Facebook
Twitter
RSS
![[Masthead]](http://www.t-g.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
A Few Clouds ~ High: 48°F ~ Low: 29°F Friday, Feb. 10, 2012 |
|
Thoughts Of The Day!Posted Wednesday, March 4, 2009, at 5:52 PM
The say that people are swooning and becoming faint when they see him or when they hear him speak. I like most people have been to concerts where girls will squeal and pass out, never did see no sense in that. My mom old me about people in the 50's and later when it came to Elvis and even Conway Twitty. I can't see why anybody would feign over someone like that. I also have seen other things happen at concerts, I hope Pelosi or Albright or anyone else take off their panties and throw them at him. Seems like some groups want Obama to decline the invitation to be the honorary boy scout president because of their rules on atheist and homosexuals as scout leaders. I never was in the boy scouts, but they are founded on Christian beliefs so I believe they should have that right. Obama says he will repeal the "religious conscience" which will stop some medical professionals from denying service based on their beliefs. In a emergency, no service should be denied, but to force a doctor to do a abortion, or to assist a lesbian couple in having children, or a plastic surgeon into doing a sex change operation is wrong. Seems as if part of our bail out money went to rebuild Gaza, which is run by Hammas , who hates us, that makes no sense. Hillary is in the Middle East bashing Israel for defending itself against bomb attacks, the guy from Iran is calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth. He even said the Holocaust was made up and never happened, how do you explain the disappearance of all those Jews? God's word states that those who divide his holy city will suffer his judgment, and that is what America is trying to do now, talk about pushing your luck. Jerusalem will always belong to Israel and they are willing to coexist with all the nations around them, but they have to defend themselves at every waking moment. Could you imagine a Obama press conference and a pair of panties get tossed at him? Horrible thought! Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
A man getting to the roots of his faith.
Hot topics Daddy's Rules For Dating My Daughters!(25 ~ 8:26 PM, Aug 15)
Southern Traditions
The Implosion From Within
The Crumbling!
IN HONOR OF ALL VETERANS!
|
Email link
Read comments (87)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.t-g.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
NO MORE TIME LEFT!
We don't need any half-measures for E-Verify enacted by the lawmakers. At the moment E-Verify is free and voluntary. Legal American Workers want the program as a MANDATORY law. In the future it can even exceed it's 99.6 success evaluation. It would have required parasite companies to verify the immigration status of their workers "after being hired." The pro-illegal alien radical groups, including the ACLU, US Chamber of Commerce funded by the business community, have tried to downplay its value.
As an amendment to President Obama's Stimulus deal, it was secretly killed by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV). So where does his loyalty lie? He's shadowed by the usual suspects that includes Pelosi,Gutierrez, Feinstein, Crowley, and the hidden faces cringing in dark corners. They have all likely have been brought by the multi-national corporations. Vote them out next time they come up for election. Crucify them?
If you value your job, within any trade or profession it is not safe. Even the high professional jobs have been stolen by visa over-stayers.
They vote on its reinstatement on March 6 in the Washington. We need a federal mandate! Not 5 years, but perpetuity! Call WA (202) 224-3121
Could you imagine a Obama press conference and a pair of panties get tossed at him? Horrible thought!
Posted by michaelbell on Wednesday, March 4, 2009, at 5:52 PM
Depends on what they came off.
If it was Sara Palin I guess it might not be so horrible after all. Actually he could take that as a compliment.
I guess either way it would be better than getting a shoe tossed at you like Bush did?
Another squash from in the garden.
Ah well,the blogs in other papers tend to be full of cukes.
Along with a few empty gourds on here.
"I also have seen other things happen at concerts, I hope Pelosi or Albright or anyone else take off their panties and throw them at him."
Michael, we really didn't need to know about your granny panty fetish.
I use spell checker to correct a lot of my words just to find out after I post it, that I spelled the wrong word correctly.
for example, There, Their, and They're. Each one can be spelled correctly but used wrongly in a sentence. So not only do I have to check spelling but check to see if I used the correct word, which many times I don't. Oh well, if I was perfect I am sure I wouldn't be here.
It is no fetish and I did correct the word.
"All of the people who would like to declare English to official language of Tennessee and the U.S. should start with michaelbell. Hah!"
-- Posted by in the garden on Thu, Mar 5, 2009, at 12:55 AM
Hmmm... just what are you trying to say here? Perhaps, you were trying to say, All of the who would like to declare English THE official language of Tennessee and the U.S., should start with Michael Bell." Hah! You would think that from someone demanding perfection, that they would be perfect themselves. But, just so you know, that is ok, we dont spek that round these here parts, cause we knowed we is just a bunch of dumb ol hicks. At, least that is how you will always see us.
Oh, and I have question, when was the survey conducted about our opinion of Michael Bell? I did not get to give my opinion.
Mr. Garden, have you ever read Tom Sawyer or Huck Finn? two books I treasure only second to the bible?
You probably find those offensive also, with all the slang and slurs and misspellings.
You have to understand, I tend to type the way I talk, which is well sort of hickish, but then again you Yankees seem to stereotype all of us South of the Mason Dixon line anyway.
Mr Rider, You must of attended the same school I did, which year of the Sears catalog was in the outhouse when you went?
"I never was in the boy scouts, but they are founded on Christian beliefs so I believe they should have that right. " But they should NOT be getting Government dollars or support if they are going to restrict their membership only to Christian or theistic Americans!. per Fox News.com " Taxpayers also fund Boy Scout activities with several millions of dollars through military personnel, federal land use and other assistance. Taxpayers doled out roughly $8 million for the 2005 Jamboree, held every four years." How much will this be for the 2009 Jamboree? $10 million? Is it right for the US government to support a private group which rejects American boys who are not god-believers or not heterosexual? I think not!
"repeal the "religious conscience" ..."
which will stop some medical professionals from denying service based on their beliefs"
So, what's next? a Christian but racist bus driver denying a seat to a Black or Muslim passenger? A sexist classroom teacher never calling on any of the girls in his classroom? As a licensed professionals of the state, doctors or pharmacists should NEVER be alloewed to deny any service that is legal in the state. They should keep their personal(religious) beliefs seperate from their professional state licenesed duties. If they wish, they can work in their off hours to make those legal yet offensive-to-them actions illegal but, until they are, they are OBLIGATED to render those services!. Period.
"I never was in the boy scouts, but they are founded on Christian beliefs so I believe they should have that right. " But they should NOT be getting Government dollars or support if they are going to restrict their membership only to Christian or theistic Americans!.
- Posted by slowe11 on Thu, Mar 5, 2009, at 5:45 AM
Fair enough, stop giving my tax dollars to fund abortions, and I will gladly give extra to help support the boy scouts.
yet abortions ARE legal. If you don't agree with them, then just don't have one, but in America you may not restrict the LEGAL actions of another citizen.
yet abortions ARE legal. If you don't agree with them, then just don't have one, but in America you may not restrict the LEGAL actions of another citizen.
-- Posted by slowe11 on Thu, Mar 5, 2009, at 7:17 AM
Boy Scouts are legal too! The issue was tax dollars. Ha ha, I am not going to have one because I am a man. However, you are opposed to tax dollars being given to the Boy Scouts because they are a Christian Organization. I am opposed to MY tax dollars being spent on a procedure that I find immoral and murderous. Abortions are legal, if you want one, pay for it yourself. My offer still stands, if you want to end tax dollars going to the Boy Scouts, stop spending my tax dollars on abortions (and helping to pay for abortions in foreign countries for that matter) and I will gladly give extra to support the Boy Scouts. Would you be willing to give extra to help pay for the abortions that My tax dollars no longer funding?
In regards to abortions, situations like the one in this article occur more than you think and why I am against abortions (plus the fact it is almost like murder).
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/b...
Please explain to me how this is right again?
'Jerusalem will always belong to Israel and they are willing to coexist with all the nations around them, but they have to defend themselves at every waking moment.'
You say Israel is looking for peace? Ah, but how will the trumpet ever blow, and the rapture occur if Israel doesn't fulfill her destiny to stretch from the Nile to the Euphrates?
She had rather possess in peace but destiny will see to it she does not find it in that manner.
ah, michaelbell,
it is somehow comforting to see that your grasp of current events is at least the equal of your knowledge of science and history.
last week you told us that "they" say that obama is greater than jesus. this week, "they" are saying that people swoon in his presence. who are "they"? are you "they"? because you are the only one i have ever heard say either of these things.
the remainder of your random thoughts (i hope i am not poking fun at someone struggling with schizophrenia) excluding the sentences that make no sense at all, seem to be a random mixture of half truths, made up stuff, and things 180 degrees from the actual facts.
for example, this line: "Hillary is in the Middle East bashing Israel for defending itself against bomb attacks" i happened to see hillary on tv yesterday. now i admit this lacks the authoritative provenance of "they say", but the words out of her mouth were essentially; 'the responsibility for the violence falls on hamas, for allowing rockets to be fired from their territory into israel. no country can be expected to stand by while their citizens or their territory is subject to attack.' i apologize for paraphrasing, but that was the essence of what she said, and as close to word for word as i can remember. in what way is that "bashing" israel?
i wish you would stop the crazy talk. you are making us conservatives look bad, and driving rational people to the other side.
oh yes, almost forgot. drop the apostrophe from thoughts, and your caption will finally be in correct english.
Midnight Rider says of me: "However, you are opposed to tax dollars being given to the Boy Scouts because they are a Christian Organization"
NO, I am opposed the the US Govt. giving money to a religious organization ( Remember seperation of church and state?) and they deny membership benefits on religious grounds to non-thiests. This is illegal in America for an organization receiving govt. money!
Michael,
If all that can be found wrong is an apostrophe or a misspelled word you are doing quite well.
The ones complaining are not exactly the most proficient of the English language themselves.
Besides, I think they get the point even with a missing apostrophe.
in the garden,
Are you okay?
We're not having that pop tart problem again are we?
Oh how sweet it is to have the blessed assurance!
Besides, I think they get the point even with a missing apostrophe.
-- Posted by parkerbrothers on Thu, Mar 5, 2009, at 8:30 PM
I don't. Is there a point?
If y'all are going to let your little lights shine,try switching to LEDs.
They still illuminate but they generate a lot less heat.
All the tsurris and hissy fits distract from what would otherwise be intriguing essays and commentary.
I may be getting hypersensitive to squabbling in my old age but sometimes I think some of y'all have missed your naps.
We may not all agree about our ideologies but,at least,give the other folks credit that they have thoughts about important issues and are ready to discuss them.
Respect people who are willing to think,act and critique when warranted.
None of us are going to be perfect.
We'll have moments we're incorrect and plenty of times when we have more to learn about the things we're right about.
But,if we're ready to learn,inform and discuss,we can benefit ourselves and others with what we say.
Holding to a party line or dismissing the wisdom of people with differing views isn't apt to enlighten or encourage anybody.
I just went on Wikipedia and looked up Boy Scout and it didn't say anything about it being a religious organization. It was founded by Robert Baden-Powell and he got the idea from his experience in the British Army in South Africa.
The Boy Scout program is designed to develop youths who have a high degree of self-reliance, initiative, courage, helpfulness, integrity, and resourcefulness. Boy Scouts should be helpful; understand their society, heritage, and culture; have respect for the rights of others; and be positive leader-citizens.
My brothers were Cub Scouts then Boy Scouts and I was a Brownie then A Girl Scout and there were never any religious programs taught in our meetings.
in the garden,
The facts surrounding my ordeal are not very worrisome. I actually have joy over the true facts noted of sober witnesses. They all saw the same thing. The same thing I witnessed.
The alledged facts of the others tell a very different story. Actually 6 different stories. By reading the transcipts you can see they had 6 different delusional visions you might say that night.
Of coarse you have not read them so maybe that explains your uninformed viewpoint.
But it does not explain why you are so bitter toward hearing anything of the Word of God. You have transcripts to read on it that are tried and true to show you the reasoning of many of Michael's blogs.
Why is the Good News taken as bad news by you. Why does it aggitate you so much to hear anything associated with it?
Your bitterness could be replaced with joy if you would allow it to work through you.
bellbuckletn,
Some of the nicest people I have met were influenced by their participation in the Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts. Many good values get instilled into the youth through such programs.
All the values you mention above in your post are seen carried forth from youth to adulthood in the participants. From personal experience I can say that I agree with your presentation of facts about the Scouts.
Boy scouts are legal, but discriminating against people because of something they cannot control (their sexuality) is illegal. There is a difference. I'm sorry you aren't intelligent enough to understand.
-- Posted by in the garden on Thu, Mar 5, 2009, at 12:11 PM
I am sorry, but I believe the courts have ruled that the Boy Scouts can exclude those that are in diametric opposition to their founding principles. That makes their admission policy perfectly legal.
Why do you always resort to personal attacks when stating your opinions?
in the garden,
Genetics?
Is that going to become an excuse for everything?
it is just as well established that people have no control over their sexuality as they do their race.
Anyone who argues otherwise is simply ignorant of basic facts about genetics.
-- Posted by in the garden on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, at 2:55 PM
There has never been a study that has successfully linked genetics to homosexuality.
And even if there was, it would still be a choice available to make.
Ha, Nathan, there is something we agree on! ;D
since it is just as well established that people have no control over their sexuality as they do their race.
Anyone who argues otherwise is simply ignorant of basic facts about genetics.
-- Posted by in the garden on Fri, Mar 6, 2009, at 2:55 PM
Really, I wonder what Ellen DeGeneres's ex-girlfriend, Anne Heche, would say about that. She switches back and forth so much, it is hard to keep up with. I would say she is "making choices"
Again, why do you resort to personal attacks when stating your opinions?
Again, the personal attacks. Does nothing to support your argument. They only serve to make you look small and petty. It is not like you are citing some absolute scientific facts. You are just stating your opinion.
Blah Blah Blah, here are two websites that refute your findings: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sch/Intro%20200...
http://www.bio.davidson.edu/Courses/geno...
in the garden,
Again, your venomous personal attacks do nothing to enhance your arguments.
Can someone explain to me why every topic Mr Bell puts out gets turned to talking about homosexuality? I don't really give a rat's --- about what people do or to whom they do it with. If more thought and effort were put to better use, the world would be a better place.
Chef Boy R.D.,
I don't know for sure but I would speculate that the reason it gets brought into every blog is because it is the very sin trying to creep in as acceptable behaviour.
It may come a point in time when it becomes accepted by the majority of mankind but it is still the same today as it was in the day of Sodom in God's eyes. I think it is also a given that it will be the same in God's eyes 2000 years from now even if 30 Billion people think it is acceptable.
I think it is much like adultery. Adultery has finally gotten acceptance to where it is not even punishable in today's society but there again it is still wrong in the eyes of God.
I think it still boils down to "choices". We can keep trying to satisfy our own desires out of lust or we can try to conform to God's desires out of love for what has been given us.
See? -all we can do is throw up the warning flares and tell people to listen to reason and God instead of ancient excuses for sin.
Genetics? Almost as good as Eve saying the Devil made her do it.
Only now you want to use God as an excuse for putting them ole gene things in us. He should of known better. Shouldn't He?
Chef Boy R.D. I believe that if you go back and read carefully, you will find that slowe11 brought the subject up, and in the garden has been the one that wants to perpetuate the discussion. Not Mr. Bell's fault this time. Seems that this is one of in the gardens pet causes.
in the garden, ding ding ding, you win the prize! Your say the website info I posted does not prove anything. That is the point, they conclude genetics can not be proved or disprove your assertions. In other words, there is no proof for your claims.
So, you can go post another site to support your claim, and I can go find another one that refutes your claim. See, you are stating that what you say is absolute fact, when in fact, it is not.
And it all still comes down to a "choice" no matter how you try to cook it.
Baking it or frying it makes no difference either.
so if genetics is to blame, we can give excuses for child molesters, arsonist, murderers, thieves and all other riff raff huh?
It is all about choice, not a pre- disposition.
Midnight rider if genetics don't prove anything then why do our court systems use it every day to exonerate alleged murderers and rapists?
- Posted by in the garden on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, at 7:41 PM
Uhm, they use DNA material in the Genes for IDENTIFICATION purposes, either to confirm, or eliminate a suspect because each person's DNA is unique to that individual. What they don't use genetics for is to say whether the murderer or rapist made the choice to commit their crime. You messed up on that argument.
Just to clarify what I am saying is, like what Nathan said, there has not been a study on genetics that provides conclusive proof that people are genetically predisposed to a certain sexual preference.
No I just get tired of stupid hicks clinging to their religion as an excuse to try to deprive other people of their rights. You all want to force your beliefs on everyone to justify the decisions you have made. You cannot stand the fact that someone somewhere may not believe what you do and still live a perfectly fulfilling and guilt-free life.
- Posted by in the garden on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, at 7:41 PM
Funny thing is, that this seems to be your religion and you are trying to force YOUR beliefs on others. In every state where the people have had a chance to express their wishes by casting a vote they have voted not to permit gay marriage.
Don't just cite websites thinking they prove your point without even reading them first. That's kind of important, you know, because if you want to cite something specific you should probably make sure it even supports the point you're trying to make. You just look even more stupid now. And still wrong.
-- Posted by in the garden on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, at 1:29 PM
You are so enamored with your self-perceived intellectual superiority, that you can't even see the double standards of your own arguments. Here look what is said on this website you posted. First the website: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/no...
Now the disclaimer: This paper reflects the research and thoughts of a student at the time the paper was written for a course at Bryn Mawr College. Like other materials on Serendip, it is not intended to be "authoritative" but rather to help others further develop their own explorations.
Now, a few excerpts from one of your other websites that you posted. Again, first the website link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/373566...
Now the excerpts: "Scientists doing DNA studies on homosexual brothers pinpointed 'culprit' genetic material to a region of the X chromosome that mothers pass on to their offspring.
But other researchers in the US have not been able to replicate these findings."
"In 2002, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics produced a report into the possible link between genes and behaviour, which included sexual orientation."
It concluded: "There are numerous problems with genetic and other biological research into sexual orientation which mean that any reported findings must be viewed with caution."
"Alan Wardle from the gay rights charity Stonewall said: "This is an interesting debate and there may well be a genetic element, but it's not conclusive. "
Finally at the bottom of this "NEWS ARTICLE" that you cited is proof this is more about an agenda than science:
"It does not really matter whether it is nature or nurture.
"The important thing is getting equality for homosexual people."
I read enough of my websites to know that they had done some research and were saying that there is not a conclusive link to prove that sexual behavior is predetermined.
Perhaps you should have read your own "NEWS ARTICLES" before you printed them. Doing so would have saved you from being so embarrassingly exposed as someone who will say anything to promote their agenda.
Additionally, you have now been exposed as a pseudo-intellectual and whatever you post from here on out has zero credibility. To quote Forrest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does" Now, I know that does nothing to enhance my argument but, it sure felt good writing it.
And, as one of my "hick" friends might say round these here parts, "in the garden, you done brought a knife to a pistol fight"
Have a great day, I am sure you will be back with another argument, but make sure you have checked your facts because we ain't as stupid as you think we are.
Can someone explain to me why every topic Mr Bell puts out gets turned to talking about homosexuality? I don't really give a rat's --- about what people do or to whom they do it with. If more thought and effort were put to better use, the world would be a better place.
-- Posted by Chef Boy R.D. on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, at 3:34 PM
Just so you know Chef Boy R.D. it was not Micheal Bell that turned the conversation this way. slowe11 broached the subject by stating the Boy Scouts should not receive federal dollars because they discriminated against homosexuals,and lets be fair, I think she was also against the discrimination of atheist too.
My response was that I would be fine if the federal government wanted to withdraw their support, and that I would throw in some extra money to support the BSA, but I also felt that the federal government should not be allowed to use MY tax dollars to pay for abortions here, or in other countries. I find abortion heinous and consider it the same as murder. However, abortion is currently legal, and has very few restrictions. But, that does not mean that I should be forced to have MY tax dollars pay for them. People CHOOSE to have sex, and one of the obvious consequences of that CHOICE is you might get pregnant. So, if you don't want the resulting baby, you can choose not to have sex, or you can set aside some money to pay for your own abortion.
From there, it was in the garden who leaped into the deep end of pool, feet first with her gay agenda. I've have been merely refuting her so called "facts".
Parkerbrothers you claiming that there is still a choice in the matter is irrelevant. If God made man in His image then why would he make someone gay if that is what he doesn't want? You people have no real, straightforward answer for this, and you revert back to this malarkey about a choice that people make. Yes, a gay man will choose to enter into a mutual loving relationship with another man, just like you would choose to enter into one with a woman. What is the difference? You're saying someone who is born genetically gay should completely suppress that and pretend they do not have those feelings and as a result not have access to the same life-fulfilling relationships as you.
Posted by in the garden on Sat, Mar 7, 2009, at 7:41 PM
in the garden,
Jesus himself was the very image of God in flesh and he suffered temptations just like we all do. He was not exempted from our trials of temptation.
He exercised free will and made "choices".
Luckily one of his "choices" was to endure the cross so we may have eternal life.
Everything is a "choice". Perhaps the different random genetic makeup of us all create and neccesitate tougher "choices" we may have to struggle with but in the end it still boils down to a "choice" that can be made.
Why does one man primarily stuggle with alcohol and another struggle with sexual desires? I don't know. I just know we all have our own struggles, me included.
Perhaps these struggles are meant to show us how we all fall short of the perfection that is found in the glory of God. Perhaps it is meant to show us how great a gift we have been given by having the "choices" that Jesus made be counted as atonement for our shortfalling.
The "choice" of faith in the "choices" he made can deem both you and I righteous in the eyes of God. Nothing else can work for us. That is God's "choice" for the plan of salvation.
If being a "dumb hick" as you call me or us means that I have a relationship, not a religion with Jesus Christ then "shut my mouth and call me cornpone"
I's will stay a hick, by the way Marvin. Jeet yet?, I have some good ol' possum on the fire, if you vant to.
I do fit a lot of the descriptions that Jeff Foxworthy and the boys use on stage.
If the people of Jesus's day walked now they would be in the same class as me so I fell honored to be a hick.
The articles you posted, "in the garden", actually support my original statement that "there has never been a study that has successfully linked genetics to homosexuality." Perhaps it is you that needs to read the information you cite before you point fingers.
supposed to be feel but since I am a dumb hick, I have a excuse, has anybody seen my tobacker and my ol'e hound dog? we's a goin huntin!
in the garden,
I do sincerely apologize for my Forrest Gump remark. It was unkind,and not very christian like. I hope you will forgive me.
In the garden, you fail because your argument is weak. You cite sources that directly contradict your assertions and you have a real problem with with name calling when you have nowhere else to go with your logic. I would consider myself far removed from the mindset of Michael, PB, and Midnight Rider, but your argument that homosexuality is inherited and that it is a 100% proven genetic fact is a flat out lie. I suggest you sit down and formulate a strong case and drop all the immature name calling and curses and then try again.
in the garden,
Why wish that on anyone?
It is painful anytime a parent has to warn and try to stop their children from something that their child wants.
However our wants can get us in trouble. We would all be better off if we focus on our needs and suppressed our wants.
Wanting to explore strange territory is not a need. It is a selfish "want". Stay with God's chartered permissable territories and your needs may be met.
nathan.evans,
I think the main point I see is that even if drug addiction, pornagraphy, homosexuality, bestility, etc., etc., etc., are ever proven to be genetically linked (and I think they may be) I do not think it will ever be such a link that will render any of us optionless and unable to make a "choice". Any such discovered linkage will never be so great as to totally take over the free will, mental capacity and decision making ability of its victim.
I's will stay a hick, by the way Marvin. Jeet yet?, I have some good ol' possum on the fire, if you vant to.
-- Posted by michaelbell on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, at 9:34 AM
don't rightly know yet. mabe you culd chek if thers eny taters, maters, or evan ssum cukumbars up in the garden. Woodn't be serprized.
Midnight rider had you really read what I posted instead of glossing through them and cherry-picking them for statements to support your arrogant, chauvinistic bigotry, you would find that there are more gay children of women who have more kids, suggesting a strong biological correlation. Human sexuality, however, proves more complicated and you fail to understand it, not unlike my arguments. You all look at in binary, black-and-white, is-or-not-is, and that is a simply idiotic and simplistic viewpoint.
- Posted by in the garden on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, at 11:22 AM
Ha ha ha, I love it, you are just like teflon, nothing sticks to you. Talk about arrogant, you have been hammering us with your assertions that that it has been unequivocally proven that sexual preference is caused by genetics, and then posted those 3 websites as your rock-solid "proof". Took me all of about 30 seconds to destroy your argument with your own references. Then when you get caught with your pants down you try to change your argument. Keep shoveling that manure, because we can use it in our gardens to grow some mighty fine taters and greens.
By the way, maybe you should consider calming down a bit before your respond, your rage causes you to write incoherent sentences like this: "you would find that there are more gay children of women who have more kids,". Don't all children come from women? Or, are you trying to say that women who have more than one kid have gay children? Could you please try to write a bit more coherently, because sentences like these really makes us think, and I quote you again, that "if you don't even know how to use the English language, then it doesn't seem your opinions would be very well thought out, either".
And, I see you have resorted to your favorite tactic of name calling and personal attacks. Again, these tactics make you look small and petty. And don't respond with your trite response of having to point out our stupid backwoods ways, because in doing so, you are saying that no one is capable of thinking for themselves, and that you are the only intelligent person reading this blog (I know you believe that anyway). I bet your blood is boiling now. But, remember, wait a bit before you post, because I don't want to have to go pointing out your silly mistakes anymore.
You know, you really should stop bringing that knife to the pistol fight, you'll lose every time. This has been easy as "shootin fish in a barrel". :D
Bigots.
-- Posted by in the garden on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, at 12:12 PM
big·ot(bĭg'ət)
n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
I think that last line sums you up pretty good.
michaelbell,
hey, granny just sed not to bring eny of da veggies bak frum in the garden. sed she wood skin ya head if ya did. granny luuks upset with ya.
michael,
granny is reelly tore up. she sed if ya menchen sumthin bout gerbil stew she wuz gonnis ta flog ya when ya cum home.
it beez abouts time for spring toniciking, younno a big ol' dose of caster url, that stuf till taste nasty. weeel doggie!
Makes me miss the Beverley Hillbillies and the other hick shows.
you know, is a verse in the bible with the words "in the garden" in it bot the words there was a serpent are before it, maybe the same serpent in that garden is in this garden also.
my hickness showed again, was supposed to be there is a verse. All that "white lightning" over the years must have fried a few braincells , or maybe it was the rabbit tobacco, don't rightly know which.
somehow this blog got on hicks, rednecks, hillbillies or whatever youins want to call us so I thought I would post a pic of my family.
he he, in the garden, watching you explain yourself is kind of like watching a dog chase its tail.
To highlight all of your idiocy, I'm going to make the rest of my responses in haiku form.
-- Posted by in the garden on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, at 2:38 PM
that's good to know
michael.
I told ya granny dint wanna heer nuttin bout gerbil stew.
Jus luuk at da pitcher yu posted. She's all sorts of mad an festurd up now.
I sur aint bout to go home fur a while.
in the garden,
I know the odds of finding 12 more crackpots like you for a jury is probably unlikley but I'll go ahead and buy a chasity belt just in case. I will also pre drill a hole in my soap and tie a string around it and my neck for insurance on the soap droppage. Thanks for your concern though. :)))
No, instead I just exercise the "choices" that are available to make.
Fortunately that is one temptation I have never had to deal with. However, if it was I would hope my selfish lust would be overpowered with my love for what Christ has done for us and I would make the "choice" to love instead of fulfilling lust.
Just curious, was most of your long term relationships began when someone dropped the bar of soap?
Or perhaps you might have dropped a bar of soap on purpose?
in the garden,
You have my curiousity stirred up this morning.
Since you like to cling to the "genetic excuse" could you explain to me which gene it is that determines which one of you two are the daddy rabbit and which one is the momma rabbit in your relationships?
in the garden,
Having faith does not stop the mind from being inquisitive. Far from it. If anything it frees it to question things of this world without fear of the answer.
You brought up some points that I happen to agree with you on. Or at least let's say I think you may be right about the genetic linkings to behaviours including your topic of homosexuality.
I was simply wanting you to look at the unescapable conclusion that if it is genetically linked (and i think it may be) there has to be an explanation for why one partner assumes or inherits, in simple terms, the daddy role and the other inherits the mamma role in the relationship? Genetics must affect the role one takes in these relationships if it affects the core issue itself. Doesn't it?
Again faith does not make the world perfect. We go on being humans in the flesh until the time.
in the garden,
It is plain and simple. My views of relationships are formed by attempting to understand what God wants for us and what he does not want for us.
Not what I want and what I think I need.
As long as you are self enslaved to serve your selfish wants you will never understand what I am saying.
You have made it clear that you have no desires to please our God's wants and that you think it is your right to serve and satisfy your own fleshly desires.
And you are absolutely right. It is your "choice". God did not force Sodom to repent so I think it is fair to conclude you will not be forced to change your mind(repent) either. He leaves it all up to you.
I think this all highlights more my earlier point that none of you really understand the traditional roles of gender and the complexities of human sexuality.
Posted by in the garden on Mon, Mar 9, 2009, at 6:44 PM
complexities? No. God made it quite simple.
In short, you sound like a sexist who thinks women are less than men
Posted by in the garden on Mon, Mar 9, 2009, at 6:44 PM
No. Actually I know women are more than man. I do appreciate the differences though.
Perhaps your problem could be solved by taking the same view.
The use of the word "you" in most instances should be better understood to mean all worldly mankind who has not come to repentance. "You" in general is a group, not an individual to me.
But I must say that few people support a cause to the degree you (individually and collectively) do without being a part of the cause. I do understand though that there are exceptions to the rule.
I still do not think you are "right" in your position. Your theoretical position that genetic linkage deprives an individual from making "choices" is still wrong.
Inclination may occur but I do not think you will see control created through this possible inherited gene argument.
There will always remain a choice that is available to subdue the inclination.
in the garden,
Please... check the archives, we have been through this with parkerbrothers on nearly everyone of Michael's blogs to date. His argument is not valid because he has not one minutes work in a lab that decodes genes. Not until last year were scientists able to uncover the full human genome, so for him to suggest that he knows anything about genes is laughable. Btw, Adenine, Cytosine, Guanine, and Thymine are the 4 most known elements in genetics... A pairs with T, C pairs with G... If any of those are inverted, then a mutation has taken place. The human genome is fascinating and we really shouldn't even worry if homosexuality is genetic, because with the advancement of science over the next 4-8 years we should be more concerned about finding treatments for various diseases, such as Down's Syndrom, {which is genetic, all because of the 21st chromosome} or many cancers, which are partially genetic, high blood pressure, etc... rather than clinging to the xenophobic thoughts of the 80's.
When science proves or disproves a theory, the only people who care, are those that discovery effects, unfortunately most others,could care less. But at the end of the day, nobody needs parkerbrothers, my or your approval to love anyone.
darrick_04,
We have been through enough of these blogs also with you to know you eagerly desire to have the genetic excuse to use.
Rest assured though that you will always have a "choice" available to make irregardless.
The genetic excuses will never keep anyone from "just saying no".
Will they?
PB,
Right, just say no to skin color, eye color, and height.. Do everything you can to choose those things and see how far it gets ya.
darrick_04,
You know very well the difference in what we're talking about. Two completely seperate issues. One involves behavioural inclinations that can be affected by a choice.
Genes do not make Jack go mount the back of Mack. Genes may encourage Jack to like the looks of Mack's back but let's face it, Jack can choose what is right or give in to his desires. It may a tough decision that Jack has to deal with daily but there remains a "choice". Always has been and always will be. Don't fool yourself just because you can't fool me.
And let's not forget that Mack also has a choice he can make.
His genes do not put him there on all fours. His fulfillment of selfish desires does.
I don't see how you drew that conclusion?
If you state you are a Christian, then sex outside of marriage is considered a sin. That means adultery, fornication, or homosexuality. It does not mean that as a Christian you can't ask for forgiveness and be forgiven. We all make certain choices in our lives that can be good for us or harm us including what happens in our personal lives.
If you state you are a Christian, then sex outside of marriage is considered a sin. That means adultery, fornication, or homosexuality.
Posted by Sharon22 on Wed, Mar 11, 2009, at 9:00 PM
And one is no worse than the other. They all are ways we can fall short. It is indeed the greatest act of love that forgives us.