Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About The Reliable Source  |  On Twitter: Reliable Source  |  E-mail: Amy and Roxanne  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed
Posted at 10:18 PM ET, 01/31/2011

This just in...: Barbara Bush endorses gay marriage (video)

By The Reliable Source

Barbara Bush at the 2009 Inauguration. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)

Updated Feb. 1, 7 p.m.: What does Barbara's endorsement mean for GOP, gays?

Another high-profile Republican is breaking ranks to advocate for gay marriage -- George W. Bush's daughter Barbara. The New York Times reported late Monday that the dark-haired twin has taped a video for the Human Rights Campaign, to be shown at their annual gala in Manhattan Saturday, calling on the Empire State to legalize same-sex marriages. Bush, 29, has kept a lower profile than her author/"Today" correspondent sister Jenna, but recently founded the Global Health Corps, which sponsors do-gooder work in poor communities worldwide.

See video...

Barbara Bush's HRC video


Updated Tuesday morning

By The Reliable Source  | January 31, 2011; 10:18 PM ET
Categories:  Politics  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Quoted: Tom Joyner tells Mary Harvey to cool it with the YouTube videos
Next: Anna Deavere Smith and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius talk health care and booze

Comments

The WP didn't make much of her doing charity work, but if she is in favor of gays, than that is worth a front page web article.

Posted by: Delongl | January 31, 2011 11:01 PM | Report abuse

It's probably because I don't view homosexuality to be a fundamentally important human characteristic that I'm never moved by these happy reports of another "young Republican" in support of gay marriage. Further, it's little surprise that generations that have been raised under conditions different than their parents tend to respond differently to particular issues. The near-constant media campaign, both public and private, to make homosexuality prevalent, common, and therefore acceptable and morally unquestionable has proved to be a major, though unsurprising, success.

But I understand that it's in the Washington Post's interest to highlight these stories, inasmuch as the Post is part of the media campaign I mentioned above. Repetition, repetition, repetition. Common occurrence = culturally acceptable; culturally acceptable = morally right.

And onward we march.

Posted by: villarrj | January 31, 2011 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Facts are stubborn things, Villarrj. Slowly but surely, scientific understanding of sexuality has been replacing prejudice.

One day, you too will understand.

Posted by: Hellmut | January 31, 2011 11:33 PM | Report abuse

That's great and all, but wasn't it sort of an open secret that the Bush ladies were all further to the left than the Bush gent?

Posted by: dkp01 | January 31, 2011 11:43 PM | Report abuse

Thankfully, bigotry isn't genetic!

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | February 1, 2011 12:41 AM | Report abuse

"do-gooder" ?

I weep for your editors....

Posted by: rwolf01 | February 1, 2011 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Sorry Babs, no use - the Left still hates you and your Father.

Posted by: pgr88 | February 1, 2011 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Whatsa Matta BABS, didn't your old man give the Left enough fodder to soil the Family name ? Between you and Cheney's offspring , the GOP will have to work overtime to re-paint the Elephant .

Posted by: puck-101 | February 1, 2011 2:12 AM | Report abuse

villarrj, Quite unlike your generation, Barbara's generation is full of people who have been allowed to meet gay people on their own and come to their own conclusions, rather that told by their elders what they're "supposed" to think. What you see in the media is actually following that, not leading it.

Posted by: JoeNCA | February 1, 2011 2:22 AM | Report abuse

@villarrj
"...The near-constant media campaign, both public and private, to make homosexuality prevalent, common, and therefore acceptable and morally unquestionable..."

This straight, married middle-aged man thinks the sexual orientation percentages are the same now as 50 or 100 years ago. There's no media campaign; as JoeNCA noted above, the media are following public opinion, not leading it. Society is recognizing the right of two consenting adults to commit to each other. What's wrong with that, particularly as record numbers of straight couples "shack up"?

It's not a zero-sum proposition. My marriage isn't threatened because two men or two women are in love. Don't like gay sex, villarrj? Fine, don't have any!

Posted by: SilverSpring8 | February 1, 2011 2:50 AM | Report abuse

I too believe in equal rights. This is a good move. Thank you.

A very silly blog by carlbatey says: "So what. Barry Obama practices beastiality."

How long has Carl had a fixation with bestiality? Is his claim a "confession"?

Posted by: robertjames1 | February 1, 2011 4:21 AM | Report abuse

She's cute

Posted by: John291250 | February 1, 2011 4:35 AM | Report abuse

pub homos?true bipartisenship. has odumbo and gang weighed in on this breaking news?

Posted by: pofinpa | February 1, 2011 5:27 AM | Report abuse

Could you possibly be more condescending?

"do-gooder?" I imagine if Chelsea Clinton had founded the charity, you would have termed it an "empowering initiative for disadvantaged populations."

Posted by: padre1957 | February 1, 2011 6:05 AM | Report abuse

who cares?...

Posted by: DwightCollins | February 1, 2011 6:12 AM | Report abuse

"do-gooder work in poor communities worldwide."

I'm no fan of the Bush Presidency but "do-gooder"? Pretty unprofessional representation of someone that is trying to help people.

Posted by: brianhoxie | February 1, 2011 6:28 AM | Report abuse

While Baarbara's mother was concerned with issues of major import - like bike path routing controversies and flower arrangements - and her dad tortured prisoners and defiled this country with wars based in lies, Barb had no awakening, none?, during 8 years in office... and only now comes out and says what most people already agree with: gays should marry. She's a coward for not having spoken up earlier. I'd love to hear what she thinks of waterboarding and Iraq and what it feels like to be the daughter of a father who was such a reckless and pathetic failure.

Posted by: jdwagner | February 1, 2011 6:58 AM | Report abuse

Well, if "Barbara Bush" says we must.........!!

Seriously, who cares for her opinion? A lot of people have opinions on this issue. I care only for what I believe God's opinion of this issue is.

Posted by: momof20yo | February 1, 2011 7:06 AM | Report abuse

Well al u, city slickers out tehre. When wei speak of Wyas gypsies, by gosh wie be ysing words like do-gooder we gots to frame them good ol boys and girs from da greait state ov Taxs in a proper laight. Yall du know dat men rode dinosours and then hawses. Uz in de meidia gots tu tall eit lak eit ess. Dunt bie disrespetien awr desrespet. Dem gerlz is dunt knowz noten aniywai. Day juzt yungins. Yall knw de appel dunt fal fir frum da trei. Ya know day aint too edukated duwn their. I meenz looks at what yus all says bout dat black ladie in de what houz. God blez ya all

Posted by: cario1 | February 1, 2011 7:12 AM | Report abuse

carbatey, you are as ignorant and disgusting as they come. There is a special place in hell reserved for liars, racists and fools like you. Shame on you.

Posted by: muffet | February 1, 2011 7:12 AM | Report abuse

One only needs to look at Egypt and Mubarak's 31 year rule to praise our ability to kick out "self-annointed" dynasties like the Bushes.

Why is this girl news to WAPO?

Posted by: wesatch | February 1, 2011 7:14 AM | Report abuse

Hellmut,

What's scarier is that one day you too will understand.

Sadly, it may be too late for you and them.....

And please don't justify it with phrases like homophobia.
Heterophobia is applicable here.

Posted by: tjmlrc | February 1, 2011 7:17 AM | Report abuse

And in other news, Chelsea Clinton said higher income taxes would be very bad for the economy.

(I made that up, but even if it were true, you would never print it, much less put it on the front page.)

Let's keep the editorializing in the opinion section!

Posted by: corco02az | February 1, 2011 7:37 AM | Report abuse

carlbatey

Get help. One reason I rarely read WAPO comments is that they badly need moderation.

Posted by: Afraid4USA | February 1, 2011 7:54 AM | Report abuse

WTH is a "do-gooder" the editor read this article? If so, the WAPO needs a new editor...

Posted by: MarkUSAF | February 1, 2011 8:21 AM | Report abuse

"carlbatey

Get help. One reason I rarely read WAPO comments is that they badly need moderation.

Posted by: Afraid4USA"
=============================
And yet here you post....

As disappointingly puerile as carlbatey's comment is, more moderation isn't the solution. Then you'd run the risk of creating a NYT-style "echo chamber" that, while conveniently reassuring, pretty much squelches any and all opinions that dare dissent to the Editorial Board's prevailing slant.

Posted by: OttoDog | February 1, 2011 8:23 AM | Report abuse

The WP and other mainstream media did report, more than once, that she was doing charity work. Make a big deal of it? Lots of people do charity work and most get far less media attention than she does. The WP making a big deal of her comments about gays? This is one small feature item. Hardly a big deal. I support her views on this topic, but agree that her views matter no more than anyone else's. Families of well-known people get media coverage no matter what they do (even appearing on a silly dance competition TV show).

Posted by: Sutter | February 1, 2011 8:34 AM | Report abuse

"One day, you too will understand."

Actually they never understand, they just die off like the dinosaurs and the like of Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond....then the world is a better place and into the dustbin of history they go...

Posted by: nowhine | February 1, 2011 8:37 AM | Report abuse

The Human Rights Campaign Fund is the largest Gay rights lobby. This is significant.

If Chelsea did a commercial for CPAC it would be news, not Opinion.
Congrat's Barbara, I applaud you.

Posted by: mcroriel | February 1, 2011 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Good for you, Ms. Bush. One can be a Republican and still be open-minded on social issues.

Posted by: chgobluesguy | February 1, 2011 8:56 AM | Report abuse

............ "what it feels like to be the daughter of a father who was such a reckless and pathetic failure."

##############################################
And in 20 years when they ask obama's offspring the same thing it will be history repeating itself!

Except I think feckless in place of reckless is a more apt description of obama.

(oh and don't kid yourself) If someone was to hurt obamas offspring as was done to the offspring of others in NY on 9-11, he would be the first one to the plate to torture them. He and MEchelle both!!

Posted by: tjmlrc | February 1, 2011 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Who cares...Barry's a one termer and libs can't stand it.

Posted by: getagrip5 | February 1, 2011 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Why are tea party people so mean spirited?

Posted by: sjp879 | February 1, 2011 9:16 AM | Report abuse

momof20yo:

Your comment is far and away the most ignorant one that I have ever read on this comment board. Yikes lady, get it together.

Posted by: saywhat3 | February 1, 2011 9:28 AM | Report abuse

OMG !!! I hope Barbara is not setting us up before she announces her engagement. !!!!

Posted by: james_m_reilly1 | February 1, 2011 9:30 AM | Report abuse

OMG !!! I hope Barbara is not setting us up before she announces her engagement. !!!!

Posted by: james_m_reilly1 | February 1, 2011 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Your gay marriage is no threat to me. If you want to get married, the government has no business stopping you. If someone doesn't like gay marriage, don't marry someone your own gender & don't attend the joyous occasion.

Posted by: cyberfool | February 1, 2011 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Seriously, jdwagner! You really think it's a child's duty to speak out against her father and undermine his work and his opinions?

Posted by: forgetthis | February 1, 2011 9:44 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry. But "God's view" of this issue? I didn't know God could talk. Since so many people from so many religions say they "speak for God", who's to believe? I frankly don't understand how gay marriage "threatens" hetero marriage. The largest threat to hetero marriage is divorce -- not gays. I think hetoros should mind their own business and stop telling everyone else how to live their lives, especially since theirs aren't exactly perfect.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | February 1, 2011 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Her mother Laura's views are the same for gays as is John McCains wife and daughter have.
Reagan's daughter protested many of his beliefs and one big one that got very vocal was when he stopped funds for the mentally ill and the hospitals had to let them out of the hospitals and they became the homeless on the streets.

I do not know why the hype on Reagan that goes on lately cause he was only good at speaking on bringing the people together due the dissent of Vietnam. This man caused some terrible problems for the people of this country that were to affect negatively and destructively generation after generation. Every time I hear the president speak his name I cringe.

Posted by: mac7 | February 1, 2011 9:45 AM | Report abuse

She's a grown woman and is entitled to her opinion. And Bravo to her to.

Now *ahem*
"We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features"

Why is the term 'do-gooder' not edited out of this article. It is a condescending I would expect a forum comment-but not in an article. Unprofessional.

Posted by: Tempest1 | February 1, 2011 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Why are tea party people so mean spirited?

Posted by: sjp879
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Probably in response to not wanting to be taxed to death and controlled by others who can't even control their own selves.
I am an adult and as such, I'm not interested in being controlled by anyone.
For instance, obama wants everyone to "get along" until of course he bad mouths someone. Apparently that is okay. And that is just one small example. The actions of the left are inflaming the right. The right has as much right to disagree with the policies of the left as vice versa.
When they begin respecting the fact I don't agree with them, and it doesn't make me "the enemy" (obama) or "astroturf" (pelosi) for two examples and when they understand that I will exercise my constitutional right to work to vote them out of office, to the best of my ability, we'll get along much better.
And I also have every right to disagree with same sex marriage. I have every right to say that in my opinion, it's wrong. It doesn't give them the right to call me names like homophobe. What right do you have to judge me to be intolerant because I don't agree with same sex copulation?
Can you respect those whose ideals are different from yours?

Posted by: tjmlrc | February 1, 2011 9:53 AM | Report abuse

She's more socially progressive than President Obama, who would not dare support Gay Marriage.

(that Southern Baptist vote is too valuable)

Posted by: DonnyKerabatsos | February 1, 2011 10:01 AM | Report abuse

It's a little more noteworthy when someone so closely related to a regressive speaks out - and in a significant forum like the HRC - than when anyone who's actually expected to do so. And in the spirit of agreeing with good behavior no matter on whose part, I applaud BB for this statement. It's not really too-little/too-late until the whole US recognizes same-sex marriage; until that time, every little bit helps. I hope it gives pause to those who consider her and her family part of their conservative/regressive in-group.

Posted by: rabbit_comma_roger | February 1, 2011 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: tjmlrc "And I also have every right to disagree with same sex marriage. I have every right to say that in my opinion, it's wrong. It doesn't give them the right to call me names like homophobe. What right do you have to judge me to be intolerant because I don't agree with same sex copulation?
Can you respect those whose ideals are different from yours?
-------------------------------
So you want us to respect YOUR opinions and YOUR right to say them, but we should keep quiet and not mention OURS? Yes you have every right to your opinion. We have the same right to our opinion that you are a religiously based bigot. My saying that is absolutely no different thean you having the opinion that because I am gay, I am less, and deserve less than you.

You cannot have the right to express your opinion and at the same time expect us to not do the same.

I turn your question right back at you-

Can you respect those whose ideals are different from yours?

If you don't believe in same sex marriage or relationships, thats fine, don't have one. But your opinion does not rule my life. and your religion does not rule my secular laws.

Posted by: schnauzer21 | February 1, 2011 10:11 AM | Report abuse

"Slowly but surely, scientific understanding of sexuality has been replacing prejudice."

Exactly the problem. Evolution or global warming: Rational scientific analysis and investigation beats revelation as the true path to The Truth. As long as GW Bush needed the radical conservative christian vote, he had to pander a "faith-based" view of the world.

Sexuality is biology, not choice.

Posted by: thebobbob | February 1, 2011 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Barbara Bush? I had no idea that she is such a thoughtful and decent person. She deserves better press coverage than she has received in the past. She has been portrayed as a portly Marie Antoinette.

Posted by: mmurray2 | February 1, 2011 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Is this the daughter who was stopped in a bar for underage drinking? The daughter who gave her secret service guards gray hair when they were told "my father will kick your a___". Remember the Argentina vacation, the young Bush daughter who was asked to leave Argentina by the government there because of raucas behavior in the hotel hallways? Now we are presented her opinion solemnly as that of a wise mature philosopher. I'm not listening.

Posted by: drzimmern1 | February 1, 2011 10:44 AM | Report abuse

How ignorant of Barbara Bush the younger to endorse homosexual marriage. At best, she is deluded, as are many today by the homosexual propaganda spread by almost all traditional media outlets, non-Catholic churches, public schools, etc.

Posted by: DoTheRightThing | February 1, 2011 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Dear momof20yo:

Welcome to America. One thing that distinguishes us from Iran is non-establishment of religion.

Posted by: DoctorWhom | February 1, 2011 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Forget their father's brand of politics. These two young ladies, especially Barbara, are wonderful.

Posted by: truth1 | February 1, 2011 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Forget their father's brand of politics. These two young ladies, especially Barbara, are wonderful.

Posted by: truth1 | February 1, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

We have the same right to our opinion that you are a religiously based bigot.
(as stated by the flaming f@gg@t schnauzer21
**********************************************

So this is what happens when you try to engage in civil discourse with a liberal f@&&@t.
They can't do it because of their bigotted heterophobia.

Posted by: tjmlrc | February 1, 2011 11:28 AM | Report abuse

The hate is strong today. Love the attacks on this woman's character... it's once again quite revealing of the general tone and tenor of the leftist liberal faction. Liberal says: "Don't eat at Chik Fil A. They hate gays." Makes me think liberals despise hate.

"Sorry Babs, no use - the Left still hates you and your Father." Makes me think liberals are quite confused.

Posted by: lingering_lead | February 1, 2011 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Sorry Babs, no use - the Left still hates you and your Father.
------------------------------------

Sorry Bonehead - We like her, plus she's hot! But yeah - W is still moron!

Posted by: question-guy | February 1, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

She's hot

Posted by: gutbro | February 1, 2011 12:02 PM | Report abuse

What a surprise to see not all conservatives are uptight righties.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | February 1, 2011 12:08 PM | Report abuse

This is only a surprise to those who see life purely through an ideological spectrum. Bush himself had a very mild approach. Over time, the issue will disappear and a liberal pillar will erode.

Posted by: batigol85 | February 1, 2011 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Is this the daughter who was stopped in a bar for underage drinking? The daughter who gave her secret service guards gray hair when they were told "my father will kick your a___". Remember the Argentina vacation, the young Bush daughter who was asked to leave Argentina by the government there because of raucas behavior in the hotel hallways? Now we are presented her opinion solemnly as that of a wise mature philosopher. I'm not listening.
Posted by: drzimmern1
*******************
Oh, give it a rest. At least she grew up, unlike the Kennedy offspring....or adults.

As far as her endorsement goes, I don't agree with it, but she's as entitled to it as I am to mine.

Posted by: Lilycat11 | February 1, 2011 12:44 PM | Report abuse

The younger generation just doesn't see their friends, co-workers, family, etc., being gay as an issue.

Posted by: seaduck2001 | February 1, 2011 12:56 PM | Report abuse

I bet it's not long before she comes out of the closet herself.

Any takers?

Posted by: medic2010 | February 1, 2011 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Who cares what she thinks

Posted by: mjwies11 | February 1, 2011 1:18 PM | Report abuse

I was a Reublican for fifty years til George Junior and his war. Laura and
Barbara give their opinions just because
of who they married, unlike those two
captains of industry who lost in the elect-
ions to Boxah & Reid. Big difference to me.

Posted by: bill_davidson | February 1, 2011 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Who cares? Babs is beyond even yesterdays news.She is from another century.

Posted by: peep1935 | February 1, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

The WP didn't make much of her doing charity work, but if she is in favor of gays, than that is worth a front page web article.

Posted by: Delongl


Why would the WP do an article about George Bush's daughter doing charity work? Would that really be any more newsworthy? If thats the best argument you can come up with please go back to work and stop wasting company money. Think before you post the next time.

Posted by: ged0386 | February 1, 2011 2:19 PM | Report abuse

'Baggers hate it that sexual orientation is biological but ideology is not. They can't stand the thought that their kids might also become infected with open-mindedness and tolerance. Haw-haw!

Posted by: raschumacher | February 1, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

I have never seen so many defensive and/or snarky comments from both conservatives and liberals. Is being mean to one another the only thing you guys know how to do?

Posted by: jrussell1 | February 1, 2011 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I have it on decent authority that she wasn't afraid to disagree (in relatively private situations) with her father's political decisions when she was in college... and it just makes sense that she wouldn't do so publicly while he was in office. Nothing in here surprises me, not even all of the homophobes and other lunatics who are commenting... we've heard you all before.

But that do-gooder line in the article? The Source may be Reliable but the Source should write like an adult!

Posted by: public-washingtonpost-com | February 1, 2011 3:08 PM | Report abuse

This same blog spent more time discussing the 18 piece wind ensemble that entertained guests at Chelsea Clinton's $2 million wedding than it did on the wonderful charitable work done by Barbara Bush (the younger). And from the sound of it, most of you lemmings out there have no idea what Barbara's twin sister does for a living. I guess being a Bush is so bad that the simple-minded among us always forget to actually learn what these girls may be all about. I mean, they're Bushes and therefore they must be country-clubbing it through life. Right? I mean, clearly only Democrats look out for the greater good. Us Repuglicans just look out for ourselves...

Please with the gay is biology thing. Scientists are currently uncertain whether homsexuality is primarily caused by genetic or environmental factors. It's true, despite what the folks at HRC would have us believe.

Posted by: lingering_lead | February 1, 2011 3:09 PM | Report abuse

This isn't really news worthy, much less front page news. This nation has huge deficits, no way to pay for gov't. pensions, were in 2 wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, fears of credit ratings dropping due to debts, unemployment is around 10% and rising gas & food prices...so the big issue is Barbara Bush supports gay marriage? Please people!

Posted by: reason5 | February 1, 2011 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Love the folks looking for hard news in a tabloid-style gossip blog. C'mon folks. Get your news in the A section, not the C section.

Posted by: lingering_lead | February 1, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. "Do-gooder" is a conversational term appropriate to the style of our column, and it is not a pejorative term. If you followed the link you would see we wrote about those efforts you're complaining we didn't write about: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliable-source/2010/05/barbara_bush_the_other_twin_ma.html

Posted by: The Reliable Source | February 1, 2011 7:16 PM | Report abuse


The WP didn't make much of her doing charity work, but if she is in favor of gays, than that is worth a front page web article.

Posted by: Delongl


Why would the WP do an article about George Bush's daughter doing charity work? Would that really be any more newsworthy? If thats the best argument you can come up with please go back to work and stop wasting company money. Think before you post the next time.

Posted by: ged0386 | February 1, 2011 2:19 PM
---------

Why would her opinion of gay marriage be newsworthy?

Posted by: momof20yo | February 1, 2011 7:53 PM | Report abuse

***INTERSEX VARIANT GENETICS, IT'S NOT A SIN, IT'S GENETICS PERIOD, GENETICS IS NOT A SIN****
PLEASE OPEN IN WORD PAD TO SEE STRESSING POINTS IN LAW/ MEDICINE/ LOGIC-REASON AND JUST ADD PLASTIC SUGERY FREEBEE TO THE HEALTHCARE LAW AND MORE WILL SUPPORT IT ASAP

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

~Mahatma Gandhi


HUMANE CIVILITY EQUALITY MOVEMENT ( HCEM )
IN LIGHT OF THE PUBLIC VOTE IN IOWA etc , THEN PLEASE START TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC AT LARGE TO THESE FACTS THAT MOST DON'T KNOW THROUGH THE MEDIA, BLOGS , UNIVERSITIES, AND HOLLYWOOD, TO STOP THE LIABLE AND INTENTINAL RELIGOUS MISLEADING THE PUBLIC AS A SIN

GOOGLE/ WIKIPEDIA/ YOUTUBE: INTERSEX/ XXY MALES IS GENETICS THEREFORE A RACE , SEE SCOTUS 379US184,191 AS ALCHEMY TEXT SAY THERE ARE THREE SEXES MALE-FEMALE-& HERMAPHRODITE CALLED THE REBIS SPICES WHICH IS BOTH THE OLDEST FROM WHICH "ADAM" WAS CREATED AS, AND WHAT MAN WILL BECOME AGAIN, SEE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ON GENETICS PROTECTIONS, AGAIN FORIEGN/ RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMAN NOR A TERRORIST AND JIM CROW LIKE PERIOD,THEY ARE LIABLE JUST AS THE KKK CASE LAWS, GENETICS


RELIGIOUS INHUMANE DEATH LAWS DOSE NOT PASS THE 14AMEND. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS, LAW DOCTRINES OF [RATIONAL BASIS TEST ] 431US471,489 427US307,314, [STRICT SCRUTINY ]403US365, 405US330, 411US1,16-17 , [COMPELLING INTEREST] 394US618,634 AND [SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION ] 411US1,28, RELIGOUS LAWS ARE FORIEGN LAWS, AND THATS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
IMF IRS 501 (3)(c) CHURCH/ TEMPLE LLC CORPORATIONS ARE BOTH LIABLE CRIMINALLY/ CIVIL FOR WHAT THEY TEACH OTHERS PERIOD, JUST LIKE THE ANGLO KKK CASE LAWS ( EQUALITY SUITS )

THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COVERS BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS WITH REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS " INTERSEXED/XXY MALE etc" ARE BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS, AND SOONER THAN LATER EVERYONE WILL FALL UNDER THIS DUE TO AGING AND ACCIDENTS ALONE, IN ALL MY BLOGING DEBATE ,NO RELIGOUS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DISPROVE THE GENETIC FACTORS PERIOD, THEREFORE IT'S NOT A CHOICE, JUST AS TANNING IS NOT A CHOICE UV EXPOSURE WILL HAPPEN


Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 8:54 PM | Report abuse

BEWARE OF BIBLE MIS=USERS, THAT USE IT FOR THERE OWN HATRED, NOT CHARITY
For ANY XTIAN to quote from Leviticus etc places them under the Law and NOT under Grace, according to James2:8-19; 4:1-17 no Charity, no Fruit of the Spirit, just Works of the Flesh, Justified by the LEVITE Law
THERES MORE TALK OF LEVITICUS THAN MATTHEW 5:1-58,6:1-34,7:1-29 & 1ST CORINTHIANS CHAPTERS 13 & 14 "JESUS" Changed The Eternal Levite/ Deuteronomy Laws in the Beattitudes

“When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross,” Sinclair Lewis

* GOOGLE AND YOUTUBE: RELIGION MENTAL ILLNESS: AND YOU'LL SEE THE PSYCHOLOGY REPORTS ON EXTREMISM SELF RIGHTIOUSNESS DELUSIONAL AND SELF INDUCED HALLUCINATIONS AND DEADLY VIOLENCE,...GOOGLE: RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM CAUSES MENTAL ILLNESS...THEIR CRAZIES PERIOD

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:06 PM | Report abuse

@ALL XTIANS AND BLACKS

GUESS WHAT........YES THE CHURCH STARTED AND MADE $$$ ON THE SLAVE TRADE ( MORALS? )INVESTMENTS AND PROFITS IN THE SLAVE TRADE COMPANIES (DID "GOD" BLESS THIS TOO?"

PASTE THIS IN GOOGLE SEARCH:( CHURCH INVOLVEMENT IN US AND EUROPE'S SLAVE TRADE )

DO XTIANS BOMB CLINICS etc? DO XTIANS SEND TERRORIST LETTERS TO THE US GOVERNMENT??? DO XTIANS ENCOURAGE ATTACKS ON SAME SEXERS??? DID THE CHURCH START SLAVERY IN THE US AND EUROPE??? DO XTIANS QUOTE FROM A BOOK (BIBLE) THAT ENDORCES GENOCIDE?/ SLAVERY AND CHILD MARRIAGES TO ADULTS??? POLYGAMY??? INCEST??, A MAN IS ALLOWED TO SALE HIS WIFE AND KIDS INTO SLAVERY TO PAY OFF HIS DEBTS..STONEING TO DEATH DISOBIDIENT KIDS(CHILD
ABUSE)...GOOGLE: BIBLE RAPE LAWS ,the shock of whats it says about RAPE OMG....THE SONG OF SOLOMON (INCEST/PORNO ).....SOME FAMILY VALUE HUH, RELIGION IS NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMANE PERIOD, HUMANE CIVILITY, NOT EXTREMISM WHICH ALWAYS ENDS IN INHUMANE PUNISHMENT.

* GOOGLE AND YOUTUBE: RELIGION MENTAL ILLNESS: AND YOU'LL SEE THE PSYCHOLOGY REPORTS ON EXTREMISM SELF RIGHTIOUSNESS DELUSIONAL AND SELF INDUCED HALLUCINATIONS AND DEADLY VIOLENCE,...GOOGLE: RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM CAUSES MENTAL ILLNESS...THEIR CRAZIES PERIOD


RELIGIOUS (LEVITICAL/SHARIA ) FOREIGN LAWS ARE INQUISITIONAL , INEQUALITY NON-CIVILITY (NO CIVIL/BILL RIGHTS , ARCHAIC BARBARIC PRIMITIVE INJUSTICE AND JIM CROW LIKE IN ENFORCEMENT.
THE US CONSTITUTION IS THE ONE AND ONLY SUPREME LAW OF THE USA ART.6 CL.2, AND IN CL.3
THE RIGHTS OF USA CITIZENSHIP TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER ALL RELIGIOUS MEMBERSHIPS LAWS

GOOGLE/WIKIPEDIA SCOTUS LAW DOCTRINES OF :CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER/ FIGHTING WORDS
THE US CITIZEN'S OATH OF ALLIGENCE IS TO THE US CONSTITUTION, NOT INHUMANE RELIGION LAWS
8 C.F.R. Part 337 (2008)) THIS LAW SHOULD BE MOVED INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY ACT ITSELF ASAP ,AND REMEMBER PEOPLE RISK LIFE AND LIMB TO GET HERE FOR HUMANE CIVILITY RIGHTS

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:16 PM | Report abuse

COMITY (COMITAS) LAW DOCTRINE IS A RULE OF COURTESY, BUT NOT A RULE OF LAW,
RELIGIOUS/FOREIGN INHUMANE DEATH LAWS FAILS THE TEST OF EQUALITY/ BILL-CIVIL RIGHTS OF US CITIZENS, " In the exercise of one's religion one, CANNOT INSIST ON CONDUCT WHICH THREATENS important interest on the society in an UNREASONABLE MANNER. The courts must, therefore, BALANCE the Importance of a religious exercise claim against the State interest involved in a rule or practice which prevents or hinders the exercise 367US488,489.


EVEN BIBLICAL/KORAN etc RECORD THE HERMAPHRODITE ( INTERSEX )BEGINNINGS OF MANKIND, AS WELL AS SCIENCE ie. SURA EL KIYAMA "FROM 1 BLOOD HE (ALLAH) MADE BOTH MALE AND FE-MALE, THE ( YHVH) ADAM AND EVE ie WO-MAN ( WOMB OF MAN SHE WAS TAKEN OUT OF MAN AS ADAM SAID IN GENESIS, IN SCIENCE BOTH X (FE-MALE ie SOFT/LITTLE MALE) AND, Y ( the infinite testes x/y bisexual ) and yet in the First Trimester ALL MALES ARE GENETIC FE-MALES, THE INTERSEX IS A PAST SYMBIOTIC ECHO THAT IN THE 90% Estrogen in Food/ Water/ Air, I.E. THE INTERSEX GENETICS IS NATURAL, NOT A SIN PERIOD.


THE QABBALAH TREE OF LIFE, REPRESENTS THE HERMAPHRADITE YHVH GOD, AND IN NATURE ALL KNOWN TREES/ PLANTS ARE HERMAPHRODITE, AS GENESIS SAYS:" ..IT'S SEED IS IN IT'S SELF..", AND YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT ie 90% OF FOOD/WATER/ AIR HAS FEMALE ESTROGEN IN IT, AND A MALES LIVER HAS THE ENZYME AROMATASE IN IT THAT CONVERTS "SEX CHANGE" TESTOSTERONE INTO ESTROGEN, SO ie WHY WOULD "YHVH GOD" DO THIS? UNLESS INTERSEX IS THE REAL NATURAL STATE,
AS IN GENESIS IT SAYS, BOTH MALE/FE-MALE IS THE IMAGE OF YHVH ELOHYM ,THE BI-SEXUAL BEINGS


TO THE JEWS THE SHEKHINAT EIL /ISLAM ALLAT Al-Uzza and Manat.

(SHEKINAH/ASHERAH/ASHERAT/ELOAH ) ARE THE FEMININE (6) TERMS FOR YHVH GOD OF ISRAEL WHOM THE XTIANS CALL THE HOLY GHOST OR HOLY SPIRIT, therefore it's a SHE NOT A HE, :GOOGLE IT OK, SEE IT AND READ IT FOR YOURSELF (=to saying Ms. Mrs. etc.) GOOGLE: SHEKINAH/ ASHERAT, ELOAH ,ALLAT FEMININE TERMS FOR GOD: A MALE WITH FEMININE QUALITIES IS CALLED SAME SEX OF GAY, IF YOU WILL, NO MORE LAME EXCUSES


JEWS/ ISLAM AND XTIAN SEMINARIES KNOW THAT ADAM WAS CREATED AN HERMAPHRODITE (INTESEXED MALE =REBIS/RIBIS ie PHEONIX THE PERFECT DIVINE INTERSEXD CHILD) AND CALLED PERFECT AND GOOD, SURA AL KAYAMA (KORAN) FROM ONE BLOOD HE (ALLAH) MADE HIM (ADAM), AND FROM HIM (ADAM), HE (ALLAH ) MADE BOTH MALE AND FEMALE, GENESIS :EVE CAME OUT OF ADAM, FEMALE IS ALSO THE IMAGE OF YHVH (THE INTERSEXED BEING XX/Y)

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA.
Abstract

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

So if these churches are using a "literal" interpretation of the bible are they also OK with slavery?
Exodus 21:7-11, Ephesians 6:5, Exodus 21:20-2 ,Luke 12:47-48 GOOGLE: BIBLE SLAVERY /RAPE LAWS

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:29 PM | Report abuse

People would also do well to pay attention to the evidence in front of them, proved time and time again in recent years by scandals involving anti-gay religious and political figures- Those who are most vocal against homosexuality are those most tempted by it, and get caught by and in the media press

If history is any guide, the loudest, most obnoxious homophobes always seem to have a little something, something in their closet.

George Reeker, Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Roy Aston, ALLEGEDLY Pastors, Troy King, Mark Foley, Robert Allen, Ed Schrock, Glen Murphy, David Drier, Bruce Barclay, Jim West, The Rev. Cedric Miller (ANTI-FACEBOOK IN TREESOME ): all outspoken homophobes caught in their own lies with their pants down.

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:33 PM | Report abuse

MARRIAGE IS A UCC " BILATERAL CONTRACT =WIN/WIN " NOT OWNERSHIP BETWEEN PERSON ie REAL AND ARTIFICIAL CORPORATION (PRE-NUPS/ Legal Separation/ Annulments/ Divorce/ Child Support, ARE ALL HANDLED BY The Courts and are ALL Contractual Agreements) NOT THE CHURCH ,IT IS A BUSINESS, JUST LOOK AT ALL THE COMMERCIAL MONIES SPENT(Cloths/Building/Cars/Places/Travel/Food/Acurtments etc)

THE WORD "MARRIAGE" DOSE NOT BELONG TO THE RELIGIOUS ( ATHEIST / AGNOSTICS USE IT ALSO )
The word"MARRIAGE" is in the "PUBLIC DOMAIN" for US CITIZEN Adults to use EQUALLY They Can Either Enter INTO or NOT without prejudices /Duress, it CANNOT be Patented/ Copy Righted /nor Trade Marked, Children, and Animals CAN'T Enter into Contractual Agreements so the Rhetoric about bestiality and polygamy does not apply,but bible does ok polygamy , NO RELIGION CAN OWN THE WORD "MARRIAGE"

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:40 PM | Report abuse

ALL CHURCH'S ,TEMPLES, etc., (INCORPORATIONS) ARE BY LAW IMF U.C.C. IRS 501(c)(3) LLC/S-CORPORATIONS NOT-FOR-PROFIT (FOR PROFIT REALLY) JUST LOOK HOW THE TOP ALWAYS END UP LIVING GOOD AND WEALTHY DOING THE THINGS THE DUMB SHEEP ARE NOT TO DO, a corporation is a Fictitious "PERSON" made up by people to function as one person, CORPORATIONS ARE NOT A CITIZENS 32US243 wikipedia /google Constitine . THE TAX EXEMPT STATUS IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION, FOR THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION SEE TITLE 28USC3001(15)(A)(B)(C) aka THE VAGINIA COMPANY


GOOGLE : CONTACT INFORMATION ACLU/ NYCLU/ AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/Human Rights Watch / US HOMELAND SECURITY,/ FREEDOM FROM RELIGION / ATHIEST.ORG / SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER : TO STOP RELIGION BULLIES THAT USE OTHERS TO OPPRESS YOU , AGAIN RELIGION ARCHAIC MURDERIOUS SATANIC INTRUTIONS IS NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMANE PERIOD (FOR TWISTED INHUMANE XTIANS SEE MATTHEW CHP 5,6&7 HUMANE CIVILITY)


SAME SEXERS ARE MADE TO LIVE LIKE SLAVES (FINANCIALLY /SOCIALLY /EDUCATIONALLY) UNDER RELIGIOUSE OPPRESSION (Xtian Sharia Taliban )WHICH it Blocks THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK/ IRS/IMF/ US CORPORATION 28USC3002(15) DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY FROM COLLECTING $TAXES AND COMMERCIAL COMMERCE (U.C.C.) FROM US CITIZENS (SAME SEXERS)

IT WERE THE ATHEIST/AGNOSTICS GROUPS AND DEIST (a.k.a. Radical Republicans)that press for Abolishment of Slavery, Women Suffrage Acts and Civil Rights to Protect Minorities,

NOT the Religious They Mis-Used The Bible to Support Slavery and Anti-Women Suffrage Acts, ANTI-INTERACIAL MARRIAGES-BIRTHS and now Same Sex US CITIZENS Civility Rights,(Levi.& Deut.BOOKS which shows Women & Slaves thier Place religious Fought Tooth & Eye to OT Biblically Oppress others)Religion has US Citizens involved in Slave Trade AGAIN!

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 9:59 PM | Report abuse

SIN INVOLVES A CHOICE, ESTROGEN HORMONAL "GOD" MADE NATURAL FOOD/ WATER BASE IS NOT A CHOICE NOR A CONSENT, ( ENTRAPMENT BY GOD?) YOU DONT OUT LAW SOMETHING THEN PUT IT IN THE FOOD/ WATER SOURCES, WITHOUT ANY EFFECTS EXPECTED THAT REALY UNJUST ENTRAPMENT, NO XTIAN HAS ANSWER WHY YHVH DOES THIS! THEBIBLE IN GENESIS SAYS VEGAN FOOD IS FOR MEN GROWTH (MEAT) OF MIND AND BODY, ( IN ESTROGEN SOAK?)

SO IS THE 90% KNOWN VEGAN/ MEAT/ WATER/ AIR "GOD YHVH" CREATED AND BLESSED ESTROGEN SOURCES "SIN AND UNNATURAL?" BUT YOU EAT IT!

So again, why does "GOD" put Estrogen in the Food source then? Its UNJUST to call Same Sex "SIN AND UNNATURAL" when "GOD" the lawgiver puts Behavioral Estrogen Hormones in the Food/Water and Air Sources and BLESSED THEM, ITS NOT A CHOICE NOR A CONSENT (IS THAT A TYPE OF ENTRAPMENT?, so its must be SUPERNATURAL yes crude oil increases estrogens in the lab studies

BIBLCALY ADAM WAS CREATED AN HERMAPHRODITE EVE CAME OUT OF HIM, CLONING TECHNOLOGY=SAME SEX TWIN SO IE GOD DID THE FIRST MATHEMATICAL SEX CHANGE, FEMALE HAVE EVERYTHING MALES HAVE BUT THEIRS INVERSE MATH, MALES FEEL THIS WAY BECAUSE OF GOD NATURAL ESTROGEN RE-ENFORCE BY THE FOOD SOURCE OF DIVINE ORDER, ALL HETERAL? MALES HAVE GOOD LOOKING MALE FRIENDS NOT THE "NERD" LOOKING SHOWS MALE ARE INFLUENCE BY APPEARANCE OF OTHER MALES, THE POPULAR ONE ARE BUILT BODY AND OR FACE FEATURES always

IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER ALL EMBRIOS (X/Y) ARE GENETIC FEMALES, THATS WHY MEN HAVE TEETS, & FEMALE DO HAVE PROSTATES LIKE MALES, A MATHMATICAL INVERSE FROM A MALE SEX ORGANS
GOOGLE:FEMALE PROSTATE G-SPOT NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE ARTICLE BY DR.SHARON MOALEM AT MT. SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE NYC, 30 MAY 2009 Pg33 paragraph #7, and also GOOGLE:(Adam Hermaphrodite/ Adam Androgyny), THEN GOOGLE:(INTERSEXED) its Genetics & Environmental Interaction

ESTROGEN IN ENVIRONMENTAL CRUDE OIL,Yes, in Lab studies, so the current oil spill will dose the whole world of men Ordained by "YHVH GOD"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=estrogen+in+environmental+crude+oil&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

GOOGLE: "DAVID AND JONATHAN GAY" //THEN ":KING JAMES GAY KJV BIBLE"...SURPRISE...SURPRISE

Thank a Homosexual for Your Bible
The printing of the King James Bible was sponsored by King James I of England. ... If Plato, Erasmus, Michaelangelo, James I of England and others were gay ...
www.libchrist.com/other/homosexual/kingjames.html - Cached - Similar
#

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:03 PM | Report abuse

CIVIL UNION SOUNDS LIKE SEPARATE BUT EQUAL JIM CROW B.S. DUDE/CHICK

MARRIAGE IS A "CONTRACT" NOT A "SEXUAL ORIENTATION" NOR "SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP" BETWEEN A MALE AND FEMALE THAT'S CALLED CONSUMMATE i.e. WE ARE ALL "CONSUMERS", IF IT WAS "MARRIAGE" ,THEN SINCE YOUR FIRST SEX ACT YOU WERE MARRIED THEN ,AND MISSED OUT ON ALL THE TAX BRAKES EVEN AS YOUNG TEENS, DID YOU NOTICE THE U.C.C. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE LAW DOCTRINES? AND THEIRS MORE, ALL PEOPLE ARE VESSELS (FEMALES) IN/ON WATER HENCE YOUR BODIES IS 80% WATER ON LAND AND BUILDINGS ARE ALL PHALLIC SHAPES(MALE) AND YET TO SHIPS (FEMALES Can MERGE ON THE SEAS AND REPRODUCE A NEW CARGO MANIFEST AT THE PORT (BIRTH=LABOR WORK) TWO OR MORE CORPORATIONS CAN MERGE (MARRY) AND REPRODUCE SUBSIDIARIES (CHILDREN). A BUSINESS ACT IS INTERCOURSE: MARITIME/ ADMIRALTY=STRAWMEN PEOPLE

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Religious TRAP Marriage was a Ownership ( UNILATERAL CONTRACT=1 WIN [HUSBAND] AND 1 LOSS OUT [WIFE] ) NOT EQUALITY By Contract of Property over the wife and ALL she has by the Husband (Magna Carta). i.e. If She wins the LOTTERY then The Husband OWN ALL OF IT and she NOTHING because He OWN's HER. (she's property, no rights) GOOGLE "BIBLE SLAVERY" FOR BOTH QUOTES IN THE BIBLE AND HISTORY, NEVER DID THE BIBLE TELL THE SLAVE OWNERS THAT SLAVERY IS SIN , IT ALSO PERMIT A MAN TO SELL HIS FAMILY INTO SLAVERY TO PAY OFF HIS DEBTS, SO HOW MORAL IS THAT? THE ABOMINATION IS SLAVERY,IT IS MIS-USED FOR HATRED NOT CHARITY/ LOVE

CONTRACTS IS A RIGHT For any US Citizen (ADULT ) to enter into, A CONTRACT IS A WRITTEN AGREEMENT, i.e. A WRITTEN CONSENT, AS THE US SCT SAID YOU MUST VERBALIZE YOU RIGHTS "CONSENT" etc, The Right For US CITIZENS To Enter into Contracts cannot be Voted on By the People

marriage was not for religious reasons NOR FOR REPRODUCTION, it was to forge alliances between tribes for battle support and/or to assure peace by blood agreements, native Americans/ Sumer/ Egyptians/Greeks, Myans etc Wikipedia marriage for its true history and how it constantly changes its purpose from each century

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Romens Chapter 2:1-4 is a continuation of the "letter" which also says to the "xtians" KJV "Google: King James Bible Gay"

"Thou art inexcusable O MAN WHOSOEVER THOU ART THAT JUDGEST : for wherein thoujudgest another, thou condemnest thy self : FOR THOU THAT JUDGEST DOEST THE SAME THINGS

ROMANS CHP ONE AND TWO AS CHAPTERS DONT EXISTS, THEY ARE ONE LETTER CHP 2:1-4 GOES ONTO SAY THAT XTIAN CANT JUDGE THEM BECAUSE THE XTIANS DO&GUILTY OF THE SAME THINGS, so romans chp1&2 IS NOT ABOUT SAME SEX, IT'S ABOUT THE FINGURE POINTERS BEING GULTY OF THE SAME THINGS, SO STOP CHERRY PICKING, XTIAN ARE VERY UNJUST AND BIASED PERIOD

What did Jesus say about SAME SEX?
Not a word from Jesus has been recorded in the New Testament. Nothing!

Since when did "JESUS" avocate death penalties???, YOUR THE SO-CALLED SATANIST NOW!!! PETER PUT AWAY THAT SWORD, YOU WILL DIE BY THE SWORD!!

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

But what did Jesus say about two men lying together in one bed?

From the Gospel of LUKE 17:verses 30, 34, Jesus said,

"In the day the Son of man is revealed, in that night there shall be two men in one bed, the one shall be taken, and the other left.",

So ok 2 GROWN MEN in 1 Bed {TOGETHER}? (what does this sound like?...AT THE RAPTURE SAME SEX "JESUS" says he takes one and leave the other in the same bed on that night ON THE RAPTURE, HMMMMM, ok?)

SEE LUKE 17:30-34, TWO GROWN MEN "LYING" IN BED TOGETHER AT NIGHT, HE TAKES ONE AND LEAVES THE OTHER...IT DID NOT BOTHER "JESUS"

Men are told to KISS Each other!!! ( BIBLE NEW TESTAMENT ) ROM16:16, 1Cor 16:20, 2Cor13:12, 1Thes5:26 1Pet5:14

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:37 PM | Report abuse

In the United States, marriage was a property transfer from Father to Husband (the daughter of one becomes the wife of the other) until the early 20th century, and inter-racial marriages could be prohibited as the law of the land until 1967. Go on the internet, and check out the Oneida Community's concept of ?complex marriage? from the mid 19th century. THAT'S WHY THE HUSBAND'S NAME IS TAKEN IN "MARRIAGE", IT'S A TRANSFER OF PROPERTY (THE WIFE=PROPERTY, NO RIGHTS, THE HUSBAND OWNS HER). Talk about different! WIKIPEDIA " WOMAN SUFFRAGE" LAWS CHANGED THAT

THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT IS NOT FOR REPRODUCTION, FYI THERE ARE MANY THAT ARE NOT IN A MARRIAGE (CONTRACT ) AND YET ARE HAVING CHILDREN, THERE ARE MANY MEN AND WOMEN FOR BIOLOGICAL REASONS WHO CAN'T HAVE CHILDREN, SO YOUR BELIEFS SAYS THEIR USELESS? THEN YOUR FAITH IS EVIL AND ABUSIVE CATTLE, Equality.

And you are clearly in the minority here. This argument has been made and struck down numerous times. If you did, then infertile people would be barred from marriage and the governmental benefits of marriage. So men who have had vasectomies, women past menopause, women who have had hysterectomies and more would all be barred from marriage. It's a ridiculous requirement. AND ALSO ANY MAN/WOMAN CAN DONATE SPERM/EGG for INVETRO SERAGATE!

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Polygamy in Judaism

According to Joseph Ginat, professor of social and culture anthropology at the University of Haifa, polygamy is common and growing among the 180,000 Bedouin of Israel. It is also frequent among Mediterranean Jews living in Yemen, rabbis permitting Jews to marry up to four wives.[5] In modern Israel, where a wife cannot bear children or is mentally ill, the rabbis give a husband the right to marry a second woman without divorcing his first wife.[6] THIS IS CURRENTLY GOING ON 21ST CENT. DUDES

THE US CONSTITUTION ART4 SEC2(1)THE CITIZENS OF EACH STATE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO ALL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS IN THE SEVERAL STATES, They are US CITIZENS OR NOT ? ,THERE'ER WANTING TO PROTECT OLD GLORY , 28USC3002(15)(A)(B)(C),

9th AMENDMENT: THE ENUMERATION IN THE CONSTITUTION, OF CERTAIN RIGHTS, SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO DENY OR DISPARAGE OTHERS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE (ie ALL US CITIZENS)

You know, had a referendum on banning interracial marriages been put on the ballot down South, up until about 20 years ago, it would have passed. Had civil rights been subject to a vote in those states, it would have also been voted down before about 1980.

matters of civil rights should never be put for a vote. If they were, as Prop 8 was, we might still have Jim Crow laws in the South, separate drinking fountains and bathrooms, poll taxes, and a ban on inter-racial marriage, AND WOMEN RIGHT TO VOTE AND EQUAL PAY, "THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN ACT"

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 10:59 PM | Report abuse

The teaching was instructing against oppressiveness.

The Bible opposes throughout itself the abuse of heterosexuality. Likewise, condemnation of arsenokoitai (mistranslated: "sodomy") does not forbid gay sex. In the 1st Century, throughout the Greek-speaking, Jewish Christianity culture, the word "arsenokoitai" (mistranslated: "sodomy") referred to exploitative, lewd and wanton sex between men. This, and not male-male sex in general, was the concern and what the Bible opposes in such chapters as 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. The Bible calls for mutual respect, caring, and responsible sharing. The violation of this is what the Bible condemns in homosexual or heterosexual sex, not gay sex itself.


In fact, the Bible has gay couples in a positive light as noted in Ruth 1:16-17; Daniel 1:9; 1 Samuel 20: 41-42; and 2 Samuel 1:26. David and Jonathan's relationship parallels that of Gilgamesh and Enkidu, a gay couple in an ancient Sumerian epic. Their relationship fits the model of military lovers, common throughout the societies of the ancient Middle East. These male-male sexual relationships were taken for granted, and they would not have had to be explicitly referenced.

Now, if Jesus had felt about SAME SEX the way that Israelite priest of the 6th century B.C. had felt, do you think he would have used the example of two men lying together in the same bed when he told his disciples who shall be saved in the Hereafter? Jesus knew very well the Scripture in the Five Books of Moses and the difference between the Hebrew terms toevah and zimah. So it is not likely that Jesus would have used that example (if ) he thought SAME SEX were a sin against God's law.

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 11:08 PM | Report abuse

CRITICAL LOGIC AND REASONING, IF SOMETHING IS "UNNATURAL/SIN" "GOD" AS THE LAW GIVER SHOULD NOT PUT IT IN THE FOOD/ WATER SOURCES THEN, JAMES SAYS"GOD IS NOT TEMPTED NOR TEMPT HE ANY MAN", SO DOES ESTROGEN IN MANS FOOD /WATER/ AIR TEMPTATION IN DEVELOPMENT
SOME WILL SAY THIS IS BLASPHEMY,BUT I DO REMIND THEM"TRUTH CANNOT BLASPHEME" ACTS "WHAT GOD"HAS CLEANED CALL THOU NOT UNCLEAN"

So again, why does "GOD" put Estrogen in the Food source then? Its AN UNJUST ENTRAPMENT to call Same Sex "SIN AND UNNATURAL" when "GOD" the lawgiver puts Behavioral Estrogen Hormones in the Food/Water and Air Sources and BLESSED THEM, ITS NOT A CHOICE nor a Consent, Google: "Estrogen Feminizing Men/Males", in Sefer Raziel Regarding the Power of Ruoch "MASH" Mem-Aleph-Shin=Male and "MESHA" Mem-Shin-Aleph=Female, Do you see the place switch of Mem and Shin, ie Hebrew Letters are also Kabbalistic Math which means a Mathmatical switch in Genetics accures in THE SAME THING ie ADAM ex He and S-He, Him (Heem) and He-r, Male and Fe-male (Fe=soft/little as in Fe-Lion for Cat ) etomology of words

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 11:15 PM | Report abuse

its a mathematical logic expression that estrogen does influence men in various feminine ways as clinical studies show, for the xtians they know that "sin involve a choice" so since xtians like to quote Leviticus of the law then how can that lifestyle of same sex be sin/abomination when "god" puts estrogen hormones in the food /water/ and air sources, a male can not avoid these thing because the xtian "god " makes it a nessesity for nurishment, that alone removes "choice" out of the sin equation and make the condemnation of it unjust for a "just god" for that is entrapment/ plant/ framed etc.. I.E. you don't outlaw street drugs, then put it in the food/water sources etc, then punish people when they test positive for them.....is that just or unjust judgement??


PARENTS FEED THIS TO THEIR KIDS (SONS) DAILY 24/7/365 (NATURAL VEGAN ESTROGEN) i.e. PLATES FULL OF ESTROGEN AM BREACKFAST/ NOON LUNCH/ NIGHT DINNER AND OTHER SNACKS, IS NATURALLY BY "GOD"s NATURE TO FEED ESTROGEN ALL THE TIME TO MALES FOR DEVELOPMENT !

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 11:23 PM | Report abuse

WIKIPEDIA BAYARD RUSTIN...MLK SPEECH WRITER... WAS A SAME SEXER CIVIL RIGHTS, HE'S IN THE BACKGROUND ON A LOT OF PICTURES WITH MLK

SAME SEXERS ARE US CITIZENS THAT ARE MADE TO LIVE LIKE SLAVES(Financially and Socially which is self Evident in front of you )UNDER RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION(9,13,&14 AMENDMENTS Dred Scott Vs San Ford (1857) and "Plessy Vs. Ferguson (1896) US SCt cases)

IT WERE THE ATHEIST/AGNOSTICS GROUPS AND DEIST (a.k.a. Radical Republicans)that press for Abolishment of Slavery, Women Suffrage Acts and Civil Rights to Protect Minorities,

NOT the Religious They Mis-Used The Bible to Support Slavery and Anti-Women Suffrage Acts(Levi.& Deut.BOOKS which shows Women & Slaves thier Place religious Fought Tooth & Eye to OT Biblically Oppress others)Religion has US Citizens involved in Slave Trade AGAIN!

Posted by: shaiarra | February 1, 2011 11:44 PM | Report abuse

The use of the Public Vote to Inhibit the Rights of US CITIZENS is unconstitutional, it Subjects the "SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION ACTS" CITIZENS into a type of Forced Servitude (13th US Amend JIM CROW/BLACK CODES ) and Less than humane treatments ( US Sct Dred Scott v. Sanford-1857/ US Sct Furman v. Georgia-1972/ US Sct Plessy v. Ferguson-1896) it inhibits the FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION (14TH US Amend), and Professional/Social Alienation by others the feel fear of religious harassment etc to be seen with "them"

The imposed restrictions on the "suspect" US Citizen further subjects them to "MENTAL CRUELTY" Which of course is CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT its a tact of Pavlov Dog and that really makes it Very Inhumane.

The US Constitution Voting Amendment (5th/14th/15th/19th) were ment to share equaly the rights and privilege of it's Citizens in the several states, if the Public Vote can be used like that then THE CHILLING EFFECT OF A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT has been set i.e. (380 US 479; 472
US 491, 503 that will back fire on some when its then used to challenge Affirmative Action and Civil Rights Furtherance, STAR 'E DECISIS-RES JUDACATA is used to validate their challenge to civil rights furtherance in the coming future.

As long as certain citizens can't enjoy full equality DUE PROCESS & EQUAL PROTECTIONS cannot be acheived. The test of STRICT SCRUTINY (411 US 1,16-17) AND THE RATIONAL BASIS TEST (431 US 471,489 and 427 US 307,314) should be applied, the religious are purely arbitrarily bias (220 US 61,78) in there assumptions, when the NJ Senator said he was making a religious choice to go against it out of fear the the poligamist would what rights ,he should review his Bible (Gay King James see his "alleged" love letters ) then its full of main charactors he "respects" having more than one wife and concubine ie mistresses/ ok'ed incest i'e ("all are from Adam Kadmon" ). It continues Religious Institutionalized Segregation of US Citizens which is NOT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, its forced servitude to live like slaves.

Posted by: shaiarra | February 2, 2011 12:01 AM | Report abuse

shaiarra --- wtf? put the meth away, dude. btw, who cares what the misfit children of former and/or current republican politicians think? the real reagan son vs. the angry adopted reagan son, the cheney daughters -- the gay one and the rabid one; and the "jive sexy", egoist and airhead mccain offspring. please go away and try to accomplish something on your own. what next, teen mom bristol palin campaigning for sexual abstinence and virginity at marriage? oh yeah, i guess that already happened. lmao

Posted by: joeblow111 | February 2, 2011 6:35 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company