Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Doug Giles :: Townhall.com Columnist
When Blasphemous Gays Rip into Christians the MSM says Diddly Squat.
by Doug Giles
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Can you imagine if a group of Christians got together and made a photograph advertising their upcoming rally, and in that photo they deliberately went out of their way to tick off homosexuals?

What do you think would happen? Do you think the mainstream media would cover it? Do you think Katie Couric, Chris Matthews, Swill Maher and the other liberal curmudgeons would wade in and condemn the Christians and call ‘em haters…meanies…or…or…something?

You and I both know these darling duplicitous Christophobic thugs would be on their TV shows screaming anathemas at Christians louder than Yoko Ono would yell if she accidentally knelt on her own breast. They would be on the church like a dog on a June bug. Like Rosie on a case of Twinkies. Like Bill Clinton on Hustler’s 2007 Chunky Intern Issue. We would never hear the end of it.

However, what does the Main Stream Media do when the tables are turned and the queer crowd spits on the Christian community by showing a bunch of S&M/B&D mooks as Christ and his disciples in an advertisement for the foul end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it Folsom Street Fair this weekend? Probably nothing.

Yep, the MSM will, most likely, defend Folsom’s unwholesome flotsam as freedom of expression, artistic creativity and a progressive step away from the puritanical social mores that have for too, too long frowned upon their dream of an annual Tommy and Timmy Testicle Pageant.

For the uninitiated, what exactly did the way-too-creepy gay crew at Folsom do? Here’s the poop (literally).

You remember Da Vinci’s painting of Christ, The Last Supper, don’t cha? Well the Wizards of Odd, yes the marketing crew at Freaks-R-Us, decided it would be cool to market their “Street Fair” by replacing Jesus with some black/gay/S&M dude and then…then…swap the disciples out for a bunch of randy bondage boys and…and…(they weren’t finished)…switch the bread and wine—which represents Christ’s sacrificial body and blood given as a ransom for man’s sin—with a bunch of rubber-fisted dildos, together with a broad selection of other fetish crap made only for the fetid critter.

Unreal stuff, right here folks.

Y’know…even in my drunkest and drugged-out partying pre-Christ days when I was a very bad guy, I was always afraid, as messed up as I was, of personally attacking God, Christ and sincere Christians. But that was just me. Hardcore blasphemy doesn’t seem to bother this gay bunch much. But I digress.

Back to the media.

As stated, I seriously doubt anti-Christian MSM and their squawking heads will hold the queer nation’s fingers to flame for this. Why, you ask? They love it. Look, anything that will whiz on Christ, goof on God and barf on Christians is completely cool with them. Yes, my friend with Mellow Stream Media, as far as Christians go … there is no closed season and no bag limit for these buggers.

However, if anyone picks on, makes fun of, or tells the truth about a group the Left has decided to love, well you better buckle up, boy, because it’s going to get rough. I hope you have tough skin.

But this is nothing new. Everyone who loves traditional values and has a lick of common sense can see the biased, hypocritical, nonstop sputum that regularly flows from these loudmouths’ cake holes. That’s why their ratings are tanking and their newspaper sales are plummeting. Matter of fact, it’s been reported that 90% of those who purchase liberal newspapers now are parrot owners who use their rags only to catch Polly’s runny white sunflower-laden liquid stool.

Frankly, I don’t care if you Folsom guys have a good laugh at God’s expense. Personally I’d like to thank you for showing us all, once again, who you truly are. And in regard to me defending God, well, He’s big enough to take care of himself. He’ll sort things out, eternally, in the end. So…if you’re cool with mocking Christ, his sacrifice and his disciples, I’m cool with it too. Wasn’t that easy? Proceed on.

Oh, by the way—for my fellow beer drinking buddies who are equally fed up with egregious attacks on traditional values—you can hammer these guys and their sponsors right in their wallets by not buying Miller beer, one of the sponsors of the Folsom Street Fair. I say, given their attack on Jesus that we officially never purchase another Miller beer ever again until Christ returns to kick butt and take names. Does that sound cool?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Doug Giles’ new book “If You're Going Through Hell, Keep Going!" is now available. Ann Coulter says "Doug Giles is a substantive and funny tour de force for traditional values.” Doug’s talk show and video blog can be seen and heard at www.ClashRadio.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I'm not wriggling off the hook at all
No, Rich D. it's is YOU who want to wriggle off the hook.
You cannot name any good and justifiable reason, other than the old 'the way it's always been' excuse. Well, it hasn't 'always been' that way.
You cannot name any society that has legally married gay couples that have been negatively impacted, nor their respective communities that have in MA, nor the countries where it is legal countrywide.

You cannot name, nor prove children raised by gay parents that are negatively impacted by their gay parents marrying. Nor can you recall that any ADULT human being in our country is banned on the basis of their characteristics or physical differences that would compromise their ability to bear, or raise children or choose not to. THAT is also a serious reality.
And I told you again, if you truly believed that the institution of marriage was a maturing, securing and opportunity for happiness that a loving couple should have, why NOT include gay couples?
I'ts unfair, stupid and painfully spiteful to say that about marriage, but a gay teen has no hope of it.
Indeed, isolating gay people from the very things and hope that would make a human being happy, then pointing fingers at gay people and remarking on what sick, sad people they are, is the utmost of casting stones. ALL human beings without hope would act that way. It's just that gay young people are particular targets for hopelessness and scapegoating.
I don't use religion to hide behind as an excuse to treat gay people this way. And if you thought about it, what good has come from doing so? Nothing. However, treating gay people with equal respect has garnered greater reward for everyone. Evidence of that is everywhere.

bought and sold God
Rich D...
In the eyes of civil law, that is the definition of marriage. You can pretend that everyone is obligated to be religious, engage the government in YOUR CHOICE of religion to isolate other citizens from their ability to function fully as such and as responsible human beings, but the fact remains that our civil government accords freedom to choose that ability.
We allow the divorced and adulterers to marry and remarry repeatedly, none are banned on the basis of their human characteristics, but status.
You are speaking in terms of what marriage has always been on some level, but it's never been static, except for opposite sex couples.
Expanding it to GAY PEOPLE, not simply same sex couples won't change the definition I mentioned. Which, if our laws are to be consistent about the security of children, remains that way also. Gay couples by the millions are raising children.
God isn't concept necessary to retain self determination and civil rights as a citizen. Including marrying the person of one's choice.

Bull
du writes: Friday, October, 05, 2007 3:03 PM

"I'm just calling you and the many other Christians on the duty you also have to treating your neighbor as you'd want to be treated."

I do - I call sin sin - what do you call it?

"It's [it's = it is] evolved..."

Marriage is defined by it's [it's = it is] VOWS..."

"Marriage and it's [it's = it is] definition NOW..."

You can pretend whatever you want, but two poeple of the same sex aren't married in the eyes of God, and never will be. You can't wiggle off the hook.

They've taken the good word gay and trashed it, invented the stupid term "homophobe" (fear of same? fear of man?) and applied it to people who aren't afraid of them, trashed the good words "kweer" (= strange) and "faggot" (a bundle of sticks, from Fr. fagot), and now they are after marriage, invalidly comparing themselves to the civil rights movement. God is not mocked.

Bull
du writes: Friday, October, 05, 2007 3:03 PM

"I'm just calling you and the many other Christians on the duty you also have to treating your neighbor as you'd want to be treated."

I do - I call sin sin - what do you call it?

"It's [it's = it is] evolved..."

Marriage is defined by it's [it's = it is] VOWS..."

"Marriage and it's [it's = it is] definition NOW..."

You can pretend whatever you want, but two poeple of the same sex aren't married in the eyes of God, and never will be. You can't wiggle off the hook.

They've taken the good word gay and trashed it, invented the stupid term "homophobe" (fear of same? fear of man?) and applied it to people who aren't afraid of them, trashed the good words "kweer" (= strange) and "faggot" (a bundle of sticks, from Fr. fagot), and now they are after marriage, invalidly comparing themselves to the civil rights movement. God is not mocked.

Rich D...not ignoring a thing
Not ignoring Christianity at all. I'm just calling you and the many other Christians on the duty you also have to treating your neighbor as you'd want to be treated. I"m not ignoring the long standing legal and moral definition of marriage.
It's evolved and changed to include those of mixed backgrounds as well as those of certain economic or criminal status.
Marriage is defined by it's VOWS, the two consenting adults involved are not excluded based on their personal characteristics, but their status.
Status as already married or already close next of kin.
Marriage and it's definition NOW, and for the last several decades has become more equitable along gender lines.
The definition is to make two, non related, consenting adults the first of kin and primary custodian of the other. And a GAY couple wouldn't change that definition, nor the definition of the VOWS of marriage.
What's really happening in this debate is people try to change the CRITERIA of marriage exclusively for gay people.
And some of us simply know when you're doing that. The definition isn't and has never been exclusively for heterosexual people and shouldn't be.
If you truly believed that marriage was a maturing, and noble institution to engage in, then that belief should extend to gay couples and their children as well.
The worst of straight people shouldn't have more access to it than the best of gay people. That's not a moral principle, that's spite.

To du
I'll ignore your many non sequiturs in your previous and conclude that you refuse to be educated regarding Christianity and the long-standing legal and moral definition of marriage as an institution and its purpose. I'll answer this, however:

du writes: Thursday, October, 04, 2007 9:30 PM

"Priorities people. Where are your priorities?"

To witness the Truth of the Word of God to all to whom I come in contact with until my dying breath.

seekerau has a point
Where IS the heterosexual gene? Where is the right handed gene? Where is the white people are superior to blacks gene? Where is the men are superior to women gene? Where is the heterosexuality is morally superior to homosexuality gene?

As IF one's genetics would ever save them from some of man's cruelest institutions.
Difference in sexual orientation would warrant someone floating a theory that there is a physiological difference.
Well, there ISN'T one. So that means that homosexuality is NORMAL. There is no aberration or retardation or incompetence in the cognitive or intellectual or physical function of gay people.
And it doesn't harm others.
And gay people will have the subsets of disorders like ADD, clinical schizophrenia or sociopathy evident in heterosexuals.
Which can't exist all at once in a person.
Meaning, that homosexuality ISN'T a disorder, but a difference. Yes, the same way left handedness is a difference ,but normal.
The APA didn't have guns pointed to their heads. Further and more comprehensive research was done and new information came to the fore. Why is there SUCH a problem with that?
I would think it would be GOOD news that gay people are highly functioning normal people. So we can all move on.
You should be happy that gay people have the ability to join in the most venerated institutions we have and SUCCEED.
If you can't be bothered to respect the evidence, than that's sicker than whatever you think homosexuality is or wish it were.
If I knew a cop in neighborhood was gay, what would you rather have happen? They get fired, or help the neighborhood take control of violent gangs? Which ARE a blight on all our lives. Priorities people. Where are your priorities?

gay people are not children
The reactions here are seriously weird and contradictory. A gay person who is EXPECTED to be celibate, never hope to give a child a loving home or work at a job or marry or protest legitimate grievances-that is the life of a child.

Gay adults are not children to be ordered around as if without the God given gift of dominion over themselves.
Gay adults are not property who are to sit in a corner and not utter any protest, no matter what hurts and injustice is heaped on them.
I don't care WHAT religion anyone is...using it as a club is not the way of intelligent and compassionate and inspired people.
Treating an adult or assuming that adult SHOULD be treated like a child was a mistake made against women and blacks.
Gay people rightly have cause to feel insecure as a minority at the mercy of the whims of hypocritical, contradictory and self righteous people.
Our paths as people of faith still requires treating a neighbor as we'd want to be treated. Period.
It's appalling how easily that flies out of the window on THIS issue ALONE.
This article is a silly complaint. The FSF didn't warrant a major story because it is local and blaspheming isn't a gay issue.

Rich D, I answered YOU
Rich D, I just answered you too. With regard to non procreative sex, ALL of which is considered sinful according to the Bible. However, with regard to individual sex lives, and individual public lives and access to protections and rights OUTSIDE of one's orienation is what I try to talk about.
Few of us, unless we are truly obssessed, know the quantity, style or quality of the sex lives of our neighbors. Gay or not.
Excluding a gay person from a job, a family, a peaceful education isn't based on whether or not they are having sex, but their orientation.
Which makes your statement contradictory as far as civil law is concerned.
This is why YOUR belief and your interpretation of Biblical law cannot be selectively applied to ONLY gay people.
And not those having sex prohibited by the Bible.
These laws should only apply to those who choose the Christian lifestyle.
Or don't you want being Christian to be a choice?
Gay sex occuring isn't at the expense of anyone else's freedoms. And certainly no one here can say at all how individual freedom (and a loving monogamous sex life) for gay people is at the expense of THEIR own freedoms and rights.
Rich D, it is YOUR straw man, that somehow a gay person legally married and supported in monogamy and securing children through that institution is a BAD thing.

knight_of_baawa
Last word baawa!

knight_of_baawa
Let those that read your comments decide for themselves.

You're a typical debater. When backed into a corner, turn your opponent’s words on them.

protesting protestants
I know you people are great at being protesting Protestants though not catholic Catholic and happy in your fundamental christian ways.

As someone here mentioned is that homosexuality is sin but are we all not born with original sin.

A where is that gene that makes people hetro?

And you protestants can not complain you are a schism from the original christian church. So accept it not every one goes with the norm just as your past relatives went against the norm.

knight_of_baawa
knight_of_baawa writes:
Your hatred and bigotry toward anyone who doesn't believe as you do is astounding.

Foxfire:

How can you hold a straight face when you say that?

I have always stated my views with civility, and respect.
I have been sarcastic with you because you earn the title of master of baawa.
Isn’t that what you are striving for?
You are vain, arrogant, and abusive, and apparently I am not the only one who holds that view.

Christians have a right to there beliefs as much as you do.

You don’t think that secular humanism isn’t imposing there beliefs on society?
The only difference is that you think that they are reasonable and right.
You call it enlightenment.

Can you really be so blind as to not see that what you condemn Christians for is exactly what you are doing, except you conceal it under the disguise of fighting for the liberty of others?
If you believe that Christianity is discrimination, than what you practice is reverse discrimination.
You take every opportunity to persecute by word and deed those who don’t agree with you.

I’ve engaged many atheists with respect for there beliefs, though I disagree with there beliefs.
I find it difficult to do that with you. You go out of your way to antagonize Christians whether they’re good, bad or ugly.

The fact is; Christians know that persecution will come because of the Word of God.
I expect your persecution; it’s your hypocrisy that causes me to engage you.

Doug Giles
This is a general comment about Mr. Giles and his writing style. It is extremely amateurish to the point of being childish. It is so obvious that he is trying desperately to show that conservative Christians can be "relevant" and daring, but he winds up becoming a caricature that cannot be taken seriously. His words appeal to angry people who feel that they can justify such outbursts by ripping some passage of the Bible out of its historical and theological context to show that Christians really don't have to be "nice," but the truth is that Mr. Giles' words are un-Christian. Indeed, they are uncivilized.

knight_of_baawa
knight_of_baawa writes: Wednesday, October, 03, 2007 11:21 AM
foxfire
John Dewey could say what he wanted, but that doesn't make humanism a religion. Further, the Torcaso v. Watkins decision is correct in the sense of a law requiring belief in god in order to hold some "public trust" does violate freedom of belief; it violates the freedom to not believe. For what good is freedom of belief if you're not free to not believe?

Foxfire:

I have to say; of all the people I’ve known or read about, you are the first who apparently has no need of a Savior.

You have arrived at perfection. There is nothing that you are not all wise in.

Oh master of baawa, your thorn hast risen above that of the gods.

Those that come from near and far shall bow down and worship thee for thou great wisdom.

Thou that hast the answers to all the mysteries of life.

May God have mercy on your soul.

Your bigotry and hate toward Christians is astounding.

There's not a bit of diffenence in the attitude you have toward Christians and that which you say Christians have toward gays.

Rich D.
Rich D. writes: Wednesday, October, 03, 2007 2:26 AM
To du
du writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 2:17 PM

"Believe me, I understand that a Christian is required to say that homosexuality is a sin."

I corrected that for you months ago, and you still get it wrong. Homosexuality orientation is NOT a sin to Christians - the behavior is. Some day you might run out of straw, but I doubt it.

Foxfire:

I had to give that some thought, but I would have to say that you are correct.

It's easy to equate the two to make it simple.

The Bible speaks of the act without the referrence to the nature.

I stand corrected.

To du
du writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 2:17 PM

"Believe me, I understand that a Christian is required to say that homosexuality is a sin."

I corrected that for you months ago, and you still get it wrong. Homosexuality orientation is NOT a sin to Christians - the behavior is. Some day you might run out of straw, but I doubt it.

Thornie
Thornie , I can tell you already what Knight of Baawa is going to come back with.
He wants his cake and eat it too.
It either is or it isn’t, but when it comes to putting forcing there ideology on someone it isn’t.
Secular Humanism is Not a religion
"for Establishment Clause purposes."
But when Christians attempt to get the religion of Secular Humanism out of the government schools, based on the same emotional frame of mind which atheists had when they went to court against God in schools, then pro-secularist courts speak out of the other side of their faces and say that Secular Humanism is NOT a religion "for establishment clause purposes." This is slimy deceitful legalism at its worst.
But it explains why so many are confused about whether Secular Humanism is a religion.
Here is the rule: When Secular Humanists want the benefits of religion, Secular Humanism is a religion. When Secular Humanists are challenged for propagating their religion in public schools, it is not a religion. If that sounds insane, it is; but all insane people are still rational. This insanity is cloaked in the rational-sounding rhetoric of constitutional law. Remember:
Secular Humanism is a religion "for free exercise clause purposes," and it is not a religion "for establishment clause purposes."

"Humanism is not a religion
knight_of_baawa writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 1:47 PM
"Humanism is not a religion
And it is not being pushed on children. Though, I suppose that some christians think that if schools don't teach that homosexuals should be beaten up and atheists deported, that is "pushing humanism" on children."


So go ahead, cry-baby (baaaaawawawa) and quote ANY Christian who advocates assaulting gays or deporting atheists. You are a freaking troll who consistently attempts to baffle others with BS as you can't back your outrageous lies with facts or anything remotely resembling reality. Truly pathetic.

knight_of_baawa writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 1:47 PM
Humanism is not a religion
And it is not being pushed on children. Though, I suppose that some christians think that if schools don't teach that homosexuals should be beaten up and atheists deported, that is "pushing humanism" on children.

knight_of_baawa
Is "Secular Humanism" a "Religion"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion. Many other Humanists could be cited who have acknowledged that Humanism is a religion. In fact, claiming that Humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years, perhaps beginning in 1875 with the publication of The Religion of Humanity by Octavius Brooks Frothingham (1822-1895), son of the distinguished Unitarian clergyman, Nathaniel Langdon Frothingham (1793-1870), pastor of the First Unitarian Church of Boston, 1815-1850. In the 1950's, Humanists sought and obtained tax-exempt status as religious organizations. Even the Supreme Court of the United States spoke in 1961 of Secular Humanism as a religion. It was a struggle to get atheism accepted as a religion, but it happened. From 1962-1980 this was not a controversial issue

Now Secular Humanists have completely reversed their strategy, and claim that Humanism is not at all religious, but is "scientific."
This page examines two issues:
• Secular Humanists and Humanistic courts have admitted that Humanism is a religion.
• Why they now claim Humanism is not a religion, in order to avoid problems under the "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court cited Secular Humanism as a religion in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins (367 U.S. 488). Roy Torcaso, the appellant, a practicing Humanist in Maryland, had refused to declare his belief in Almighty God, as then required by State law in order for him to be commissioned as a notary public. The Court held that the requirement for such an oath "invades appellant's freedom of belief and religion."

Gestell
In fact, we could invite Mr Giles along.. He likes his beer "out of the can" and his whiskey "neat"!! Heh. Cant see him signing up for Shari'a ... at ALL!

Gestell
Gestell: "If you do not, then you haven't really thought carefully about your own religious and political beliefs."

A touch of condescension here. Because I dont fit YOUR categorization - with which I disagree - I therefore havent "thought through" my position!! Neat!!

Gestell: "The sort of restrictions on clothing, behavior, lifestyle, etc you find so astonishing are represented in such communities as the Amish, Mennonites, and other very conservative Protestant groups."

Yes, I know. I am not "astonished". I merely pointed out previously that I havent "come" across such groups in a PERSONAL capacity. It would take a bit more that that to "astonish" me at this stage of my life, I'm afraid. But these are small UNrepresentative groups.

Gestell: "As for Doug, if he doesn't mean a lot of the stuff he gets so upset about, then he's a bigger hypocrite than even I think he is."

See, here again, you feel the need to distort my earlier point. It should be OBVIOUS from the way he WRITES that he is having a LOT of... FUN!! Nothing to do with being "hypocritical" or insincere. His style is "over the top". I read him precisely for that reason - for a good laugh. Perhaps you should lighten up a bit.

Who knows? Maybe some day, we might even meet and have a beer!

Gestell
Gestell: "You don't really get my point."

Actually, I do. I just disagree with it.

Gestell: "As it is interpreted by conservative Christians, Christianity requiers a specific set of prohibitions on immoral behavior"

I think "prohibitions" is too strong. Of course, Christians - conservative or otherwise - would prefer if people in general behaved in particular ways. But so would everyone ELSE! Christains arent the ONLY ones who think stealing or muirder to be wrong and "should" be outlawed.

Gestell: "that includes, as derivations from its basic principles, the sorts of restrictions I mention."

Perhaps, among SOME Christians, but! A "bit" different from wanting stonings, beheadings, amputations etc, which Shari'a law would suggest. So I thought your point is at LEAST exaggerated somewhat. I still do.

Gestell: "These, if thought out carefully, approximate the Shari'a in their intentions."

I simply disagree.

Gestell: "If you regard yourself as a conservative Christian, you should, even if you are a Roman Catholic, come close in in your beliefs to these principles and their implications."

Well, you see, you are now trying to box me in, according to YOUR definition of a "conservative" Christian. I regard myself as "conservative" - but for reasons VERY different to those you would impute to me. We have discussed this before, and I think you are FAR too hung up on its "historical" meaning, in which I have NO interest.

I use the word as the best PRACTICAL generalization for where I stand on issues, as it is defined toDAY. I cant call myself "liberal" because I detest the baggage that word has acquired over time. If we go back to the 1800s... fine.


reply to Jimmy Joe
You don't really get my point. As it is interpreted by conservative Christians, Christianity requiers a specific set of prohibitions on immoral behavior that includes, as derivations from its basic principles, the sorts of restrictions I mention. These, if thought out carefully, approximate the Shari'a in their intentions.


If you regard yourself as a conservative Christian, you should, even if you are a Roman Catholic, come close in in your beliefs to these principles and their implications. If you do not, then you haven't really thought carefully about your own religious and political beliefs.

The sort of restrictions on clothing, behavior, lifestyle, etc you find so astonishing are represented in such communities as the Amish, Mennonites, and other very conservative Protestant groups.

As for Doug, if he doesn't mean a lot of the stuff he gets so upset about, then he's a bigger hypocrite than even I think he is.


hello foxfire....
Thank you very much for your cognizant and forthright post.
Believe me, I understand that a Christian is required to say that homosexuality is a sin.
However, most human failures and imperfections or whatever we perceive, usually requires the individual to note RESULTS of their sin, and how it impacts their lives and of those around them.
ALL Non procreative sex is considered sinful.
But practicality on human sexuality requires us to examine what is important also to human well being and quality of life.
Non procreative sex, or sex that isn't primarily for it, has shown to be beneficial to society and individuals.
Homosexual sex, for all intents and purposes can be for the same reasons, particularly since BEING gay isn't the choice of the individual but a characteristic as immutable as heterosexuality is.
How one treats a human being with sex remains the biggest dilemma. We encourage love, fidelity and monogamy. These are the good aspects to be encouraged in a person whether gay or not.
Sadly it's NOT encouraged or hoped for in gay youth, but the expectations regarding celibacy and affecting straight life is inherently impractical and cruel.
Being left handed was considered a sin, and immoral. So? That was wrong.
Being wrong about something before won't take away from the strengths of being Christian.
Legislating against gay people exclusively has proven cruel and impractical. To say nothing of wasteful.
We as individuals should also know when standards are not being applied fairly, or when there is opportunity to know more.
Our lives are more complex and we know more about human sexuality than was known 2,000 years ago.
We have to weigh the benefits and risks of what was considered sins.
Like autopsies and organ and blood donations.
And so far, the benefits of gay equality FAR outweigh the perceived risks.
And holding the Biblical standard for homosexuality ALONE, looks less justified and more like spite.

du
Sorry for the double post. It's TH again.

du
What is a Christian suppose to say; that homosexuality is not sin. And they are in good standing with God.

Once again, you may say that you don’t believe that, and that fine, but Christians do believe it.

Christians do not have a right to persecute gays. Christians are command to try to lead them to saving faith.

Christians are not trying to build church membership; they believe that sinners that die unsaved are going to hell.
Again, you say that you don’t believe that, that fine, but I do.
It is Gods desire that none should parish and He has commissioned the church to tell mankind that message.

I’m sorry if professing Christians have been jerks, bigots, and hateful, God will judge that as well.
Christians are not perfect by any means. None of this rhetoric changes God’s word
The message is that God is holy and man has missed the mark.
He has provided a way of escape from judgment in the sacrifice of His Son.
Those who refuse that gift will face God in there own righteousness.
Believe me, it won’t measure up.

Once again you may say that you don’t believe that. That’s what’s great about the grace of God, you have that right to make that choice and He still puts bread on your table.

du
What is a Christian suppose to say; that homosexuality is not sin. And they are in good standing with God.

Once again, you may say that you don’t believe that, and that fine, but Christians do believe it.

Christians do not have a right to persecute gays. Christians are command to try to lead them to saving faith.

Christians are not trying to build church membership; they believe that sinners that die unsaved are going to hell.
Again, you say that you don’t believe that, that fine, but I do.
It is Gods desire that none should parish and He has commissioned the church to tell mankind that message.

I’m sorry if professing Christians have been jerks, bigots, and hateful, God will judge that as well.
Christians are not perfect by any means. None of this rhetoric changes God’s word
The message is that God is holy and man has missed the mark.
He has provided a way of escape from judgment in the sacrifice of His Son.
Those who refuse that gift will face God in there own righteousness.
Believe me, it won’t measure up.

Once again you may say that you don’t believe that. That’s what’s great about the grace of God, you have that right to make that choice and He still puts bread on your table.

du
du writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 12:40 PM
religion is a choice
When it's all said and done, religion is a choice and should remain so.
Our governing bodies are not allowed to establish a religion nor favor one by the state.
And the reason this is IS because we can take our spiritual faith to individual levels. No one is forcing their neighbor to attend church, nor should public school children be forced to pray.
There are so many more venues and ways that one can commune in fellowship without including a public school where many children of differetnt backgrounds will attend. This should be neutral ground.

Foxfire:

I completely agree that Christianity or any other religion should not be imposed or it’s ideology forced on the citizens of the state.

But, humanism is a religion as well, and it is being imposed upon the citizenry of the state.

It is clear that our youth are the future members of our society, and the leaders of government.
The public school system has adopted a liberal humanistic agenda and is indoctrinating the children of those who hold religious beliefs that differ, whether Christian or otherwise.
If we are to insist that the church stays out of the affairs of the state, then the state should not impose it’s ideology on the children or citizens of the church.

Christianity was not meant to be a religion, but a way of life for the believer.
No where in the NT does it say that Christians should persecute in any way those who are gay.
The Bible does say that homosexuality is unnatural and is judged as sin.
Sin is sin in the sight of God.
Every person according to the Bible needs to be redeemed from there sin by faith in Jesus Christ.
You may not believe that, but Christians do believe that.

CONTINUED

religion is a choice
When it's all said and done, religion is a choice and should remain so.
Our governing bodies are not allowed to establish a religion nor favor one by the state.
And the reason this is IS because we can take our spiritual faith to individual levels. No one is forcing their neighbor to attend church, nor should public school children be forced to pray.
There are so many more venues and ways that one can commune in fellowship without including a public school where many children of differetnt backgrounds will attend. This should be neutral ground.

As for this ad, religious iconography has been parodied before and will again. It won't kill anyone that this image was parodied.
However, the continued ridicule and abuse of a gay child, just might kill them.
Christianity can survive such distasteful displays. Perspective people, I'll be more concerned when actual PEOPLE are abused, rather than an image.

Good Job!
First off, speaking of homosexuals having depression, suicide problems. I think we can safely state that if anybody had entire communities treating them like dirt, cursing them, yelling at them, telling them they are going to hell, that they have no right to be in society...etc. It's a really safe bet you'd be depressed and suicidal too.

Secondly, while I am a believer in Jesus, it is those like you who have convinced me to reject the label of Christian. I've become very cynical when it comes to your religions. Especially those who refuse to acknowledge that not everybody believes in God or Jesus, and refuse to allow others to believe what they choose to believe.

I really don't care if they pee in your breakfast cereal or not. They have as much right to tell you what to do with your religion as you do to tell them they are going to hell. I'll side with telling you what you can do with your religion.

Swampfox
I would to God that Christians would start acting like Bible believers and put the mouths of these hecklers to silence.

The Bible does not support the abuse of gays; they are sinners in need of the Savior like anyone else.

Gays need to understand that Christians oppose gays trying to compromise an institution that has been sacred to Christians for centuries.

If you want gay union, institute your own. You pay taxes; you are entitled to every benefit that the government provides.

You can not expect Christians to accept homosexuality as a natural life style, so move on with your life.
You shouldn’t expect Christians to allow homosexuality to be taught as a natural life style to there children in school. Christians don’t believe that it is natural, why should they be forced to accept it as natural.

Many Christian are supporting public education while not taking advantage of it because of the anti Christian views being taught already.

Christians need start presenting the gospel and let God handle the rest.

Swampfox
Swampfox writes: Monday, October, 01, 2007 1:11 PM
Gay gene
I keep asking this question and no one answers. If a gay gene is found and a pregnancy test can determine if the unborn child will become gay, would the Christian Right then support abortion for them?

Foxfire:

Short answer to your question, NO!

First of all the Bible says that abortion is wrong because it is taking a life that God created.

If the child is born gay as you say, it is still a sinner even if it weren’t gay.

Sinners must be born again or they are going to have to pay the price for there own sins.

God states that homosexuality is sin. If God saves the gay, He has promised to give him every thing he needs to comply with Gods expectations.
If God can’t supply it, man can not be held accountable for not complying with God’s expectations. Right!

CONTINUED

?
I don't get what Christian values are involved in promoting hate. The MSM is rife with unchristian ethics, and thats why I hardly watch t.v. Personally, I think Fox News is the worse offender.

Gestell
Gestell: "What I don't get is why conservative Christians like Doug aren't leading the way to a return to such standards?"

LOL! I think you take Mr Giles a BIT too seriously! I dont think he takes himSELF that seriously... at all! I would guess that a LOT of the stuff he spouts is tongue in cheek!

Gestell: "He gets all frothy-mouthed at the appearance and behavior of gays, but doesn't see that standard-setting needs to go beyond just gays."

I dont agree with this. What got him was the descecration of a religious symbol. And he doesNT get "frothymouthed" JUST at gays!!

If I may make a suggestion. I suspect that the Minister you refer to has had a FAR greater influence on you than you think. I think you see HIM as the "standard bearer" of the "right" - which you instinctively dislike. I would too... if I had such a "standard bearer."

Gestell
Gestell: "What's "mindless" about suggesting that Christians develop their own Shari'a?"

Because "Shari'a" law in the Muslim sense includes stonings, beheadings, and dismemberment. I dont see ANY Christian going for it. NOR do I see any Christian going for the compLETE covering of womenfolk. A bit of a stretch between that and the "bathing suit" you refer to. I have a cousin who doesnt like his wife wearing a skimpy bathing suit. HIS perogative. Nothing particularly "religious" about it either.

As for the: "no drinking, swearing, listening to rock music, dancing, card-playing etc.?"

LOL! This is why I am Catholic, not fundamentalist!!

Gestell: "You probably don't know, Jimmy Joe, that many, many Christian communities lived by such principles until very recently in the US, and some groups still exist that subscribe to such limitations."

Fair enough, Gestell. I am not familiar with them.

Satire
lilly writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 12:22 AM

"By the way, profane satire of sacred rites and liturgy was common in Medieval Europe. What stopped it then was something you would understand perfectly, the Spanish Inquisition."

Yeah, stopped completely - haven't seen any fatwas against novelists, shelling of ancient statues of Buddha, or profane drawings of Mohammed since then.

Doug Giles
First of all, before going into Mr. Gile's arguments, I'm afraid I must take issue with his poor writing style. This is something I would expect my little sister to write. I would hope the qualifications for being a columnist for Townhall would require writing skills, but perhaps I ask too much. As for Mr. Gile's large distraction piece, it's to be expected from a person who quite evidently has never met a gay person. Oh yes, there are extremes in every group, but rather than have a serious dialogue about gays and the rights they deserve, Giles and crew are more than happy with a quick and losing superficial point. As for the mainstream media not picking up on this story, they may be smart enough to pick up on the connection between alcohol and bad taste, a relationship apparently all too well known to Mr. Gile's from the state of his column.

Raising money
This great outrage over the Folsom Street fair must be energizing the religious right. I would wager that dollars are flowing into those organizations that might qualify as gay-hating organizations. Those demon possessed gays are at it again.

Christianity
I think that Christianity can survive some parody that is in bad taste.

Thought experiment
Can you gay haters imagine what it is like growing up in a small town, knowing that you are homosexual?

Gay gene
I keep asking this question and no one answers. If a gay gene is found and a pregnancy test can determine if the unborn child will become gay, would the Christian Right then support abortion for them?

Too funny
The Hamas and Fatah thugs in Gaza are going at it, calling each one gay. It seems that a videotape got out with some senior members of one of the groups performing gay sex acts. Will they be stoned to death or hung? An Islamic chapter of NARTH needs to be established in Gaza to convert these poor folks.

Another take
The fact is, domestic beer has always sucked. This just proves it.

reply to Jimmy Joe
What's "mindless" about suggesting that Christians develop their own Shari'a? All they'd really have to do is agree to develop a comprehensive code covering such areas as styles of clothing, hair, and makeup for women, at least some limits on men's clothing styles, and then go on to a variety of everyday forms of behavior--e.g., no drinking, swearing, listening to rock music, dancing, card-playing etc.?

You probably don't know, Jimmy Joe, that many, many Christian communities lived by such principles until very recently in the US, and some groups still exist that subscribe to such limitations.

What I don't get is why conservative Christians like Doug aren't leading the way to a return to such standards? He gets all frothy-mouthed at the appearance and behavior of gays, but doesn't see that standard-setting needs to go beyond just gays.

I was raised in an Assemblies of God congregation, so I saw a lot of this up close. Our minister was proud of the fact that his wife didn't own a bathing suit, since bathing suits violated biblical requirements for decent clothing for women. He had a TV set but he covered its screen on Sundays so no one in his family would be tempted to watch it on the Lord's day. He always found plenty of targets for his sermons on the evils of Hollywood, rock and roll, and the like. He would have been a big help in setting up Christian Shari'a. Doug could probably do this, but I doubt if he's really Christian enough to set up the sort of restrictions the Christian life requires.

2,000 year ago
Can we PLEASE get some perspective. I don't appreciate speculating on what Jesus 'would' think or do.
The people of 2,000 years ago in any given society have a lot to answer for that was very detrimental to women and a homosexual would be presumed to be deviating in societies with such strict artificial rules about how women are supposed to behave.
Yes, artificial.
We are NOT the people, nor do we have to live the way those people of those times did.
If anything the most important directives regarding loving God and treating your neighbor as you'd want to be treated hold the most direct and simple message.
You can treat a homosexual the way you'd want to be treated FIRST, then wait and see what happens.
Since gays and lesbians are taken for granted as a social blight, the treatment up until very recently has been brutal.
We have yet to adjust to really knowing who and what gay people are.
Serious dialogue and honesty is really impossible here. Those who have more experience with and AS homosexuals are dismissed, denied and held in much contempt.
Yet, those who write the articles on gay lives, use a great deal of conjecture and misinformation and speaks as if they are to be the most trusted authority on the intents and lives of gay people.
The limits of their experience is glaring, to those who aren't afraid to know better.
I'm glad that God made me and more and more people not afraid to expand their information and to sit with and talk to such an intimate stranger. Jesus didn't live long enough for any of us to speculate on what he would have done.
However, WE have the option to keep learning, and expanding our understanding of who is different and mysterious to us.
That's the path I prefer. And I've been greatly rewarded for taking that leap of faith.

Christ Can Defend Himself
Believe me! Christ does not need defending.

I defend the truth, the Bible. I contend for the faith, but Christ can take care of Himself.

In the end you may not like Him, but the Bible says that every knee will bow.

A Christian's responsibility is to proclaim the gospel non violently.



Not Cool?
no bs artist writes: Saturday, September, 29, 2007 9:14 PM
>>Not Cool
>>To the best of my knowledge Jesus never took >>names or kicked anyone's butt.

Um, actually Jesus walked into the Temple and physically threw out all the moneylenders. Oh, yeah, he kicked butt. As for taking names, he does take names and he does write them in his book of life, and if your name isn't in that book, guess where you're going? I guess the best of your knowledge isn't very good, is it?

Better read up on the Bible, it may help you in the future to make more informed arguments.

>>He actually rescued a harlot, Mary Magdeline >>from a howling mob of self righteous Douggies >>who wanted to stone her to death! He simply >>told her to go and sin no more.

Are you not even aware of what you have written? Jesus did not condone or tolerate her behavior, he told her to "go and sin no more."
You are right that he did not condemn her to death, but he did tell her to stop her behavior. If Jesus had come to Earth today, he would most certainly have told those who indulge in homesexual activity to "go and sin no more." He would not have tolerated those who abuse homesexuals, like in the Matthew Shepard case, but he by no means would have pretended that homosexual behavior is okay. He would have labelled homosexuality as sinful and treated it as such.

Lastly, if you had bothered to really read all of Doug's article, you would have noticed that he did not condemn even one homosexual. He was simply voicing disgust at a tasteless and blasphemous advertisement displayed by the promoters of the Folsom event in San Francisco.

Bad scripting?
Jackpine Savage wrote:
< < It's more like technical difficulties than censorship. I'm beginning to think that TH hired Rube Goldberg to do the scripting on this site. > >

Thanks for the reply, JPS. I hope you're right about that (and I hope TH does something about it).

Well, superskinny,
I post mostly as a pass time. Nothing too serious about it! Nice meeting you!

McMike
McMike: "can someone please let this moderator know there is something known as "edit" for us who don't proofread our postings???"

"Poof"-reading your postings is a matter of courtesy to your fellow posters. No big thing.

McMike
McMike: "It saw A LOT when a simple picture can rile up the religious right so much."

Actually, we arent "riled up" at ALL. Riled up is what Muslims do. Which is why cowards mock Christ, but not Muhommad.

McMike: "you guys have gone from homophobe to homoterrified which, in my humble opinion, is the best thing ever - means we're doing something right."

Nonsense. homo-this or homo-that is a matter of complete indifference to us, in the main. What Mr Giles objects to is the mockery of religion by homo-whatever.

McMike: "you guys should be scared: every day more and more people are starting to see homosexuals as the normal people they are and you guys just can't stand it."

We have nothing to be "scared of." And whether they are seen as "normal" or not is again, a matter of complete indifference. I know LOTS of homosexual/gay people, and boo hoo. Big deal.

McMike: "Those who freak out the most are those who are losing the battle."

The ONLY one I see "freaking out" here is... YOU.

McMike: "Scream all you want that homo's are making a mockery of God but it is you, the religious right, who mock God's word when you so desperately fight for the right to hate another man and get away with it."

Absolute rubbish. NOwhere here did you see ANY Christian fighting for "the right to hate another man." Not only is this rubbish, but it is a LIE. And, as a matter of FACT, the "homos"
WERE making a "mockery of God" - NOT beCAUSE they are "homos" but because of how they redrew the last supper. Duh and double duh. Are you totally stuupid?

McMike: "Sorry, even God has a sense of humor - if He doesn't then why does He make all the homosexual men better looking, funnier, smarter/more educated and more successful then their homophobic counterpart?"

Nonsensical generalization.

um edit
can someone please let the moderator know of something called 'edit' for those of us too lazy to proofread out postings? maybe someone can tack the note on one of the cows so when the cows finally do come home they'll be clued in?

um
can someone please let this moderator know there is something known as "edit" for us who don't proofread our postings??? maybe you can post it to one of the cows so when the cows finally do come home they'll be clued in...

sumthin's workin
It saw A LOT when a simple picture can rile up the religious right so much. you guys have gone from homophobe to homoterrified which, in my humble opinion, is the best thing ever - means we're doing something right. you guys should be scared: every day more and more people are starting to see homosexuals as the normal people they are and you guys just can't stand it. Those who freak out the most are those who are losing the battle. Scream all you want that homo's are making a mockery of God but it is you, the religious right, who mock God's word when you so desperately fight for the right to hate another man and get away with it. Sure the ad might be in poor taste but as a photographer, who was offered to be placed in the Smithsoneon, I can attest the picture is by far art - when a photograph can cause show much emotion, fear, conversation, debate and is a prime example of what's going on in society then there is no doubt this picture will be discussed for years to come simply because it stresses what some see to be a vital issue to our society. Sorry, even God has a sense of humor - if He doesn't then why does He make all the homosexual men better looking, funnier, smarter/more educated and more successful then their homophobic counterpart? As long as all the pretty boys are either gay friendly or just out-right gay and then phobes not then all you backwoods peeps can keep bickering til your cows come home. This picture is proving to be one of the most important pieces of art simply because it's shining a light on just how pathetic and petty these religious wanna-be right wingers are.

no bs artist
bs artist: "I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar in the first place,"

Heh. We never mistook you for one!

bs artist: "But what little I do know.."

You said it. What "little" you do know!! Heh. I agree!! Again!

bs artist: "I got the impression that the Lord tried to help mankind, not prejudge or ridicule people who were different."

As in NOT calling people who are "different from YOU "sheeples" and shnooks"!! Right on!

bs artist: "You reactionary sheeple need to lighten up."

Actually, you are projecting here. Mr Giles is pretty light, and he seems to get YOU all worked up week after week!! You need to get a life!

bs artist: "Now you see sheeple--nothing catastrophic happened!

Yes, we know.

bs artist: "The sun is going to rise in the east and we're going to be OK."

And we know that too. But SOME of us will still be pretty stuuuupid.

no bs artist
I just love BS artists who tell Christians all about Jesus and how they should act when they haven't a clue...maybe you can recall hearing a story about how not once but twice Jesus got mad and turned over tables of money changers at temple or if you ever read the Bible, you'd know he goaded the Pharisess many times and called them many choice names but you just live in your little fantasy world on what "you" think...which is all wrong...quit BSing...

no bs artist
I know you feel somehow "compelled" to write under Mr. Giles' colums. I dont know why, since they seem to "upset" you so much! As for his cartoon?? More silliness and emptyheadedness from you. A BIG difference between depicting Christ with a lighter under a defamatory book, and portraying Him as he was prortrayed in the sacriligeous picture of the last supper. Duh.

is as stupid as you are
knight_of_baawa writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 8:55 PM
Of course, jim knows that I'm not gay, but he chooses to ignore that fact.
========

Of course I don’t know that, and I wouldn’t believe it if your mother said it. I do not ignore the fact, I just have no care in the world for whatever you want to do or say.

My comments are just to make sure none of your buddies think everyone is as stupid as you are.

knight of baawa...
...it would be a waste of my time to try and remonstrate with you. Instead, I will simply quote from God's Word "A fool has said in his heart, there is no God."

And so, knight of baawa, since God has called people like yourself 'fools' because you haven't got the basic sense to understand that you were created, there is little more I can say. Your argument, on this and basically every point, is with your Creator, not me.

I will point out for the sake of discussion, and the enlightenment of other TH readers that homosexual acts, in the animal kingdom or as it relates to human, are NOT the norm and CANNOT be the norm. The reason is incredibly obvious. Gays do not reproduce. Therefore, if being homosexual was 'natural', the species would die out. The normal order of things is a male, female, and offspring. Any variation of that is abnormal.

at least partially normal, for a part
knight_of_baawa writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 8:28 PM
jim
If homosexuality is a choice, heterosexuality must as well, since otherwise you're special pleading.
-------

What a phony, you try to sound like a human, but can’t quite make it. This is where I hate the fact that animals like you are permitted to change the language, because if a word ever fit as a descriptor, QU*ER is sure the right word for you, and I am not allowed to use it.

You say, “If homosexuality is a choice, heterosexuality must as well” and of course that is true. 99.9% of births are normal in sexuality, a few mistakes are like you.

Millions of stupid Qu*ers have decided to be as near normal as possible, and have been successful in being at least partially normal, for a part of their life.

Just as many have chosen to live your miserable life style.


knight of baawa...
...Actually, Jim is perfectly correct. The natural order of the human and animal kingdom is heterosexual. Your mother and father, as an example, followed that same natural order, and that's how you came to be. Homosexuality is unnatural and contrary to what is normal.

In a pure sense, though, everything people do is a 'choice'. The choice to do the right thing, or the choice to rebel and do the wrong thing. Most of God's creatures recognize that He made the female for the male and vice-versa. The ones who do not subscribe to that obvious, immutable truth are in rebellion against their Creator's will for them.

be a choice” and that is a lie.
knight_of_baawa writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 7:21 PM
You're trying to have it both ways, jim
Won't work. If people aren't born gay, then they aren't born straight, since sexual preference MUST be a choice. If being gay is a choice, being straight is a choice.

Can you choose to be gay, jim?
======

You say, “since sexual preference MUST be a choice” and that is a lie. That is as possible as you chose to be a blond, to have blue eyes, and you chose to have toenails or not. Forget it. you got it or you don't.

How silly, some babies are born as Siamese-twins, some with no arms, with two heads, and on and on, but normal is like most of us, non-homo, with two of what should be two, and one of what should be one.

Normal is normal, as natural is natural, and that is not Homo. And believe me, somewhere between many and most Homo's are by choice. Just like alcohol drinkers are volunteers, but can become addicted.

Let’s list the features that the one being born can choose, vs what thing are as it is, as it happened.

Douggie's cartoon
Oh did anyone check out Douggie's current cartoon? If I didn't know any better I swear that was pure blasphmey! For shame Douggie, for shame!!!! You're going straight to hell!

no bs artist...
...Doug Giles is a born again believer and doesn't subscribe to the Old Testament law of stoning people. That law was for the Jewish people AT THAT TIME and has no relevance for today's believer. It's pure ignorance for you to claim that Doug would want to 'execute' gays or 'stone' anyone. Writing a painfully accurate column that exposes you left wingers as the simpletons that you are is hardly 'stoning' or 'executing' anyone.

It's pathetically childish of you, no bs artist, to add '..gie' to the end of someone's name, or to call someone a 'shnook'. That is the kind of thing that second graders do. Grow up. I suggest that you spend a few years studying the Bible by submitting to the authority of people who actually understand it and teach it, before you go slinging any little pebbles of your own.

no bs artist...
...Jesus is the Son of God. He has existed since time began and is fully one with and equal to the Father. The Father had a few things to say about the homosexual lifestyle, and those things represent the eternal perspective of the Godhead. When Jesus came as a man, He came as a servant. He came to redeem mankind, by offering Himself sacraficially in our place. That is, if people like you and me will receive that free gift, and begin to live accordingly. But when Jesus comes back in Revelation, He WILL be taking names and kicking butt. But you probably haven't read that far into God's Word. Why should you - you've got the two or three verses that you think support your liberal worldview, and have no need to go any further.

As to the passage in John about the woman caught in adultery, that wasn't Mary Magdeline. The woman is not identified. Furthermore, nothing in Scripture tells us that Mary Magdeline was a harlot. It says that she had 'seven devils' which the Lord cast out of her.

The people who wanted to stone that woman were in the wrong because the man who was also caught in adultery was nowhere to be found. Most Bible scholars believe that this is what Jesus was writing in the sand - the actual law that says the man and the woman caught in adultery are to be stoned. So He exposed what they were trying to do as an injustice - they wanted to stone the woman but let the man off the hook.



I see
the usual apologists for all things anti-Christian are here in force. Here to defend a disgusting display of of human behavior. This parade is sick. If the homosexual community was at all interested in voluntary acceptance by the population at large, they would denounce this trash for what it is. Alas, anyone against it is deemed intolerant, a bigot, a hate monger. What was i thinking when i called when i called half naked men going at each other with the drive of a teenager and his first porno, disgusting?
Whats a little public orgy here and there, never hurt anyone right? I guess i shouldn't expect anything less from the banner phrase of the 40 years or so, "If it feels good, do it". Maybe the Dems can pass universal health care next year and they can rob my wallet to pay for the diseases spread by people who will have sex with anything that has a hole in it.

Annefann
I never claimed to be a Biblical scholar in the first place, you shnook. But what little I do know I gleaned from the onslaught of Jesus flicks like King of Kings and The Robe (I can hear all you sheeple laughing out there, but that's ok) I got the impression that the Lord tried to help mankind, not prejudge or ridicule people who were different. I'm sure there were gays way back then too and weird sex toys.

You reactionary sheeple need to lighten up. Anyhow it's getting late and by this time that stupid Folsom Festival is part of history now. Now you see sheeple--nothing catastrophic happened! The sun is going to rise in the east and we're going to be OK.

Khan
I agree with you. I think drawing attention is playing right into their hands. Ignoring is the best policy. That said, it is a matter of balance and it is sometimes difficult to make a judgement call.

Personally, I would like to see them mock Islam with the same fearlessness... LOL! Not a chance!!

Gestell
no bs artist: "Douggie is a homophobe."

Take ONE quote from what "Douggie" actually SAID which would back this up. Mr Giles is objecting to the the mocking of religion. I cant be bothered taking issue with the rest of what "no bs artist" stated. Waste of time. Mindless.

Gestell to no bs artist: "YOu do have a point."

Which IS??

Gestell: "It's too bad Doug and the other right-wing Christians can't convert to Islam; they could live in a society which pretty much conforms to most of their biases."

Absolute rubbish. Mr Giles likes his liquor too much!

Gestell: "Realistically, such conversion is too much of a stretch for most of our Christian brethren."

Er. This is difficult. I understand that you are a Christian. It SHOULD be "too much of a stretch"... given that Christians - even "liberal" ones, SUPPOSEDLY believe in the divinity of Christ.... Muslims dont. Duh.

Gestell: "Instead, the Christian Right should do something I've suggested in other posts: develop a Christian version of Shari'a."

I respectfully suggest you stop making mindless suggestions. It makes you look foolish.

Gestell: "Of course, as I said in my first post on today's column, the conservatives would have to start attacking the heterosexual raunch in our society too, but a Christian Sharia would do that too."

You see how paranoid you are? There IS no "attack" on ANYone in Mr Giles' column - merely a DEFENCE of Christianity from mockery. In this case the mockery HAPPENS to be gay. Big deal.

we will destroy you
lilly writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 6:54 PM

conservatives is "Unless you follow our social agenda we will destroy you."
=====

What if that stinking pig-slop maker, Miller, said something even slightly in favor of something that normal decent human people are in favor of, you would be screaming to high … … … whoops I almost said that horrible anti-homo, anti-lib, word “Heaven,” but I caught myself.

reply to no bs artist
YOu do have a point. It's too bad Doug and the other right-wing Christians can't convert to Islam; they could live in a society which pretty much conforms to most of their biases. Realistically, such conversion is too much of a stretch for most of our Christian brethren.

Instead, the Christian Right should do something I've suggested in other posts: develop a Christian version of Shari'a. It would allow for all of the biases of the Christians to be made concrete in a system of law. Of course, as I said in my first post on today's column, the conservatives would have to start attacking the heterosexual raunch in our society too, but a Christian Sharia would do that too.

So, Doug, get together with Frank Pastore and some of the other TH columnists, go on a long retreat someplace, and come down from the mountain with the new teaching. Someone can come up with a Christian version of hijab and burkhas---after all, we don't want straight temptation having any more legitimacy than gay temptation, right, boys? Boys? Say something, boys?

When Blasphemous
The MSM is ingoring a non-story. People in the bay area outside of the castro district are just not interested.

A Blasphemous satire is still just a satire. By writing about you encourage the people you hate to act more outragious. They know that they are getting under your skin and you can't do anything about it.

Re Miller
It's one thing for a private individual to decide, all by himself, that he chooses not to do business with a company for whatever reason. It's quite another thing when a product boycott is choreographed by an institution for political reasons. Let's look at this. 1) Miller was a sponsor of the immigrants' march a couple of months ago. 2) Miller is presently a sponsor of the Folsom Street Fair, a flamboyant gay event. 2) I have not personally seen ANY coverage of the Folsom event on the mainstream media or on any media but townhall. I could have missed it, but I read the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune hard-copy seven days a week, the Washington Post online seven days a week, and half a dozen other papers passim depending on issues, online, all the time. I watch network world news every evening and in between I have TV news on CNN or FOX several hours a day. I also review Google News several times a day. And I watch half a dozen TV political talk shows every week. Not hide nor hair of Folsom have I seen. 3) I have, however, seen several articles on townhall about Folsom, all at the same time, what a coincidence. 4) Miller has been named. 5) Conservatives are now vowing not to buy Miller.

This is troubling because the message to business from conservatives is "Unless you follow our social agenda we will destroy you." And evidence strongly suggests that this anti-Miller campaign did not show up at grassroots level but was deliberately run from above.

Miller
I found the Miller 'contact us' at the bottom of the privacy policy. Link is on the home page.

Purplestater
purplestater writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 3:20 PM
Censorship here? What gives?
Before I went to bed last night (around 5:30 a.m. on the time stamp), I wrote a comment about the crudity that Reverend Giles uses in this article and others. I wondered how my congregation would take it if our minister stood up in the pulpit and said things like ...


It's more like technical difficulties than censorship. I'm beginning to think that TH hired Rube Goldberg to do the scripting on this site.

Hey TH, I can put you in touch with the tech for my company, he's kept me online for almost 7 years. :o)

Immoral Company List
I have an immoral company list of companies I will never never never support by purchasing their products. Miller has been put on the list and I am not Jesus, there is no redemptive way to get off my list.

Skip
Do they have Moose in Montana? Wow. I hear the meat is the best of the hoofed animals. Good luck.
I heard a story about a guy who was using a 7x57 on moose. Three shots and the moose never even stopped feeding. He said i wasn't ready to concede i was undergunned, but i was starting to think i was over-moosed. But at that point the moose just slowly piled up. Phlegmatic, thy name is moose.

Doug,
I always heard "...like a duck on a June bug". I've said before, you can learn stuff on TH.


As far as Miller is concerned I lucked out. Here in Montana we have a wide variety of beers to choose from. Micro-breweries turn out some really good beers. I haven't been able to test Moose Drool yet, but I will eventually get around to it.


Perhaps if I ever get lucky enough to draw a tag for moose, and fill that tag, I will celebrate with Moose drool.


As to the freakazoids in the parade, and the ones responsible for that picture, there should be an open season on them

no bs artist...
...is about as full of b.s. as it's possible to be. You really can't be that ignorant, can you?

First of all, the admonition to 'turn the other cheek' has to do with one person who slaps another person. It's true that the 'slap' is figurative, in the sense that it could mean any offense, but the key to Biblical interpretation and understanding is context. This passage refers to ONE person who is offended or hurt by ONE OTHER person. A PERSONAL offense. It does not refer to groups of people who vilify and attack other groups of people. How does a group of people turn it's collective cheek? Answer - they don't, and they can't. Think a little bit, though be careful in doing so, because someone with as little practice at genuine thought as you clearly have had might end up with a severe headache.

Secondly, it's dangerous for people to go buy a Bible, open it up, read a little bit, and then proclaim themselves Bible scholars. Which liberals are wont to do. Imagine if you enrolled in college to study deep subjects, and then just decided you didn't need to go to class or listen to any knowledgeable teachers, but rather, opted to just buy a textbook and try to teach yourself. Clearly, no bs artist, you are uninformed on Biblical matters, and embarassingly so.

Since Townhall limits the length of a comment, I will post the second half of my response to you in a subsequent post.

no bs artist...
...is about as full of b.s. as it's possible to be. You really can't be that ignorant, can you?

First of all, the admonition to 'turn the other cheek' has to do with one person who slaps another person. It's true that the 'slap' is figurative, in the sense that it could mean any offense, but the key to Biblical interpretation and understanding is context. This passage refers to ONE person who is offended or hurt by ONE OTHER person. A PERSONAL offense. It does not refer to groups of people who vilify and attack other groups of people. How does a group of people turn it's collective cheek? Answer - they don't, and they can't. Think a little bit, though be careful in doing so, because someone with as little practice at genuine thought as you clearly have had might end up with a severe headache.

Secondly, it's dangerous for people to go buy a Bible, open it up, read a little bit, and then proclaim themselves Bible scholars. Which liberals are wont to do. Imagine if you enrolled in college to study deep subjects, and then just decided you didn't need to go to class or listen to any knowledgeable teachers, but rather, opted to just buy a textbook and try to teach yourself. Clearly, no bs artist, you are uninformed on Biblical matters, and embarassingly so.

Since Townhall limits the length of a comment, I will post the second half of my response to you in a subsequent post.


It just makes me chuckle....

The more on target the column is, the more the lunatics come out in force, and the more hateful and vile their rhetoric is.

Now, we have a pretty nice Sunday afternoon, and these lunatics have nothing better to do than to than sign onto TH and post hateful, ignorant comments.

I'm thinking that most likely Doug Giles pretty much hit the nail on the head!

Great work, Doug. :-)





Censorship here? What gives?
Before I went to bed last night (around 5:30 a.m. on the time stamp), I wrote a comment about the crudity that Reverend Giles uses in this article and others. I wondered how my congregation would take it if our minister stood up in the pulpit and said things like ...

< < louder than Yoko Ono would yell if she accidentally knelt on her own breast > >

... or made gratuitous attacks like the comment about Rosie or especially Clinton and Hustler magazine.

My comment was up for some time, but when I got up this morning (I'm out west, so it's still morning), but now it's gone.

Why it gone? Was it removed? Was it flagged as offensive? If so, why was it flagged as offensive? This seems to be a rather disturbing display of censoring ideas that go against the majority grain. I mean, my comments were certainly less offensive than the gleeful comment poking fun at the execution of gays in Iran.

born straight, that is normal
knight_of_baawa writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 2:33 PM
Hey jim
If people aren't born gay, then they're not born straight, either. Think you could choose to be gay, jim?
======
Of course people are born straight, that is normal, that is nature, that is the way it is intended.

I didn't have to choose, I was born natural. The only things in the world that can’t reproduce are a rock, a hand-full of dirt, and someone with a birth defect. In other words a committed Homo.

I have Declared today:
Thank the 1 Percent Day!

Not factoring in all of the many retirees, prior military and other patriots who were unable to serve in the military, we now have an active duty military that constitutes about 1 percent of our national population.

1 out of every 100 people is serving the US.
So, the slogan for today is

THANK THE ONE PERCENT!

Have you hugged your soldier today?

difference
I think there is a difference between gay people, and the gay agenda. I have known and worked for gays and they have been my best bosses. Granted I have tripped across misogynists now and again.

However the purple glove, or the pink glove, or the rainbow glove, or the fuchsia glove, whatever the right term is, is another thing. There is no reason not to fight against an agenda.

One commentater said that ""If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him also." applies to personal interactions with one's family and close acquaintance. It does not apply to the public sphere and does not apply to nations. By using the word "right cheek" it means being hit with the back of the hand, which means feeling humiliated". It does not refer to beatings, nor attacks upon a nation. Not that all of this is relevant. I am just taking the opportunity to clarify what is often misinterpreted. Therefore in essence it is saying, be forgiving in your personal life. It does not mean lie down on the ground and allow yourself to be beaten up and don't act like a wimp in the public sphere, nor in the international sphere.








MR. GILES:

You don't mean to say there's a double standard here, do you?

My, oh, my. What an imagination you have. Aren't you a writer whose exclusive genre is fiction? It must be so.

MSM afraid of gays
If the MSM deviates (pun intended) from the homosexual party line, it can find itself the object of harrassment and threat.

knight
I can't remember who said "When engaging in a battle of wits, make sure your opponent is armed". Since I have the unfair advantage of God's word on my side, I shall leave you to your own designs. Good luck! I must go now and spend quality time with my family and cheer on the Dallas Cowboys.

P.S. I hope you enjoy your close relationship with Satan. Eternity with him is going to be "hell".

excuse of “I was born that way”
Well we have caught those Homo's in a great lie. They want to live as trash, so try to use the excuse of “I was born that way” to make us ignore, or accept their life of debauchery.

But we have them now. They insist that 10% of the people born in the world are qu**r. But now the most qu**r of them all has told us for sure that is not true.

There are no Homo's in Iran. How do we know, the man in charge told us that. How do we know Frisco Qu**rs are natural, because one of them told us so.

And another thing. I get so disgusted with the Anti Christian and Anti Bible people complaining when someone says they are not going to Heaven, they are going to Hell.

Well now, the only place that I know of that describes either place, and how to get there is the Bible, so if they don’t believe the Bible, what makes them so sure there is ether a Heaven or Hell, or that they intend to spend any time making sure they get to one and not to the other.

If you think it doesn’t exist, and you won’t read the road map, how could you get there.

There is a solution sheeple
.....and it's called moving to Iran! I can't wait for all you reactionary sheeple (especially you Douggie) to move there posthaste, the sooner the better. In Iran there's already a "final solution to the gay problem"--gays are simply executed. Just think-- no wimpy liberal activists judges, no appeals process, no due process, no stays of execution--just right to the block and be done with it. Iran sounds like a conservative Utopia so why all the rukus when their leader Mr Imadinnerjacket blew into town for a couple of days? Douggie could have a heckuva career in downtown Tehran as leader of the anti-gay execution squads. In addition Douggie wouldn't have to worry about his daughters' modesty and chastity being compromised by Mr. Gangsta Rapper. His daughters would be dressed in modest head to toe black robes and since casual dating is a no-no, Mr. Gangsta Rapper would probably be in jail for quite some time to come.

There are some drawbacks to this Paradise, though. Douggie would have to give up his precious booze, grow a beard, convert to Islam and bow toward Mecca 5 times a day. But isn't that a small price to pay for ridding the world of the evil gay menace? Just think, there would be no Folsom Street Fair in Iran--that sort of nonsense is just not tolerated!!!!

I'm not exactly up on my New Testament but I honestly don't think Jesus would boycott the local wine merchant because gays also drank from the fruit of the vine too. If all of you sheeple are so brave, how come you're not in San Francisco, our answer to Gomorrah,casting the first stone at this shameful festival?

Anyhow I know how this will play out in the mainstream media--it will be handled as just a charming local human interest story. Heck even politicians of both parties march in Gay Pride parades to suck up for more votes!!!

Thank you Neo Commies...
...for so predictably showing up with your hateful Christophobic rants, your gratuitous cheap shots at conservatives, and your vitriolic name calling. It is all so cliched and passe' it isn't even funny any more.

But some commenters are right - while we type away our comments, Neo Commies in power ban the U.S. Marines from filming in this same SFO area, ban Christmas displays and allocate tax funds for Christian bashing works of "art". Who are the REAL inquisitionists today?

EXELLENT COLUMN!

I’m so glad that Farmer’s Wife had a chance to post a comment BEFORE the vile, perverted, vicious, hate filled, contemptible filth slithered in to attack.

What’s amazing is that with all the vile rhetoric, there isn’t a valid point among them.

I’m off to take a long hot shower … Somehow after wading through those disgusting posts I feel contaminated! Yuuuuuukkkkk!

Off the subject of debaucthery
The homos, the real power in Qu*er city, Frisco, have shown their hate for all things normal, so just off their subject for a moment.

We have visited Da Vinci's Last Supper in Milan several times, two or three during the 22 years spent recently restoring that beautiful work of art. Having been to Qu**r town hundreds of times, I can assure there is nothing in that cesspool that would approach the beauty and the skill involved at Milan.

Throughout Europe there are many paintings of that same scene, but none so famous as Milan. However, here is one that must almost be considered a greater work of art.

At the Wieliczka Salt Mine, in Poland, their is a bas-relief of Da Vinci's version of the Las Supper, carved in salt, 300 feet below ground.

If you can't use the following address, Google Wieliczka Salt Mine.

http://www.travel-tidbits.com/tidbits/003888.shtml

Knight, I don't need a rational argument
for my beliefs because I have faith. I simply have faith that God loves all creatures, even you, though you deny Him. I have faith that He sent Jesus Christ, his Son, to save all man from the sins that we are sure to commit. Jesus willingly shed His blood so that you and I may live eternally with God our Father if only we will believe.

Could you please back up your statement "That won't work" when referring to not tempting God. How do you know it doesn't work? No, I will not jump off a 50 story building because I don't know exactly what God has in store for me, however, I do believe that if He knows it is not time for my time to end on this earth, He would surely intervene should I jump off that building. How's that?

I shall continue to pray for you and hope that you will come to know God.

reply to du
I agree with your main point--that conservativse need to be as critical of rampantly explicit heterosexual themes in advertising and the media. Every denunciation of displays of gay sexuality should be accompanied by a right-wing blast at Victoria's Secret, any pop music star (Beyonce, Fergie, Pusscycat Dolls, etc.), a big portion of popular movies, and much, much more.

Or is it the case that conservatives (who are all straight, as we know) don't have any problem with straight raunch, only with gay raunch. I think this is likely, but it's awfully inconsistent and all these conservatives will be burning in Hell right next to the gays they hate so much, if we are to believe the Christian TH readers.

Otherwise, I too get a little suspicious at Doug's obsession with gays, something shared by lots of TH readers.

on second thought
Now that I get a better look at this picture...there is a painting of (or by) the Dutch masters that it more closely resembles.

Meaning that this likely isn't a parody of a Christian icon at all.
Of course, the Dutch, being more liberal about artistic expression (and gay folks), would probably get criticized for allowing it anyway.

I already said
I already condemned this ad as distasteful and uncalled for.
However, the Folsom St. Fair isn't exclusively a gay event. And eroticism isn't either. However, even TH isn't too interested in condemning heterosexual fetishists.

The icon of the Last Supper has been parodied in so many ways from Sunday, that complaining about gay people doing it now shows a lack of perspective in what to be outraged about.
And there are gay Christians who have condemned this ad, and many gay people are critical of those who validate stereotypes from their own side.
However, all Christians have to do is be offended and leather fetishists will be criticized.
There are leather fetishists gay AND straight.
Being called out on this bias in complaint is fair.
If you're going to complain about overt sexual expression, do it about ALL the people involved. Not just homosexuals.
After all, who do you think Victoria's Secret, Frederick's of Hollywood and Trashy Lingeries BIG and wide display windows are for?
Billboards that fill your whole windshield advertise 'gentlemen's clubs' ad infinitum where I live.
Get real.
Heterosexuals are just as guilty of blatant sexual expression as anyone else. The difference is: gay people don't try to beat you up, fire you from your job and gay parent's children don't bully YOUR kids in school.

Homosexual brainwashing.
Anybody can say we are brainwashed, because it is brainwashing which makes that person conceive of that idea. In reality; we only learn by mimic, memorizing in school, the repeating of mantras over and over again, regardless of whether they are true or not. Repetitiveness is used to establish agreed upon civilized truths or perverted propaganda Every deduction is from pre-existing thoughts. Those rare occasions when we excitedly believe that we had an original thought, is only a mathematical combination of pre-existing thought crystallized through one’s pre-existing language structure.
Although we all have fingers, every person has different fingerprints. Perverts, usually out of a distorted emotion need of not being uniquely ‘alive’ will do anything to prove to themselves, through others, that they are different. Many homosexuals are hung up in the ‘God like’ psychosis derived from the permanent effects of using cocaine or have been seduced to bust taboos or destroy icons.
Homosexuals do not understand the compulsion part of their perversion...
go to my new blog at townhall if interested in reading rest of piece, maturing.townhall.com.

Christians
are fair game for any group wanting to ridicule, defame, tear down. Making matters worse, some of you gays and gay supporters respond to christians' concern about one of their sacred symbols being defamed by crying homophobe. This kind of response is similar to blacks I have read about recently by deriding O'Reailly as a racist for saying something that is true (most blacks are not the hip hop thugs but well dressed people who dine in nice restaurants and attend plays and concerts) by saying he is truly a racist for not having the right tone of voice. It appears as if aggrieved groups want to stay aggrieved groups. They like their anger and victimization.

knight_of_baawa
why would you care about the Christian faith, much less the author's interpretation of it as it would apply to those of sexually alternative lifestyles? unless, you believe what he says? otherwise, if you "burn" you "burn" and if you don't you don't...his opinions/beliefs are his and yours are yours, period.
my point was that the author at least said that as far as he was concerned as an individual, you could go right ahead and practice what you desire...in his mind, you'll get what you deserve in accordance with his beliefs, but why should that bother you? does he have that much power over you?

To knight of baawaa re: your 9:03 am
No, I still don't believe you got the point and I don't think I can break it down enough for your limited brain to comprehend. Still I shall pray for your soul. Jesus and God really do love you even though you deny Them. Although you seem like a hopeless case, with God all things are possible.

Have a blessed Sunday everyone, and peace to you, knight!

he answered his own question
From his first sentence, Doug Giles answers his own question.
Some Christians and others DO go out of their way to tick off homosexuals. Starting with advancing misinformation, stereotypes, myth, dangerous rationalizations for the discrimination, bigotry and tragedies that occur.
How vehemently do they condemn the anti gay violence or school bullying? How much work are they putting into at least trying to dialogue with gay people so that such issues can be prevented?
Even here, a gay person who posts is treated with dirision and contempt.
When gay people get ticked off in their own defense, it's called whining. When the secular or religious do it, it's called standing up for their values.
How can you call it a value that gay people be constantly derided, instead of being spoken to like human beings with something of merit to offer society if they were freely allowed?

A chip sale?
I need to find a chip sale. Do you guys/gals know where they sell them?

On the other hand, why should I care about how a few bad dressers pose?

When you react, you just give them more media attention...and they really have the right to disbelieve, dress up like kids do on Halloween, and drink Miller Beer and even occasionally use Right Guard!!

Col. DOUG


Fact is

quote:
"And in regard to me defending God, well, He’s big enough to take care of himself. He’ll sort things out, eternally, in the end."

--------------
In the Righteousness of God, this world is already judged.
When Jesus Christ returns, He comes to execute judgment, and all men are judged by the words of their own mouths.

I do not think it can be said any better than what is already written.

John 12:31 -
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

These people just cannot imagine anything is pure.
Nothing is pure, nothing is sacred, nothing is holy, they have corrupted their own selves by their God given Rights to choose, good or evil.
They have made their choice by an in your face belligerence against the Judgment of God that cannot be abolished.

Jude
7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

Such as lilly calls this a freedom of speech issue, but condemns any dissenting speech.

People's judgment means nothing, the judgment is made and there are no amendments to be made.


re Lilly's remark:
"You people are disgusting."

And the behavior at these gay expositions isn't?

How totally warped.

no bs artist
no bs artist writes
(BQ)
Hey Douggie--if you're truly without sin, are you going to cast the first stone?
(EQ)


When was the last time you were hit with a stone, bs?

Truth is not a stone. Words are not stones.

As far as being sinless goes, none of us are sinless, including you. Some of us do try to remove sin from our lives.

But all of us should watch out for the other guy. That includes shining light on societies sins and teaching all of society the results of that sin.

Is it that the truth hurts, bs? You protest too much.

Sure
Screw Miller Brewing Co. But, I wonder if anyone at Miller Headquarters in Milwaukee, Wisconsin really knows and understands what they are attaching the company name to when sponsoring the event in question? There has to be 1 or 2 traditional values Americans at the heirarchy of such an old,proud company. If you really care, give them a call.
I would also suggest going to your local brew-pub, where they make their own beer. Nice fresh tasty hoppy malty brew. Mmmmmmmmmmm, beer. Go without Lite Beer from Miller this Sunday, or the High Life, or MGD. Go support your local brewery. It's usually so so so much better. In the Atlanta area, go to
http://www.5seasonsbrewing.com/?q=node/195

Their beer's the best, and the food is awesome. And it's always inhabited by a wide & philosophically varied crowd. Lively.

if gays can't take this, well...
"So…if you’re cool with mocking Christ, his sacrifice and his disciples, I’m cool with it too. Wasn’t that easy? Proceed on."

This guy in effect said gays have the right to have their little displays. he may have expressed his personal opinions on the subject, but he certainly didn't say that gays can't do what they want. if you guys and gals can't live with this, well, then why should anyone allow you the right of personal opinion?
I mean come on....I doubt if any hetero protesters" were within miles of Folsom on "the gay day", but if the gays have the right to do something in public, then the opposition has the right to disagree, but then that's one reason these "gay pride" activities occur, right, so the opposition can be "baited", PLEASE.

Giles says:
"You remember Da Vinci’s painting of Christ, The Last Supper, don’t cha? Well the Wizards of Odd, yes the marketing crew at Freaks-R-Us, decided it would be cool to market their “Street Fair” by replacing Jesus with some black/gay/S&M dude and then…then…swap the disciples out for a bunch of randy bondage boys."

Tacky it may be, but Da Vinci's Christ and diciples as white Europeans is pretty far off the mark as well - you ever see what them Middle Eastern Jews look like? I have - and they sure don't look like ANYTHING hanging on the walls of the museums depicting Jesus, Mary and the rest of that crew...

The Religious Celebration of Analtheism

The Fair is actually a sacred and holy celebration of the religion of Analtheism. Yes they act out some of the sacraments of the faith such as pushing poop up another guy’s dirt chute and just playing with each other in the streets. It demonstrates AmeriKa's religious tolerance.

WARNING EXTREMELY VULGAR NUDE PICTURES of the blessings of celebrating the religion of Analtheism. This is last years worship service in progress.

http://www.pbase.com/2112/folsom_street_fair_2006


new cabinet post
the next white house administration should have a new cabinet post: Secretary of Preaching and Common Sense, and Doug Giles should be the man. how about next yr(or anytime!) let the "gay" crowd or the MSM crowd (but i repeat myself) slam the Muslim faith,who absolutley do not tolerate the "gay" choice. the "gay" always want to show us their "package", let's see how big their gonads REALLY are!.......

No man is an island
What happens in Am. affects us all.

silly lilly
lilly writes: Sunday, September, 30, 2007 12:22 AM For God's sake, most of you don't even live in San Francisco---what happens there is none of your business.

Really then by the same token, if that lil NK munchkin fired off a missle and hit Thanfranthisco I shouldn't be concerned either.

touche




I do not have the talent
of art, hell, I can barely draw a stick figure. But I wonder, if I painted a caricature of Mohammed and 11 mullahs at the Table with IED"s would the MSM be as tolerant toward me? Just wondering how far their "tolerance" goes.

I gave up Miller Beer when they
supported the illegals march in Chicago and I told the local distributor that when he came through the place I hang out at downtown. I switched to Coors Lite.

To LILLY

I have given up thinking you are only misguided. I now think you are insane and in need of thorazine.

This gathering of "British slang word for cigarettes" is designed for one thing only; to gain publicity. That is why they take a picture such as The Last Supper" and replace it with disgusting sights of "village people" images. The intent was to cause and upraor and with the aid of the MSM they got what they wanted.

Remember people that the MSM makes money when they get viewers. They get viewers by stirring up controversy. They will even invent controversy where NONE exists in order to get viewers.

The more we react to these kinds of things, the more money the MSM will get. This will be my only post on this column as I expect that as the "word" gets out, the "British slang word for cigarettes" will take over the column with spew after spew.

So my bottom line, think about keeping the outrage to ourselves and deprive the media of their funding.

Savage: You bet! The thing is,

we ALL have to ignore them. As long as they think they can engage even one Conservative, they'll continue to slime over here...

In fact, I'm going out today to buy a new mouse. Heaven knows that little "scroll wheel" is going to wear out pretty soon, so need to have a "stand by mouse" on hand. :-)





Aha Anne
You join me in recommending ignoring the drivebys. Once a month or so i may try to start a left/right dialog with a name i don't recognize. Not with the usual suspects, they are self-delusional who enjoy arguing with a mirror image. There are so many powerful left wing ideas well worth discussing. It seems strange they never seem to appear on TH.

Attacks on Christianity
San Franciso's party simply illustrates what Jonathan Swift first noted in his essay "Should We Abolish Christianity" three hundred years ago. He argued it was necessary to keep Christianity because it provided a strawman for any fool to attack. That is still true. What would have happened to the leaders of this farce if they had attacked Islam as they attacked Christianity? Look at those who have done it in Europe. They are either dead or fleeing for their lives. Bill D.

Clay, and all, Until such time that

lilly and her playmates can come up with something even minimally intelligent or even logical, it's best to not even bother to acknowledge them or their posts.


On Bozell's column (yesterday) the limited left was claiming that we should let the market speak... don't buy the product of a company that endorses objectionable or offensive behavior.. such as Miller Beer.

Now, today the limited liberals are amazed that Giles would even suggest such a thing.



Choice of Words
Tonight there are two townhall articles about the Folsom Street Fair. Toggling back and forth, I notice that the anti-Folsom posters have chosen the following words and phrases (sorry I don't have time to do a count): turn the other cheek; shove [something] down [one's] throat; ace in the hole; kicking butts; getting butts kicked; take it up the rear. Some of our townhall folk seem to find the subject inspiring.

Beetlebrox
"Name one conservative media figure trying to shove the conservative point of view down your throat": Bill O'Reilly. Last night he was screaming again that the the New York Times, moveon.org, and Media Matters are bad. I do believe that is a conservative point of view.

All homosexuals...
...are not bad.Just a couple of weeks ago I saw pictures of two of them just hanging around in Iran,not bothering anyone.

While having my first English cigarette of the day with my coffee,I read this article and thought to myself: "How (insert word for odd,that rhymes with"here")."Van has not shown up yet".Maybe he got locked up in a men's room in Minneapolis and missed his connecting flight.But I expect he will be here very,very shortly.







-phobe
Several people have stated here that Giles (and others) are not homophobes because they do not *fear* homosexuals. Such a statement demonstrates a misunderstanding of the suffix -phobe (and -phobic), which is a little different from phobia.

While the primary definition of phobia refers to a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing or situation, it can (secondarily) refer to a strong dislike or aversion.

Similarly, a -phobe is someone who fears *or is averse* to a specified thing (American Heritage Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/-phobe).

So a homophobe is not just someone who fears homosexuals. It also refers to someone who is averse to homosexuals (and homosexuality). And, yes, Reverend Giles is one. Rather than deny that, if he feels the way he claims to in his diatribes, he should embrace it and run with that. Take back the word.

I myself am a hobophobe: I fear hobos.

Lilly seems to think...
... that only the homosexual community has the right to deride and defend -- not that Giles derided anyone in this piece. The Christian community just has to -- and probably much to Lilly's delight -- take it up the rear. But all he/she/it does is PROVE Giles' points of anti-Christian bigotry by those on the Left. Mocking and derision need to come from his side, but any defense against it is bigotry and hate. Staggeringly one-sided, hateful thinking.

Great article Giles and thank you, Lilly. Wing-nuts like yourself reveal your true colors with opinion pieces like this.

As for Lilly
Lilly is most likely an angry little man who came back from the gay club scene alone again tonight because he's getting older and the effects of all the drugs he takes to control his HIV are really starting to show, and the narcissistic clubbers crowd want nothing to do with him. Another Lilly used to post here for awhile who was conservative, so he picked up her moniker and started spewing his idiocies, pretending to be her (sort of ironic, a gay guy pretending to be a woman) to validate his arguments. Probably the same person as Van, and a couple of other ID's that all sound terribly alike.

Folsom Fair, Miller Beer, Illegal Aliens
Make sure to put extra emphasis in your disdain against Miller Beer since they also sponsored illegal alien marches in the last year. SFO will slide into hell sometime soon if they dont get wise to these fellows and so-called women. Pelosi gave a classic response in defending them. She calls herself a Catholic. May she rot in hell.

To the point made above of getting out there and taking action, I think the point of the article is that if we were to take action it would be chastised as anti-homosexual (which it is intended to be) and discriminatory (I mean that in a good way). Those that do not decry this kind of mockery (where are the 2 revs Jackson and Sharpton when we need them) of Christianity fail to see how society is sliding downward with little chance to redeem itself. I am no holier than though Christian but I do not believe there is a place in peaceful society for this kind of mockery without repercussion.


Correctwing patriot writes
"In 1989, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued its "Report on the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide," which found that "A majority of suicide attempts by homosexuals occur during their youth, and gay youth are 2 to 3 times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people."

CP, that little bit of spin has no basis on reality. there is no and never was any scientific evidence to back it up. It was written by a state clerk who was also a homosexual activist (surprise) and tossed in with the actual study. Amazingly enough HHS took it seriously and it proved to be the golden key that unlocked the public school doors to a whole slew of acronym toting homosexual activist groups to teach our kids to accept homosexuality as being perfectly normal and a lifestyle option they should explore.

Continued
So I ask, what do we accomplish here, tapping away retorts to such idiots as Knight_of_bawaa, Van and others. It might make us feel better , yes, but while we are feeling better about ourselves, they are getting another law pushed and possibly passed, instituting ever more repressive codes of conduct in the businesses that many of us work at and fast gaining more recruits as their influence of the school system produces more and more morally relativistic children who will either join that lifestyle or at least support it as young adults.

Recommendations anyone?

Maybe we are all missing the point
Every day there is another article on the latest offense the Homosexualist have committed here at TH, and every time there are literally hundreds of responses, all saying a variation of either how bad homosexual practices are or how everyone that points out how bad homosexual practices are are actually homophobes and haters. And yet every day there is another offense and another article and hundreds more responses.

I'm getting the feeling that this is a waste of time. My sympathies lie with those who appose homosexual conduct, but while we are here tapping out a response to stupid, inane arguments by a handful of supporters of homosexual conduct, the homosexual lobby is out there in the real world pushing their agenda, getting another liberal judge to overturn marriage amendments, blackmailing or buying another politician to support their cause, and figuring out their next attack on any sense of morality and especially on Christianity. In the span of a generation, the homosexualist have successfully infiltrated and bent to their will the APA, all the MSM's, the Democratic Party, most mainline Protestant religions, all the Lawyer Bars and most all lawyer associations, almost every Higher State and lower Federal Court, the public K-12 school system along with almost every university and college, and many businesses (google homosexual hiring sometime, you might be surprised). Most all local and state government bodies bow to their demands or are wholly controlled by them, such as is in Sacramento and Massachusetts. Whatever organization is not already on the same page with them, they are working hard to either infiltrate or marginalize.

Folsom Street Fair
I wonder if anyone notices the similarity between the homosexuals mocking Christians and the congregants of the Westboro Baptist Church picketing funerals of AIDS victims.

Interesting notes
Note 1: The Humane Genome Project hasn't yet discovered a gene that causes homosexuality. That sort of makes you wonder if the whole "you're born that way" thing is legitimate. I mean, if it's something you don't choose, then wouldn't your genes be the deciding factor? Not that God cares. Homosexual practice is still a sin whether the tendency is genetically induced or not. Alcoholism clearly is genetically induced (very clearly runs in families), but drinking to excess is still a sin according to the Bible. It's just interesting to note that the HGP hasn't found that particular gene yet.

Note 2: We all have heard that the American Psychological Association deemed homosexuality not to be a mental disorder many years ago, but the DSM-IV of the American Psychiatric Disorder still lists several problems associated with homosexuality as disorders and a study not so long ago found that 53 percent of psychiatrists still believe homosexuality to be the root of many of the disorders they're called upon to treat -- from depression to drug addiction, anxiety disorder, etc. I work at a mental health center. Three-quarters of the psychiatrists I've asked say they think immoral practices, whether homosexuality or other sexual degradations have a strong influence in the maladaption of the human psyche. In other words, they think homosexuality is a mental disorder. They believe that vote to say it wasn't one was rigged!


Lilly
"I am guessing that you don't live in San Francisco. Alabama, maybe? South Carolina? Texas? Rural Idaho? And that you had never even heard of the Folsom Street Festival until right-wing journalists started raising your consciousness about it this week? So it doesn't really sound as if the gay community has been "shoving their perverse lifestyle down your throat". If anyone has, it's been the right-wing media community shoving it down your throat. Let's at least try to be accurate."

Lilly,

I have witnessed in the last few decades an attempt to push their (homosexual) agenda onto the rest of us via television programs and movies. I didn't necessarily need Doug Giles' column to point that out to me.

I am all for the homosexual's right to pursue their relationships in private. I just don't want it thrust in my children's or my face. In the same manner, I don't appreciate extreme heterosexul love making in public, as I have stated before.

Lilly, it is my understanding that you are in your 80's. Is that true? If so, I am amazed at your ability to stay current at this forum.

Not because 80 years old people shouldn't be here but, more like how can they? Most elderly people that I have known in nursing homes couldn't possibly do what you do.

It is a joy to see that you are able to do this.
Even if I don't share your moral/political viewpoint.

Tea Party & Beeblebrox
Congratulations to both of you for putting Lilly in her place without resorting to meanspiritedness like she does.

Tea Party, my heart and prayers go out for you, your husband and your son. I do wish you well. I think we also need to pray for Lilly and knight of baawaa. They both missed the point of Doug's column and I think they both need to find God and fast!

"Douggie" is a lot of things, but...
Giles in his column was rude, crude, confrontational; but he did NOT sound fearful. So much for the "homophobe" label!

I have never been able to buy the whole "gays were born that way" myth. Homosexuality - at least in men - is an obsessive-compulsive disorder. Most gay men really can't help themselves.

In this culture where self-esteem is valued above self-control, there is no societal incentive or pressure for gays to moderate or change their disgusting promiscuous practices.

Their behavior in the promotion and participation in the Folsum Street Fiasco should be denounced by all gay people who desire to be accepted as "main-stream" and "normal". I doubt such denunciation will be forthcoming. As I said, they really can't help themselves.

May Jesus help them...

Lilly
You miss the point..it's a symptom of the degradation of our national spirit. It's not unexpected that these people would turn against
Christians because we remind them there is a God they will answer to one day. Never mind they
may mock and say they don't believe..be assured
they will one day and it will be too late. I'm
speaking as the adoptive mother of a homosexual, and my husband and I have been praying for him
for 20 years. He was just released from a hospital because of a suicide attempt and alcoholism..he was once a very angry young man,but now he's sad and depressed. He wants to change, we aren't so naive as to think it will be overnight, it's a difficult noose to get out of. How ironic that you moan about being bullied. Whose bullying you? Christians because we want our civilization to have standards, the standards that possibly you as well as I grew up with. What's wrong with that?
To demand a standard of decency, not only from
homosexuals but from the heterosexual community as well. I'm just as disgusted with Britney Spears and the other young tarts who are degrading themselves. I was raised to believe
my generation would leave a better country than that which I inherited but the 60's radicals were determined to change our culture. They think they have won, but they've only proven the point my generation said before them. They have
allowed degnerate behavior to bring down our children's birthright..as it's written, they and the following generation have "done that which is right in their own eyes." They call licentiousness "freedom" when in fact they are slaves to their own lusts.

Lilly the troll
returns with more BS. Lilly, you do realize that the homosexual community is daily trying to influence legislators in order to further advance their agenda. Name me ONE example of conservative media trying shove any conservative viewpoint down your throat.

We'll pray for you knight_of_baawa
Even if you don't believe in Jesus, He believes in you.

Bravo....
Lilly.

To Clay
I am guessing that you don't live in San Francisco. Alabama, maybe? South Carolina? Texas? Rural Idaho? And that you had never even heard of the Folsom Street Festival until right-wing journalists started raising your consciousness about it this week? So it doesn't really sound as if the gay community has been "shoving their perverse lifestyle down your throat". If anyone has, it's been the right-wing media community shoving it down your throat. Let's at least try to be accurate.

Folsom Street Festival
I had been wondering what all this anti-Folsom campaign was about, with three townhall articles plus a Bill O'Reilly rant this week (obviously you all got your marching orders), and now it's clear: you want to put economic pressure on Miller to pull its support from the Folsom Street Festival. Don't you realize that boycotts work both ways around? I think already gays and their friends don't drink Coors in spite of Coors hiring Cheney's lesbian daughter as their corporate relations manager. Now if Miller caves in to the right wing, gays will be adding Miller to their no-drink list---and so will other liberals. I don't drink, but if Miller stays with San Francisco's gay community on this, I will happily buy many cases of Miller and donate them to all the gay people I know. Some of us are getting sick and tired of being bullied. You want to shut down, bomb, terrify, fire, silence, put out of business, and stop your political opponents. Meanwhile you fantasize about shooting them. What happened to the United States of America? You people are disgusting. For God's sake, most of you don't even live in San Francisco---what happens there is none of your business.

By the way, profane satire of sacred rites and liturgy was common in Medieval Europe. What stopped it then was something you would understand perfectly, the Spanish Inquisition.

GAY, HOMOPHOBIA, SPIN
First of all there is nothing gay (happy) with these people. Most live miserable existances. This is all about striking out for attention they don't normally get in their mundane, "ordinary?"' miserable lives. Don't give them any more ink than they already have received. This was done for shock value.

Second as stated earlier, by Dean, "homophobe" is about fear. Hard to fear less than 2%(est)of the population usually cloistered in conclaves scattered throughout the nation. They will destroy themselves.

In 1989, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued its "Report on the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide," which found that "A majority of suicide attempts by homosexuals occur during their youth, and gay youth are 2 to 3 times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people.

Here is some spin courtesy of "buzzle.com": Homophobia negatively affects the social and health care environment of homosexuals so that they become at increased risk for health problems. Studies have shown higher lifetime rates of depression, attempted suicide, psychological help-seeking and substance abuse among homosexuals. This is attributed to chronic stress from societal hatred or to the ascription of inferior status that homophobia imposes.

My question is "If I "suffer" from homophobia, how is it that homosexuals exhibit the effects?

religon
One of the main goals in founding this country was freedom of religon,,be it catholic, protestant, nfl, nascar or whatever!!!!??? What was never intended was the freedom to degrade and insult other religions. It is another symptom of to many rats in a box and an overabundance of easily obtained food. For those of you out there that do not want to work it out on your own that means WAY to much time on our hands. Remember idle hands are the devils play ground.

Anne
I did notice the 'homophobe' quip. I don't see any signs of Mr. Giles' being afraid, though. Maybe 'no bs artiste' is heterophobic. Hmmmmm...

San Fran
AKA People's Republic of San Fransisco
(Thanks AGZ!)

Mr. Giles
Another great column, as usual! Your columns are required reading for my 12 year old. I for one do not drink Miller. I'm a Shiner Bock, Samuel Smith kinda girl. And I completely agree with the second-to-last paragraph: I don't care what they do in San Fran. I have the right to shield myself and my family from that stuff.

Folsom
Not just a prison...

I guess
that most Christians would really have pity for those lost souls. It's really an expression of the demonic. The Last Supper was when Jesus instituted Communion, and in order to take it we must be right with God. What we see in this blasphemous portrayal are souls caught in the demonic web. It's Sodom and Gomorrah in real time..scary. They think they are mocking Christians but they are mocking God and the Bible says "be not deceived God is not mocked."
The fact the MSM or is it now SMM (sadomasochistic media) ignores it, is because the homosexual activists are among the media
elites, running the news, the entertainment etc.
so it's no surprise they won't condemn their
fellow travelers.

Miller time
Miller also was a sponsor of an "immigrant rights" march in Chicago. What's next - antiwar rallies? Perhaps they should change their name to "Liberal Causes Company."

Anyone notice....????

Giles wrote about it... and the SECOND poster called him a "homophobe."

Let me repeat that, "... SECOND poster called him a 'homophobe.'"

Excellent column. :-)

P.S. The only "Miller Time" for me is listening to Dennis Miller on FoxNews.



bs artist
I'm not sure you know what homophobe means. It literally means "fear of homosexuals". I hate to burst your bubble, but Doug doesn't sound scared. How very typical to reply to his argument with derision and labeling. Nice.

For me, I could care less about what homosexuals do, but I agree that with Doug that there is a duplicity in the media. It's not only their kid glove treatment of some of the more outrageous insults of the gay community, it's their lack of indignation when it comes to the, what I would call, politically incorrect treatment of any group with which they disagree. Christians, Republicans, gun owners etc. Good luck with your "free" press. They're going to have to start giving it away soon.

No Names Taken or Butts Kicked...
I would guess Jesus handled the whip like Zorro or Indiana Jones.
John 2:15
When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables.


mo bs artist
Jesus said to turn the other cheek, not a blind eye.

This means do not lash back at those who mock you or Him, but treat them kindly.

I don't see Doug lashing out at anyone, you on the other hand...

@No BS Artist
At least you pointed out that a "Good Christian", He being Christ, said "go and sin no more". Not even Doug is saying that to the Folsom qu33r crowd.

Christ threw the money changers out of the temple. He called people hypocrites and vipers. He was compassionate but He still called 'em like he saw em.

But maybe you are saying that Christ would be okay with what the Folsom gang did. My guess is that, unless they repent and accept Him as Lord, they will burn. Sad really.

my 2 cents
If we ignored them it would probably drive them nuts. (pun intended)

So they keep raising the ante on outrageous because they keep getting more outrageous and we keep trying to act as if we aren't furious because we are tolerant and so on and on it goes.

Let them have their qu**r fests and let them screw each other and let them die of aids and hopefully at some point they will pull their next stunt and turn gleefully to us to see how mad we are and .....

we won't be there.

BTW - Piotr Ilyvich Tchaikovsky was gay.

Clay - your last point was good. I couldn't agree more.


Not Cool
To the best of my knowledge Jesus never took names or kicked anyone's butt. He actually rescued a harlot, Mary Magdeline from a howling mob of self righteous Douggies who wanted to stone her to death! He simply told her to go and sin no more. Jesus actually preached dumb things like love thy neighbor and other sappy stuff like that. I guess Douggie doesn't like his gay neighbors very much.

Hey Douggie--if you're truly without sin, are you going to cast the first stone?

No More Miller Beer For Me
Doug Giles, as usual, is spot on. I am sick and tired of homosexuals trying to shove their perverse lifestyle down our throats (no pun intended). On second thought, maybe there is a fantasy of theirs somewhere in that statement.

SHHUUUDEERR

As much as I enjoy an ice cold "Champagne of Beers" every now and then, I won't ever again.

As a christian, (Episcopalian persuasion), I am with Doug on this. God is perfectly capable of defending his Son's honor by Himself. Judgement Day is going to be a terribly rude awakening for many.

As an american, I believe that homosexuals have every right to pursue their vision of happiness for themselves.

I just wish that they would:

1. Keep it to themselves. (I also find heterosexual public displays of making out offensive i.e. get a room!).

2. Lose the christophobic nonsense. There are ways to make their case without dragging Jesus into it.

Maybe they attack Christianity and Jesus because they know full well, deep down inside, that they are wrong, and that Jesus stands in the way of their self-indulgence. So, they strike out at Him to delude themselves into thinking that they are justified in their sensual indulgence by trying to relegate Jesus to the trash heaps.

But, there is that pesky Judgement Day coming. I don't think that Jesus' Father is going to be too amused.

Douggie is a homophobe
Douggie should remember that good Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek. Isn't that core to what gentiles believe in?

Personally I think Douggie should move to Iran. Didn't Mr. Imadinnerjacket declare that there's no homosexuality in Iran. They hang gays there, you know. Maybe Douggie could voulenteer for the execution squads. That'll teach gays not to take the Lord's name in vain and abuse the Sabbath with their preverted festival in San Francisco Gomorrah.

Lighten up Douggie.



Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.