Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 4 of 39  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 39 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Yet another "evangelical Christian" caught in sexual affair
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 4:01PM #31
Girlchristian
Posts: 13,685

May 18, 2010 -- 3:35PM, Tolerant Sis wrote:


May 18, 2010 -- 12:32PM, Sirronrex wrote:


May 18, 2010 -- 12:29PM, Girlchristian wrote:

All mistakes are forgiven (well, all but one)...





Please explain what the one mistake that is not forgiven is.




Suicide.  You're not around to atone or ask for forgiveness.




Suicide is not an unforgivable sin, at least not according to the Bible. There is only one sin mentioned in the Bible where we're told that there will be no forgiveness and will, in fact, be condemnation.

"No matter how dark the moment, love and hope are always possible." George Chakiris

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.” Stuart Chase
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 4:04PM #32
Do_unto_others
Posts: 11,942

GC,


 


"Simply because you choose to make this about his voting record on gay rights does not mean it's on-topic. The thread is about Souder resigning due to adultery. You're choosing to use his voting record on gay-marriage as a "gotcha" rather than simply dealing with the topic of the thread."


 


Actually, I wish you were correct, GC. This thread is about the fall from 'grace' (as it were) of a radically 'right'wing "Christian" man who preached "family values" and then went against them himself. Those "values" very (VERY) much include the RRR's constant condemnation of God's gay and lesbian children. In fact, it goes far beyond mere "condemnation" - they actively seek the passage of laws that rip apart gay families and destroy gay people's lives. It is about a self-described "Christian evangelical" who had sex with someone not his wife, while simultaneously working toward an UN-Constitutional outcome against those he 'preaches' against in the name of their sexual "sins". It's called hypocrisy, and its rampant on the 'right'.


 


(BTW, he also preaches "abstinence only" 'education' (i.e. no condoms, no birth control, no innhibitors of sexually transmitted diseases. I wonder if he thought to actually use a condom or if his wife is now in danger.)


 


Hint: I most assuredly DO know what "the topic of this thread" is. I started it.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 4:54PM #33
hyoka
Posts: 277

May 18, 2010 -- 2:26PM, mytmouse57 wrote:



IOW, somebody has to live a perfect life in order to disagree with you on certian social/political issues?


That's not the way the real world works.


Nobody's perfect, and not everybody agrees with the same social agenda you do. Welcome to America.


I would suggest that GC is not the one here who needs to get a clue.






IOW, You shouldn’t throw stones in a glass house. Especially when those stones do real harm to real people.


It’s not just about disagreeing on social/political issues it’s about actively supporting an agenda that hurts people.


Souder jumped on the anti-gay “Sanctity of Marriage” bandwagon and used his powerful congressional vote to pass laws that diminish the rights and welfare of gay men and women and our families.


He contributes to an agenda that dehumanizes gay folks in the name of “Family Values” and “The Sanctity of Marriage” and then he violates the sanctity of his own marriage and makes a joke of the “Family Values” that he uses to justify harming gay folks.


Thing is, when Souder and the rest of his crowd who dehumanize gay folks get busted violating the rules of their own game they snivel about how they’re not perfect and how they’re “only human” .


Yep, this guy works to pass laws that dehumanize other folks who don’t measure up to his “family Values”, then when he f*cks up we’re supposed to let it slide because “he made a mistake and after all he’s only human” .


Sorry, but all I gotta say is tuff sh*t Bucko. You don’t get to be treated as human till you start treating other folks as human.


Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 6:35PM #34
Tolerant Sis
Posts: 4,201

I agree completely.  This isn't a mere issue of someone getting caught with his pants down.  This is an issue of someone getting caught with his pants down when he has done everything in his considerable position of power to abuse and make miserable those who don't hold the same beliefs he does about sexuality, so-called 'family values', and the right to privacy.


Eliot Spitzer did the same thing, with his 'get tough on prostitution' stance while he was banging a high-priced call girl who wasn't out on the streets, getting raped, getting diseased, and getting beat up by her pimp.  But he was using the same services the johns of the street whore were using.  THAT'S why Spitzer took his fall, too.  Nobody cares if someone behaves badly, really.  But when they behave badly in secret while chastising those who behave badly in the same way, they're bloody hypocrites.

First amendment fan since 1793.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 7:00PM #35
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

May 18, 2010 -- 4:54PM, hyoka wrote:


May 18, 2010 -- 2:26PM, mytmouse57 wrote:



IOW, somebody has to live a perfect life in order to disagree with you on certian social/political issues?


That's not the way the real world works.


Nobody's perfect, and not everybody agrees with the same social agenda you do. Welcome to America.


I would suggest that GC is not the one here who needs to get a clue.






IOW, You shouldn’t throw stones in a glass house. Especially when those stones do real harm to real people.


It’s not just about disagreeing on social/political issues it’s about actively supporting an agenda that hurts people.


Souder jumped on the anti-gay “Sanctity of Marriage” bandwagon and used his powerful congressional vote to pass laws that diminish the rights and welfare of gay men and women and our families.


He contributes to an agenda that dehumanizes gay folks in the name of “Family Values” and “The Sanctity of Marriage” and then he violates the sanctity of his own marriage and makes a joke of the “Family Values” that he uses to justify harming gay folks.


Thing is, when Souder and the rest of his crowd who dehumanize gay folks get busted violating the rules of their own game they snivel about how they’re not perfect and how they’re “only human” .


Yep, this guy works to pass laws that dehumanize other folks who don’t measure up to his “family Values”, then when he f*cks up we’re supposed to let it slide because “he made a mistake and after all he’s only human” .


Sorry, but all I gotta say is tuff sh*t Bucko. You don’t get to be treated as human till you start treating other folks as human.






I fail to see how anything he supports "dehumanizes" gay people. It's not a matter of so-called "equality" or human rights. I'm not buying that for a second, many people are not.


The majority doesn't need to go on a massive guilt trip simply to cater to a hoped-for "equality" based upon a minority's sexual/romantic desires. The gays-as-eternal-victims routine was wearing thin years ago. I'm sorry, gays stepped up and asked society to completely re-define a long-standing institution according to their wants and desires. And, when a large part of society balked, there came this angry huff and accusations of bigotry and oppression.


Stop trying to make it a matter of morality, social justice and so-called "equality."  Those arguments don't hold water. Societies have always drawn lines of exclusion around marriage and the definition of family. Morally and philosophically speaking, it's not a right, never was a right and never will be a right to get married.


It's about simply recognizing the legal definition of marriage -- or, at least, a marriage-like arrangement  -- in our secular republic has room for same-sex couples. In the legal sense, it's a "right." Let the courts settle the matter -- they are certian to rule in favor of gay marriage.


Meanwhile, quit bitching and nit-picking over people who oppose it on moral or philosophical grounds. I think they're barking up the wrong tree. But, I'm also not going to take them to task for barking.


Nobody's perfect. This guy messed up. And yep, sure, you betcha, what he did was wrong, immoral and weak. But it's also completely irrelevant to the issue of gay marriage.


"Gay marriage is morally equal to marriage between a man and a woman becuase this guy who opposses gay marriage messed around on his wife" isn't a solid argument. In fact, it's not an argument at all. It is, like I said, basically just griping and nit-picking.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 7:13PM #36
teilhard
Posts: 53,304

Consider, though, The Character Question ... One Reason I NEVER supported William Jefferson "Slick Willie" Clinton's Nomination -- and never voted for him -- was his PERSONAL Life ( which for a Politician ISN'T a "Private" Thing ) ...


I was RIGHT ... During his Two Terms as President, he REGULARLY dumped his own People when he encountered Opposition ( think: Lani Guinier and Dr. Joycelyn Elders ) ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 8:09PM #37
Grinandbearit
Posts: 2,319

May 18, 2010 -- 12:01PM, Do_unto_others wrote:


Can't wait for the firestorm of oppobrium that will surround Republican Souder.


Souder once said he is “most defined by the fact that I'm an evangelical Christian.”







Just goes to show that you can hang whatever label on yourself you choose to, but that does not make it true!


1Co 1:18  For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 9:49PM #38
jane2
Posts: 14,295

May 18, 2010 -- 7:13PM, teilhard wrote:


Consider, though, The Character Question ... One Reason I NEVER supported William Jefferson "Slick Willie" Clinton's Nomination -- and never voted for him -- was his PERSONAL Life ( which for a Politician ISN'T a "Private" Thing ) ...


I was RIGHT ... During his Two Terms as President, he REGULARLY dumped his own People when he encountered Opposition ( think: Lani Guinier and Dr. Joycelyn Elders ) ...




I did vote for Clinton twice. He did balance the budget and took us into no land wars.


No, I didn't like his womanizing, but that was his business and Hillary's. Now his wife is Secretary of State and I like her, too.


Probably half the people--including not a few women, in the US "fool around" : not my choice.


FDR died with his mistress in Warm Springs and Eisenhower had a mistress in Europe. And we won WWII.




discuss catholicism
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 10:27PM #39
hyoka
Posts: 277

May 18, 2010 -- 7:00PM, mytmouse57 wrote:





I fail to see how anything he supports "dehumanizes" gay people. It's not a matter of so-called "equality" or human rights. I'm not buying that for a second, many people are not.


 






You fail to see the dehumanization because you support it yourself and give it fodder with your mean spirited and silly babbling about how disordered and aberrant we are.


And I can see why YOU can’t see it as a matter of morality , social justice or equality . But just because societies have always puked on folks that you consider disordered and aberrant doesn’t mean it’s right or any less dehumanizing .


And as hard as you and people like you try to shut me up I’m not gonna stop “bitching and nit-picking” and fighting for my rights  untill people who actively make laws to oppress AND DEHUMANISE me on “moral or philosophical grounds” start minding their own business .


Folks like Souder aren’t just barking up the wrong tree they are actively "hounding" and "biting" at folks who don’t deserve it . They are hurting people based on “moral or philosophical grounds” as well as vicious arguments that we are disordered or aberrant.


 


Thing is….. I don’t really care who Souder screws. That’s between him and his family and perhaps the ‘God’ that he claims to be serving when he’s helping to squelch the rights and lives of gay people and our families. I think his real moral transgression is in his treatment of gay folks .


Even so, I agree with you that “ yep, sure, you betcha, what he did was wrong, immoral and weak. But it's also completely irrelevant to the issue of gay marriage.” Where he puts his dick IS irrelevant to the issue itself but I have to say that the fact that he’s being crucified by the same “family Values” and “Sanctity of Marriage” crap that he has used against gay folks and our families leaves me with very little sympathy for him and in fact reaffirms my faith in Karma.



 
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  May 19, 2010 - 12:14AM #40
rabello
Posts: 29,815

May 18, 2010 -- 7:00PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


"Gay marriage is morally equal to marriage between a man and a woman becuase this guy who opposses gay marriage messed around on his wife" isn't a solid argument. In fact, it's not an argument at all. It is, like I said, basically just griping and nit-picking.




That's not the argument.


What is repeatedly proven, by those who holler the loudest about the "sanctity of marriage," is that the "sanctity of marriage" is a conceit, a fabrication, a mirage, a cliche....and if that's what it is, by the very data made available by the hollerers, there is simply no reason to deny gays and lesbians the same rights that philanderers & cheats already possess.


The only people hollering about a "moral equivalence" are those who are so self righteous, they can't or won't hear their own hollering, much less live up to what they holler at everybody else about, or be able to see how their pointing finger is stuck on the "on" position.   Everyone else knows better, from the very behavior of heterosexuals and what the hollerers/pointers always get away with.


In a word, blantant and vicious hypocrisy that has real life damaging consequences for some.

Black Lives Matter
Muslim Lives Matter
There is no such thing as "illegals"
LGBT Lives Matter
Poor Women's Lives Matter

"If we jump too quickly to the universal formulation, 'all lives matter,' then we miss the fact that black people have not yet been included in the idea of 'all lives.'"

--Professor Judith Butler
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 39  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 39 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook