amoral and mentally blind to defend such ignominy.

"We know that Homosexuality is not a condition that any human being is born into, nor is it primarily a physical condition. It is a spiritual condition. In the final analysis, it is a choice, or a series of choices and decisions that each individual has made. It is impossible to understand anything about homosexuality without first understanding this." (Ibid)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EXCELLENT POINT AND POST.

"Unfortunately, the reason they are committing suicide is because they’ve abandoned God and in effect lost their purpose in life."

really? how do you know that, being the 'purveyor' of all things 'statistical,' that you cannot find a shred of evidence to back that up. that's YOUR conclusion. What if it's because people like you tell them that the god they've always trusted and thought of will torment them forever after having made them the way they are? What if it's because of having to hear day in and day out that they are not fit to have civil rights in this country simply because of the way they're wired? Which is supposed to be a country providing 'liberty and justice for ALL', not just those that you agree with?

Your dogmatism is unbelievable.. and doesn't even follow what Jesus said, about 'loving your neighbors as yourself' and 'judging not' and 'taking the beam out of your eye' before looking for it in others.

Gay people are not responsible for school shooters. For someone who talks about statistics, I'd like to see some that shows a direct cause.

You are absolutely scared of what you would find in your own shadow, and it shows.

Thankfully the Lady has a sense of humor when she allows you to stand there pissing into the wind.

the blowback sucks, doesn't it? Your face is yellow.

You have my pity.

IRT:
“These days the biggest spread is caused by Heterosexual activity. People who feel that their 'manhood' is being threatened because of people telling them to be responsible for their own behavior.”

ANS:
Baloney! You’ve been given the U.S. Government report, and the British report. Show they are wrong.

IRT:
“Actually I have had the joy of meeting Christians who feel that whatever two people do in the privacy of their own home is not their business. Regardless of whether or not they approve, they are willing to live and let live. Because they believe that's what Jesus would have done.”

ANS:
To God homosexuality is an abomination. Love is not disobeying God’s laws and causing others to do so. Love is obeying God and love is loving God. All true love is a vicarious love for God, because he is All Love.

“The Holy Spirit, in 1 Timothy, writing through Paul, called it the work of every 'good servant of Jesus Christ to expose godless errors and profane myths." accordingly; this view, through the truth of God's Word, of homosexuality's history, occult spirituality and inherent destruction of man, should not be dismissed as "hatred," for it is written in obedience to the God of Creation, and with love and concern for the physical and the eternal spiritual well being of all men and women.'
also2 Kings 2: 1, 6 - 14

This is the blessed assurance that the Christian has. In the Holy Spirit, speaking through Paul in the First Century stated:

l Corinthians 6:9-11,
'Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor [the] covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.” And that is what some of you were, but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.'"

IRT:
“You have no knowledge of Nature's laws any more than you show anything other than fear for what you don't understand. And that is sad.”

ANS:
My friend, it is you have no understanding of what you are saying. You haven’t gotten anything right yet.

IRT:
"What the heck is a beetlebomb? Are you a terrorist?"

ANS:
A racehorse that came in last.

IRT:
Really, TTWetc.. you're just talking to yourself. pissing into the wind. Which will get you wet. And covered in your own mess.

ANS:
That’s what truth means to a closed mind. When a closed mind is presented something it can’t understand, it calls it stupid.

You haven’t got anything right yet because you're in denial. You have an obstacle called bias. Your analysis of the Church was wrong; you dispute the findings of the Federal and British governments, and you show no stats or authority to confirm any of your denials.

You can’t refute the truth so you make nonsensical remarks to hide your lack of knowledge. Your predispositions are so overpowering your reason that you don’t want to know and are afraid of the truth.

IRT:
"You are absolutely terrified of things you know nothing about- and are obsessed with the behavior of people that you have no control over. And never will."

ANS:
I am not terrified, just saddened that people could be so ignorant by putting themselves in danger of such an unbearable, insufferable, and excruciating death. It's called being in denial of reality.

IRT:
“To quote from Toy Story: 'you are a sad, strange little man- and you have my pity'”

ANS:
I read a report on gays in Los Angeles. The leader of a gay community couldn’t understand why more of his friends were dying from suicide than from AIDS and STDs. Unfortunately, the reason they are committing suicide is because they’ve abandoned God and in effect lost their purpose in life.

Suicide is becoming in vogue to these shooters of Malls, schools, and work places. The problem is for the shooters as those who engage in gay sex, they always take someone who is innocent with them.

Moreover, it’s not just happening to shooters and gays; it's happening to our whole nation, and most specifically to the whole of the Democrat Party, that is pursuing the Clintons the emblem of gay advocates.

That is what is sad and morbid; that is what is so sorrowful and lamentable. Over 29 million worldwide have died from AIDS and it seems you are in denial of gay sex is not the cause of these sexual transmitted disease. Now who is the one to be pitied?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONYMOUS
“There are a lot of monogamous homosexual partners out there who are more moral than you. Who just want to have the same rights accorded to them that married people do.

If that bothers you then please, don't marry one.”

ANS:
Monogamous only is applicable to sexual unions in marriage. Monogamous sexual activity out side of marriage is an abomination in the eyes of God and in His Natural Moral Law. It is an patent contradiction of the natures of man and woman.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a7.htm#I

“Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone."92 The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help.93 "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."94

The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage."87

The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics.

Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity,88 some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."89

God who created man out of love also calls him to love the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love.90 Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'"91

The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."

Marriage under the regime of sin
1606 Every man experiences evil around him and within himself. This experience makes itself felt in the relationships between man and woman. Their union has always been threatened by discord, a spirit of domination, infidelity, jealousy, and conflicts that can escalate into hatred and separation.

This disorder can manifest itself more or less acutely, and can be more or less overcome according to the circumstances of cultures, eras, and individuals, but it does seem to have a universal character.

According to faith the disorder we notice so painfully does not stem from the nature of man and woman, nor from the nature of their relations, but from sin. As a break with God, the first sin had for its first consequence the rupture of the original communion between man and woman.

Their relations were distorted by mutual recriminations;96 their mutual attraction, the Creator's own gift, changed into a relationship of domination and lust;97 and the beautiful vocation of man and woman to be fruitful, multiply, and subdue the earth was burdened by the pain of childbirth and the toil of work.98

In his mercy God has not forsaken sinful man. The punishments consequent upon sin, "pain in childbearing" and toil "in the sweat of your brow,"100 also embody remedies that limit the damaging effects of sin. After the fall, marriage helps to overcome self-absorption, egoism, pursuit of one's own pleasure, and to open oneself to the other, to mutual aid and to self-giving.

Moral conscience concerning the unity and indissolubility of marriage developed under the pedagogy of the old law. In the Old Testament the polygamy of patriarchs and kings is not yet explicitly rejected. Nevertheless, the law given to Moses aims at protecting the wife from arbitrary domination by the husband, even though according to the Lord's words it still carries traces of man's "hardness of heart" which was the reason Moses permitted men to divorce their wives.”

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONYMOUS:
POINT OF ORDER TTWETC..- HOMOSEXUALITY DOESN'T CAUSE AIDS.

ANS:

http://www.chefdansculinaryadventures.com/~lgthscac/homosexualityingod'seyes.htm

“Based on the abject unhealthiness (as of 1995) of those in bondage to this "unnatural" vice, according to the BRITISH JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE AND THE HIV/AIDS SURVEILLANCE REPORT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES:

1. “Homosexuals carry one-half of the country's syphilis, although they are only 1- 1/2 to 2- 1/2% of the population, and are fourteen times more likely to have had the disease than heterosexuals.

2. Two-thirds of all the AIDS cases in the U.S. are the direct result of homosexual conduct.

3. Homosexual young people are twenty-three times more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) than their heterosexual counterparts.

4. In San Francisco, the sexually transmitted disease rate is twenty -two times higher than the national average.” (Ibid)

You don’t have to be a Rocket Scientist to see the immorality in gay sex and its evil, when over 29 million gays have been exterminated by AIDS and STDs, and who knows how many have committed suicide, or been scared and mutilated by these diseases and aren’t quite dead yet. You do have to be amoral and mentally blind to defend such ignominy.

"We know that Homosexuality is not a condition that any human being is born into, nor is it primarily a physical condition. It is a spiritual condition. In the final analysis, it is a choice, or a series of choices and decisions that each individual has made. It is impossible to understand anything about homosexuality without first understanding this." (Ibid)

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONYMOUS:
“You don't want liberty and justice for all, nor do you believe that 'all men are created equal', which is our founding basis. Note that it doesn't say 'only straight men are created equal'.”

ANS:
To the contrary, freedom is limited to choose that which is good; there is no right to choose immorality or evil. In that context, you want license. License is a prescription for immoral and social chaos.

All men are created equal in the dignity of their nature. All men are endowed with the same inalienable rights. The nature of all human beings is the same, their properties and philosophical accidents are different. They are physically and mentally different, but not substantially different. Their dignity is not measured by quantity or quality, but by their substantial nature, which is made to the image and likeness to God, and is the same for all human beings. Namely, their nature is human.

The Constitution implicitly in the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration explicitly says all men are created equal and this equality is endowed by their Creator, but it doesn't tell them they are free of consequence when they violate the rights of others and those of God. That is almost verbatim from Church doctrine.

The Church doesn’t condemn homosexuals, but it does condemn their behavior such as gay sex since it violates the moral law and therefore the social order.

IRT:
“Not your warped version of 'living by a book written for a long ago place, time, and culture that no longer exists'”.

ANS:
Your inalienable rights are based on God’s moral laws written in Scripture, in the Bill of Rights and the Declaration. So don’t they have any moral authority? Supreme Court Justice Stephens thinks they don’t. Unfortunately, you have no rights without a transcendental authority to enforce the violations of them. However, you do have rights, therefore there is a transcendental authority.

Under your prescription, government gives you your rights, contrary to the Bill of Rights and the Declaration who recognize they are God given not man given. Thus, the Declaration says they are “endowed” by our Creator. A nation that doesn’t recognize God doesn’t recognize the human rights God stored in human nature.

Evidently, the Court thinks like you. They corrupted the basic right of all humanity, the Right to Life of the innocent.

Since Stephens said, traditional morality is not a legitimate State interest in “Bowers,” then what is a legitimate interest to a State? If it is not morality, then it is social chaos. Is it the whims of man. Ask people who live in Communist countries. The Court has also infringed on the freedom of political speech, and eminent domain. The majority of the Court redefined human nature, and is on the verge of redefining marriage, if either Hillary or Obama are elected president.

Unfortunately, our nation once a republic is morphing into an oligarchy, changing the Constitution by writing immorality into a civil right, usurping the Amendment process, and violating the Equal Powers of the branches of government by writing laws instead of interpreting them.

The Court has become so bold as to redefine the Natural Law and discovered some new beings in the process to justify abortion. By fiat, they created a "1/3rd human 2/3rds "thing," and a 2/3rds human 1/3 "thing." It then declared that a woman is never pregnant with a child, because it never becomes a child until it is completely free of the mother.

Yes, one can believe anything, but they don’t have the authority to manufacture the facts. Men can ignore the Natural Law but the Natural Law will not ignore them.

If you don’t know God, you cannot know the truth. If you know not the truth, then you live in darkness and become like dogs chasing their tales. Hitler, Mao, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Stalin and Saddam, didn’t know the Truth and we have witnessed the consequences of millions dying because of it. Truth matters whether you believe it or not, so a word to the wise is seek it, act on it, and do not refute it.

"Really, TTWetc.. you're just talking to yourself. pissing into the wind. Which will get you wet. And covered in your own mess.

You are absolutely terrified of things you know nothing about- and are obsessed with the behavior of people that you have no control over. And never will.

To quote from Toy Story: 'you are a sad, strange little man- and you have my pity'."
````````````````````

Ironic that you should say this to ttw, it really applies to you. Point of order, do you always deceive women you sleep with that you are Gay at times?? What an A/H.

Point of order TTWetc..- Homosexuality doesn't cause AIDS.

There are a lot of monogamous homosexual partners out there who are more moral than you. Who just want to have the same rights accorded to them that married people do.
If that bothers you then please, don't marry one.

These days the biggest spread is caused by Heterosexual activity. People who feel that their 'manhood' is being threatened because of people telling them to be responsible for their own behavior.

Actually I have had the joy of meeting Christians who feel that whatever two people do in the privacy of their own home is not their business. Regardless of whether or not they approve they are willing to live and let live. Because they believe that's what Jesus would have done.

You have no knowledge of Nature's laws any more than you show anything other than fear for what you don't understand. And that is sad.

What the heck is a beetlebomb? Are you a terrorist?

Really, TTWetc.. you're just talking to yourself. pissing into the wind. Which will get you wet. And covered in your own mess.

You are absolutely terrified of things you know nothing about- and are obsessed with the behavior of people that you have no control over. And never will.

To quote from Toy Story: 'you are a sad, strange little man- and you have my pity'.

"Paganism is no help; it is a conduit to sexual perversion. Hence, their gods see no discord with the iniquity of human sacrifice or temple prostitutes. Under such a regime, truth becomes relative, subjective, and therefore meaningless since your truths may not be those of another."
___________________________________________

pa·gan:

1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion.
2. One who has no religion.
3. A non-Christian.
4. A hedonist.
5. A Neo-Pagan.
adj.
1. Not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish.
2. Professing no religion; heathen.
3. Neo-Pagan.
TheFreeDictionary by Farlex

2 Corinthians 6:14-17, (14)“Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? (15) What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? (16) What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people." (17) Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord.” NIV

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONYMOUS:
“…it's about EDUCATION, and not restricting natural impulses, but teaching people to respect themselves and other's enough to be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS.”

ANS:
You can't be educated if you consistently refuse to seek the truth, only seek that which you believe, and not seek what you don’t want to believe and can’t understand. The lack of objectivity is a prescription for a closed mind and an obstacle to the Truth.

Man is given an intellect that he might reason to the truth. Man is given a conscience, that he might reason the difference between good and evil.

God has given man His Church on earth, that the Church may assist man to do good and avoid evil on his journey to his final end that is the purpose of his life. By refusing to believe in the one true God, who is Christian, and who is Truth, one rejects truth.

Paganism is no help; it is a conduit to sexual perversion. Hence, their gods see no discord with the iniquity of human sacrifice or temple prostitutes. Under such a regime, truth becomes relative, subjective, and therefore meaningless since your truths may not be those of another.

Virtue is the discipline of the will by which man avoids evil or vice and controls his will by doing virtuous habitual acts that conditions the will to do what is good.

It was not natural to be sinful when God first created man. Since the sin of Adam, Original Sin, brought evil into the world, man’s nature has been overshadowed by sin, and man’s will has been weakened by its affects.

Hence, man must continuously discipline his will to resist the evil tendencies that attacks his wounded will. Namely, the Seven Deadly sins are a result of man unable to control his passions that overpower the will and reason.

Therefore, man needs the supernatural graces from God given to man through God’s Church by Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. He has opened the gates of Heaven so that man may obtain eternal happiness by sincerely seeking it.

IRS:
“…2) who said anything about my being Christian?
I'm not. Never was. and who said anything about my following the bible? Don't assume things about other people. it makes an ass out of you and me."

ANS:
It’s unfortunate that you are not a Christian. If you were a Christian, you wouldn't support gay sex. Those who approve of gay sex, become co-conspirators in the putting of peoples' lives in tragic danger of death and being infected. I think you made yourself the south end of Beetlebomb that is just under his tail. In fact, you already were by not being a Christian, and supporting gay sex.

IRS:
“you don't get to make policy for other people- and it tells me that because you choose to exclude others, you demonstrate your own fear of what you don't understand. if you don't approve of gay sex, don't have it. Don't marry a gay person. It has absolutely no impact on you whatsoever."

ANS:
No, I don’t make policies for you; God does that with the Moral Law and the Civil Law follows suit for the most part. They are all based on the Natural and Moral Law. I just tell you what they are, and why they are. You can reject them at your own peril. That’s what God gave you a free will for when He created you. However, you don’t get the choices of consequences that ensue.

I believe there is a great fear for the lives of people who could get AIDS or STDs from these nefarious evils they bring to unsuspecting others. Apparently, it doesn’t seem to bother you.

It is clear that Homosexuality can be deadly. Gay sex puts an enormous devastating physical and spiritual burden on those who engage in it, on their friends, and on the society they inhabit. Those who engage in gay sex are being socially irresponsible and reckless.

MHughes, thank you for your thoughtful reply. I must admit I'm not familiar with the philosopher you quoted. But I agree with you -- none of us are as open-minded as we profess to be, although it's an admirable quality. I think the best we can do is work in that direction, and knowing our shortcomings is a good first step.

Personally, I reach the end of my tether when I am confronted by a wall of absolute intolerance that seeks to limit my spiritual path. That wall is generally manifested in people who say with "absolute" authority that they have the one and only inside track on spirituality, and all else is balderdash and wrong based on their personal definition of sensible and right. I tend to push against those types -- as evidenced by a few of my posts.

Unfortunately, walls constructed in such a manner seldom budge from their footings, and I wind up beating my head pretty soundly. It is one of my shortcomings. *sigh* But I'm working fixing that. Clearly, two-way discussions are out of the question with those folks. The best I can do is walk around them and keep doing what I know is right for me.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MHUGHES976:
“Like Rousseau he is worried about the claim 'outside the Church there is no salvation', though as I remember he swallows hard and finds ways to live with it."

ANS:
Christ instated His Church so that all man may receive eternal happiness. He died on the cross so that man may be redeemed from the Sin of Adam, Original Sin. However, forgiveness of sin is not automatically bestowed on man; man must seek it and ask for it.

No one can enter the Kingdom of Heaven with sin. Therefore, man must be baptized. Baptism removes all sin, actual and Original. Therefore, man cannot enter heaven without being baptized.

Since the Church is Universal, for all humanity, everyone is a member of His Universal or Catholic Church.

“BAPTISM EXPLAINED, Pros and Cons”

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm#IV

The Fathers and theologians frequently divide baptism into three kinds: the baptism of water (aquæ or fluminis), the baptism of desire (flaminis), and the baptism of blood (sanguinis). However, only the first is a real sacrament. The latter two are denominated baptism only analogically, inasmuch as they supply the principal effect of baptism, namely, the grace that remits sins.

It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that when the baptism of water becomes a physical or moral impossibility, eternal life may be obtained by the baptism of desire or the baptism of blood.

(1) The Baptism of Desire

“The baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis) is a perfect contrition of heart, and every act of perfect charity or pure love of God which contains, at least implicitly, a desire (votum) of baptism.

The Latin word flamen is used because Flamen is a name for the Holy Ghost, Whose special office it is to move the heart to love God and to conceive penitence for sin. The "baptism of the Holy Ghost" is a term employed in the third century by the anonymous author of the book "De Rebaptismate.”

The efficacy of this baptism of desire to supply the place of the baptism of water, as to its principal effect, is proved from the words of Christ. After He had declared the necessity of baptism (John 3), He promised justifying grace for acts of charity or perfect contrition (John 14): "He that loveth Me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him and will manifest myself to him."

And again, "If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him." Since these texts declare that justifying grace is bestowed on account of acts of perfect charity or contrition, it is evident that these acts supply the place of baptism as to its principal effect, the remission of sins.

This doctrine is set forth clearly by the Council of Trent. In the fourteenth session (cap. iv) the council teaches that contrition is sometimes perfected by charity, and reconciles man to God, before the Sacrament of Penance is received. In the fourth chapter of the sixth session, in speaking of the necessity of baptism, it says that men cannot obtain original justice "except by the washing of regeneration or its desire" (voto).

The same doctrine is taught by Pope Innocent III (cap. Debitum, iv, De Bapt.), and the contrary propositions are condemned by Popes Pius V and Gregory XII, in proscribing the 31st and 33rd propositions of Baius.

(2) The Baptism of Blood
The baptism of blood (baptismus sanquinis) is the obtaining of the grace of justification by suffering martyrdom for the faith of Christ. The term "washing of blood" (lavacrum sanguinis) is used by Tertullian (De Bapt., xvi) to distinguish this species of regeneration from the "washing of water" (lavacrum aquæ). "We have a second washing,” he says "which is one and the same [with the first], namely the washing of blood." St. Cyprian (Ep. lxxiii) speaks of "the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood" (sanguinis baptismus).

St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei, XIII, vii) says, "When any die for the confession of Christ without having received the washing of regeneration, it avails as much for the remission of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism."

The Church grounds her belief in the efficacy of the baptism of blood on the fact that Christ makes a general statement of the saving power of martyrdom in the tenth chapter of St. Matthew: "Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven" (verse 32); and: "He that shall lose his life for me shall find it" (verse 39). It is pointed out that these texts are so broadly worded as to include even infants, especially the latter text.

That the former text also applies to them, has been constantly maintained by the Fathers, who declare that if infants cannot confess Christ with the mouth, they can by act. Tertullian (Adv. Valent., ii) speaks of the infants slaughtered by Herod as martyrs, and this has been the constant teaching of the Church."

Mama Bear - thanks for your reply to my question. I was just trying to explore the question of whether or how those of us who think that there is validity in different theological systems reach the end of our tethers and decide that some systems are unendurable, sacriligeous etc. - maybe because they really, really insult something we hold sacred or are conspicuously totalitarian. The great, recently deceased American political philosopher John Rawls explores this question, saying that there is an 'overlapping consensus' between different religions and ideologies but that beyond this consensus there comes a point where intolerance and even oppression have to be applied: or would have to be applied if the Bad Ideology were becoming too powerful. Like Rousseau he is worried about the claim 'outside the Church there is no salvation', though as I remember he swallows hard and finds ways to live with it. I'm just wondering whether any of us is quite as tolerant and open-minded as we would like to think we are. If you can be bothered to reply it will be some time before I can respond again, since my annual-ish visit to my family in the New World is almost upon me.

ANONYMOUS
“BIBLE & SCRIPTURES”

“Ttw, Nothing in the Catholic bible is of any interest to me based on the fact that they have devised their own bible, which is not consistent with,
-Matthew 5:17-19, "17

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm

At the Council of Trent, she enumerated the books that must be considered "as sacred and canonical.” They are the seventy-two books found in Catholic editions, forty-five in the Old Testament and twenty-seven in the New. Protestant copies usually lack the seven books (viz: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and First and Second Maccabees) and parts of books (viz: Esther 10:4-16:24, and Daniel 3:24-90; 13:1-14:42) which are not found in the Jewish editions of the Old Testament.

The Bible is plainly a literature, that is, an important collection of writings, which were not composed at once and did not proceed from one hand, but rather were spread over a considerable period of time and are traceable to different authors of varying literary excellence.

As a literature, too, the Bible bears throughout the distinct impress of the circumstances of place and time, methods of composition, etc., in which its various parts came into existence, and of these circumstances careful account must be taken, in the interests of accurate scriptural interpretation. As a literature, our sacred books have been transcribed during many centuries by all manner of copyists to the ignorance and carelessness of many of whom they still bear witness in the shape of numerous textual errors, which, however, but seldom interfere seriously with the primitive reading of any important dogmatic or moral passage of Holy Writ.

the New Testament, completed about A.D. 100, is indeed far more recent than the four last named literatures, and is somewhat posterior to the Augustan age of the Latin language, but it is older by ten centuries than our earliest modern literature.

As regards the Old Testament, most of its contents were gradually written within the nine centuries, which preceded the Christian era, so that its composition is generally regarded as contemporary with that of the great literary works of Greece, China, Persia, and India. The Bible resembles these various ancient literatures in another respect. Like them, it is fragmentary, i.e. made up of the remains of a larger literature.

Of this we have abundant proofs concerning the books of the Old Testament, since the Hebrew Scriptures themselves repeatedly refer us to more ancient and complete works as composed by Jewish annalists, prophets, wise men, poets, and so on (cf. Numbers 21:15; Joshua 10:13; 2 Samuel 1:18; 1 Chronicles 29:29; 1 Maccabees 16:24; etc.). Statements tending to prove the same fragmentary character of the early Christian literature which has come down to us are indeed much less numerous, but not altogether wanting (cf. Luke 1:1-3; Colossians 4:16; 1 Corinthians 5:9).

AS TO ERRORS IN TRANSLATIONS:
However, ancient and fragmentary, it is not to be supposed that the Biblical literature contains only few and these rather imperfect, literary forms. In point of fact its contents exhibit nearly all the literary forms met with in our Western literatures together with other peculiarly Eastern, but none the less beautiful. It is also a well-known fact that the Bible is so replete with pieces of transcendent literary beauty that the greatest orators and writers of the last four centuries have most willingly turned to our sacred books as pre-eminently worthy of admiration, study, and imitation.

To sum up, the Biblical knowledge of St. Jerome makes him rank first among ancient exegetes. the Scriptures are the only ones inspired and free from error. Therefore, one must determine if the text, in which the difficulties arise, has not been altered by the copyist.

St. Jerome .ASSERTS THAT IN THE BIBLE THERE IS NO MATERIAL ERROR DUE TO THE IGNORANCE OR THE HEEDLESSNESS OF THE SACRED WRITER, BUT HE ADDS: "IT IS USUAL FOR THE SACRED HISTORIAN TO CONFORM HIMSELF TO THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED OPINION OF THE MASSES IN HIS TIME" (P.L., XXVI, 98; XXIV, 855).

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
FEBRUARY 25, 2008 10:16 PM
ANONYMOUS
“BIBLE & SCRIPTURES”

The New Testament was completed about A.D. 100,

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm

“The Bible is a collection of writings which the Church of God has solemnly recognized as inspired. In the time of Christ, the Jews were in possession of sacred books, which differed widely from one another in subject, style, origin and scope, and it is also a fact that they regarded all such writings as invested with a character which distinguished them from all other books.

TRADITION:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

This was the Divine authority of every one of these books and of every part of each book. This belief of the Jews was confirmed by Our Lord and His Apostles; for they supposed its truth in their teaching, used it as a foundation of their doctrine, and intimately connected with it the religious system of which they were the founders [a.k.a. Catholicism].

The books thus approved were handed down to the Christian [Catholic] Church as the written record of Divine revelation before the coming of Christ. The truths of Christian revelation were made known to the Apostles either by Christ Himself or by the Holy Ghost. They constitute what is called the Deposit of Faith [of the Catholic Church], to which nothing has been added since the Apostolic Age.

Some of the truths were committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and have been handed down to us in the books of the New Testament.

Written originally to individual Churches or persons, to meet particular necessities, and accommodated as they all were to particular and existing circumstances, these books were gradually received by the universal Church as inspired, and with the sacred books of the Jews constitute the Bible.

The Bible not only contains the word of God; it is the word of God. The primary author is the HOLY GHOST, or, as it is commonly expressed, the human authors wrote under the influence of Divine inspiration.

It was declared by the Vatican Council (Sess. III, c. ii) that the sacred and canonical character of Scripture would not be sufficiently explained by saying that the books were composed by human diligence and then approved by the Church, or that they contained revelation without error. They are sacred and canonical ‘because, having been written by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author. As such, they have been handed down to the Church’.

The inerrancy of the Bible follows as a consequence of this Divine authorship. Wherever the sacred writer makes a statement as his own, that statement is the word of God and infallibly true, whatever be the subject matter of the statement.

We are dependent upon the Church for our knowledge of the existence of this inspiration. She is the appointed witness and guardian of revelation. From Her Alone We Know What Books Belong To The Bible." (Ibid)

ANONYMOUS
“BIBLE & SCRIPTURES”
“Ttw, Nothing in the Catholic bible is of any interest to me based on the fact that they have devised their own bible, which is not consistent with,
-Matthew 5:17-19, "17

ANS:
"The Bible is the inspired recorded word of God's Revelation. It contains the word of God; that is, it contains those revealed truths that the Holy Ghost wishes to be transmitted in writing. However, all revealed truths are not contained in the Bible (see TRADITION); neither is every truth in the Bible revealed, if by revelation is meant the manifestation of hidden truths which could not other be known."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

"Tradition sometimes refers to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another, and sometimes to the organ or mode of the transmission."

The New Testament was completed about A.D. 100. Therefore, for some 100 years, the New Testament hadn't been created yet, it was still being written. Consequently, the teachings were transferred by word of mouth since there were few copies of the Apostles letters, and few had access to them. Thus, not every thing was handed down only by Scripture, but by Tradition. The importance of Tradition was personified in the play and movie "Fiddler on the Roof."

"Much of the Scripture came to its writers through the channels of ordinary knowledge, but its sacred character and Divine authority are not limited to those parts that contain revelation strictly so termed." (Ibid)

http://www.reference.com/search?q=Bible

“Bible [Gr., = the books], term used since the 4th cent to denote the Christian Scriptures and later, by extension, those of various religious traditions.”

Did you wonder what Christians were around in the Fourth Century? Was it the Baptists? Was it Lutherans, Episcopalians, or Methodists? I believe it was Catholics. So who was editing and collating the Scriptures into the Bible? It wasn’t Muslims, Buddhists, or Hindus;’ it wasn’t pagans was it? Was it the Jews? I don’t think so. I believe it was Catholics.

“The sacred writings of the religions of the world exhibit a variety of genres—prayers, visions, ritual, moral codes, myths, historical narratives, legends, and revelatory discourses. SUCH WORKS HAVE TENDED TO BE TRANSMITTED ORALLY AT FIRST AND COMMITTED TO WRITING AT A LATER DATE.-(Ibid)

This is true of much of the content of the Christian Bible as well as of the Hindu Vedas and the Jewish Mishnah Not all things are written in the Bible, the other source of inspiration comes from Tradition.

The earliest surviving complete manuscript of the entire Bible is the Codex Amiatinus, a Latin Vulgate edition produced in eighth century England at the double monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow.

The Codex Amiatinus is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Bible in the Latin Vulgate version. It dates to the turn of the 8th century and is considered to be the most accurate copy of St. Jerome's text. The Codex is also a fine specimen of medieval calligraphy, and is now kept at Florence in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. The symbol for it is written am or A (Wordsworth).

Most variants among the manuscripts are minor, such as alternate spelling, alternate word order, the presence, or absence of an optional definite article ("the"), and so on. Occasionally, a major variant happens when a portion of a text was accidentally omitted (or perhaps even censored), or was added from a marginal gloss. Fortunately, major variants tend to be easier to correct." (Ibid)

Don’t be so foolish; if it weren’t for Catholicism, you would have no Bible. The monks and priest are the ones who preserved the books of the New Testament.

Never has the Church changed any of its doctrines, fundamental beliefs, or teachings since Her inception. Therefore, She is a manifestation of the Word of God and God's providence.

Can you name one Church or religion other than the Catholic Church that hasn’t changed its fundamental precepts in accord with the Scriptures since its beginning? That is evidence She is the one true Church.

Mama bear, please don’t use the term “bible thumping,” is has a great deal of negative connotation attached to it that it makes a person that believes in scripture to be a deviant.

I understand your point and scripture should never be used as an attack on someone and possibly you could make the delineation in your comment. I believe in scripture but try hard to only use it as a basis to an argument as my resource and not as an attack on someone stating, “if you don’t live by scripture then you are wrong.”

Although I agree that requesting a believer in Christ whose fundamental belief is reliant on scripture not to use it, as there’re reference in religious and or spiritual discussion is an unreasonable request. It would be like asking a Muslim not to introduce there’re importance of pray when discussing religion.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MAMA BEAR:
“And as you can see, you've already alienated some Christians who might agree with you on the basic theological precepts of Christianity, because of your over-reliance on your one interpretation of the book.”

ANS:
There can only be one truth and so not only Aristotle, the Father of Logic, but common sense and reason show the First principle of Contradictories is not a whim but a fact. You can’t have Scripture mean anything if it is self-contradictory. Fortunately, it is not; it is infallible, without error, since its author is infallible.

To adhere to the untruth of contradictory interpretations and maintain they all are true is to adhere to confusion and unreality. Therefore, God gave his Church the gift of infallibility in its moral and religious teachings pontificated by the Pontiff “excathedra,” as the Visible Head of the Church, representing God who is its Head.

Pontius Pilate asked Jesus, “Why are you here?” Jesus said I came to witness the truth.” Pilate said, “Truth, what is Truth?” Truth was standing before him and he couldn’t see it. Christ came to bear the Truth and they murdered Him for it. The Truth divides families, brothers from sisters, fathers from mothers. However, deny the Truth and descend into the darkness where the blind are leading the blind.

Again, how many universities, orphanages, schools, and hospitals have been started by atheists, agnostics and pagans, the iconoclastic, troglodytes, and sophists? Compare them to the number created by Catholics. Who fights for the dignity of all life more than the Catholic Church? Ever heard of Mother Theresa, Catholic Charities, the Dream Program, Catholic programs for the unwed Mothers

IRS:
“Try something new: Use your own words. Paraphrase, if you must. But the din created by your incessant bible thumping really drowns out what you're trying to say.”

ANS:
What can be substituted for the Truth? The quotes are only to show that the reasoning is substantiated by credible scholars and not my reason alone.

The reason you can’t have a rational discussion is that you want one to agree to your doltish statements. You are so flustered that you cannot answer the questions to defend your preconceived ideas since they have no rational basis. Now you want to run and hide with under the inane conclusion they contain too much Scripture. What priggery!

In your frustration, as the Irish say, “Smile and give your face a holiday.”

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MAMA BEAR:
“TTWetc, there is no way to have a rational discussion with you unless I agree with you, which I don't. I'm not reading your posts, anyway, because they are too full of scriptural references.”

ANS:
Checking my last four post to you, I find there is not one verse of Scripture in any of them. It's surprising you seen the verses when you haven't read them. What absurdity! How can you reply to post you never read?

To the contrary, you have read them and that’s why you’ve become so unscrewed. You can’t rationally respond to them because your predispositions are an obstacle to your objectivity.

Consequently, you make rash statements and then ignore the responses to them. What beliefs have Catholics imposed on millions of people and impugned their civil rights? Is one that Catholics believe there is no right to murder innocent unborn children? If you support that then those poor unborn never get a chance to worship anything.

You were asked, “Do you believe in a God and if you do, define God.” Your response is you aren’t going to respond because I want you to agree with me. Evidently, your flummoxed comport indicates you more than likely agree with the post since you can't answer them, and lamely claim you never read them. Ridiculous! You can’t refute reason and be rational

IRT:
“The constitution says you CANNOT do that. And I will do everything in my power to make sure that people like you don't mess the Constitution up because of your jealous, vindictive worldviews.”

Where did the Constitution say murder is legal? That was done by the Court. And, why is it vindictive to protect the unborn. Do you not believe in Equal Rights? Though the Court is complicit in the murder of 48 million unborn, it seems it is immaterial to you.

Without a Right to Life, all other rights can be disposable. The majority of the Court, the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse—Souter, Stephens, Ginsburg, and Breyer, joining Kennedy—concurred with Stephens that traditional morality is not even a legitimate state interest. Stevens’ declaration in his Bowers dissent, concluded, “The fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice,” ante, at 17.

The Court violated Equal Powers provision, by legislating. It violated the Amendment process by writing immorality into the Constitution. It violated the Bill of Rights and disregarded the Declaration of Independence by obscuring the Right to Life. You sophistically write you will do every thing in your power to see that vindictive people like Catholics, who in fact defend the Constitution, don’t screw it up. Thus, you incomprehensible exalt the Court who is actually screwing it up.

Moreover, you defend gay sex and can’t explain why you do when it has killed over 28 million people worldwide.

You write, “What I DO care about is how much YOUR beliefs interfere with the rights of millions of people to believe, worship, and live as they feel right for themselves.” What beliefs are these? Is it, “You can’t murder your unborn,” or that, “Gay sex is illicit and immoral,” that “Gay Marriage is an oxymoron, and the Court may redefine Marriage,” or that “Traditional morals serve no purposeful meaning to society?” These are precepts of the Natural Law.

Maybe you think that Court has a right to define the nature of man and claim the unborn is not human, as they have done. Are you unaware of what Justice Blackmon’s basis was for justifying that the unborn wasn’t a human? He created the buffoonery that the conceived was a “thing” that morphed into 1/3rd human 2/3rds “thing.” In the first Trimester, In the Second Trimester the conceived was 2/3rds human and 1/3rd “thing. It’ never becomes human until it is completely separated from the mother. So the Court signed on to the preposterous theory that woman is without child but with a “thing.”

Therefore, a butcher surgeon could suck the baby’s brains out while being born. According to the Court, the child is not human until complete separation occurs. Fortunately, Partial Birth Abortion (PBA) is now illegal thanks to Bush and Pro-Lifers. The Abortion Dems’ co-presidency Clintons vetoed the Anti-PBA Bill twice.

Even after complete detachment, the child is not safe. The Court ruled that the butcher could legally strangle the victim even if it survives the abortion. Abortion is infanticide. Jesse Jackson once called it Black Genocide.

You have signed on to this irrational lunacy, the boondoggle of the Trimester Theory. It justifies the legal murder of over 48 million unborn. It facetiously is said to be a compassion for women, a right for a mother to murder her own unborn child.

You have wrote, you will defend the right of millions of people “to believe, worship, and live as they feel right for themselves“ That sounds like you unwittingly defend the right of terrorists to believe and act accordingly to what they feel right for themselves, or all the other iniquitous improvident overindulged passions that are immoral and destructive.

TTWetc, there is no way to have a rational discussion with you unless I agree with you, which I don't. I'm not reading your posts, anyway, because they are too full of scriptural references.

And as you can see, you've already alienated some Christians who might agree with you on the basic theological precepts of Christianity, because of your over-reliance on your one interpretation of the book.

Try something new: Use your own words. Paraphrase, if you must. But the din created by your incessant bible thumping really drowns out what you're trying to say.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
MAMA BEAR:
TTWetc, you just don't get it.
“It is your interpretation and your language that is creating the barrier.

ANS:
It is not my interpretation; it’s the Church’s interpretation protected from error by God. There are no barriers; the Truth will set you free from your anger, from you frustrations, and will set you on the way to eternal happiness.

IRT:
“It is your insistence that your way is the ONLY way to believe, worship, and live that is creating the barrier.”

ANS:
Wrong again, the Word of God is not a barrier but the key to open your mind up to the real world. Second, it’s not my way; it’s God’s way. I, and the Founding Fathers, have recognized the dignity of man and that man’s inalienable rights are God given, not man given. That is stated in the Declaration and the Bill of Rights.

Unfortunately, you cannot see that your own rights are being trampled by an oligarchy Court writing its own Constitution, usurping the role of the Creator, and you claim it is their right to do so. You seem to think that since the Scriptures were written in ancient times, the only ones who can interpret them are the ancients

You sound like an agnostic that denies the attributes of God. Moreover, I don’t claim to be infallible, so it's not my way.

Additionally, the Church’s precepts do not just rely on the translated word. They also rely on Tradition, the spoken word. Namely, the Church was teaching the Word of God some 50 to 70 years after Her inception and the Ascension of Christ without any Scriptures, since they were still being written at the time.

In addition, the New Testament is cross-referenced with the Old Testament insuring Scripture’s continuity and is interpreted in its historical context as well. The superficial errors in translation due to the language are minute and inconsequential to the meanings deducted from the translations that are protected under the auspices of God.