CY:

I accept that not everyone shares the “basic premise” of sin.  That is obvious.  But that was not my point.

My point was that the simple fact of seeing all people as “sinners” is not per se “divisive” - UNTIL one “sinner” (i.e., one who believes in sin) judges or condemns another “sinner” (either one who believes in sin, or one who does not).  That is, it is the hypocrisy involved that makes it a “problem,” NOT the belief itself.

Peace.

And then they act all surprised, wounded, whatever, when the monkey whacks the shit out of them.

Yes she does that that “gay” look about her doesn’t she. I always felt that women who have their hair cut short as hers are emulating the acceptable hair styles of the “straight males” in their narrow view of the world, thus exposing themselves to be something other that what they claim to be. Time to come out of the closet Sally.

Alan:

“That Christians have viewed, presently view and will presumably forever view the world’s inhabitants as sinners in need of ‘forgiveness,’ speaks volumes about their seemingly willful inability to see the world outside of a rigid, institutionally-organized, ultimately divisive and dangerously oppressive framework.”

There are two problems with this statement.  First, it is self-contradicting: if EVERYONE is a sinner, how can this be “divisive,” since it makes EVERYONE “equal?”  The problem only arises when one sinner “judges” another sinner; hence, Jesus’ admonitions: “Judge not, lest ye be judged in equal measure,” “He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone,” and “Take the log out of your own eye before you take the splinter out of another’s.”

That too many Christians do NOT take these to heart is both true and sad.  And I, too, lament the number of Christians who engage in judgment and condemnation of ANYONE.

Second, your statement presumes that all Christians believe in, much less belong to, “organized, mainstream, hierarchical” (“institutionally-organized”) religion.  Not only is this not the case, but, on balance, more people are LEAVING the mainstream churches than are joining, and those who leave are doing so BECAUSE of the “oppressive” (and overly ritualistic) “framework.”  And although many of these “unaffiliated” Christians are “floating,” a large number are joining “alternative” churches and “home churches” (i.e., literally held in a person’s home) - which is how Christianity was actually founded, long before the Council of Nicea and the creation of “organized” religion.

Finally, as for “history speaks for itself,” I am assuming (and I could be wrong, of course) that you are referring to the atrocities of the Crusades, Inquisition, witch trials, etc.  If so, two things.

First, ANY ideology can be co-opted or “hijacked” by a vocal and active minority, whether religious, political, social, cultural or other.  This was true of Christianity for a period, and it is true of Islam now.  But in no historical case of which i am aware were these “hijackings” representative of the MAJORITY of any faith, body politic, etc.; those who participated in, or even supported, the Crusades were a small minority of Christians at the time, and those who are engaging in “radical Islam” (violence) are a very small minority of Muslims.

Second, the violence associated with Christianity is now hundreds of years old; as a faith, it came to terms with its misunderstandings of the Scripture in those regards (even if it took too long for the organized capital-C Church to acknowledge it publicly), and has not only been non-violent for quite some time, but also became a force for good and charity throughout the world.  Yes, it still has its occasional failings and misappropriations (e.g., the Religious Right), but it is no longer nearly as “divisive” (to say nothing of violent) as its history was.

As an aside, although it might sound oxymoronic, as an independent minister I have worked actively for years to help “undo the damage organized religion has done and continues to do to our world and to our children.”

Peace.

The biggest threat to anyone in the U.S. is getting “rear-ended” by an elected official.

(My sincere apology to rear ends everywhere!)

Ignorance has no bounds in how low it can go, to believe that people actually voted for her is even a lower low.  Things must be looking down in Oklahoma.

Dear Sally,

You go girl! Keep America safe for people like us who don’t want the sexual deviants to multiply and run us out of Dodge. What would America come to? Civility? I ran into that in New York once, squashed it like a bug! Just remember you’re the best and we’ll always have DC.

Your pal,

Client 9

(My sincere apology to clients everywhere!)

“Oklahoma! Where men are men, women are like Sally and the cattle are nervous!”

“Sally, I wish I knew how to quit you!”

(My sincere apology to cattle everywhere!)

Oh how I love that musical!

“Ooooooooooooo-kla-homo and the gays wont be voting for this twat!
And her lipstick smile, betrays the guile to-ward folks that are something that she’s not…...  In
Ooooooooooooo-kla-homo, Ev’ry night this troubled human beeeean,
Sits alone and prays gays will change their ways or if not suffer something rather mean!”

Good times, everybody loves a Broadway revival.

(My sincere apology to twats everywhere!)

To borrow an insult from a 19th century lawmaker in the Senate:

Lady,”...if you had a few more brains, you’d be a halfwit.”

Another of many,  to take our minds off real issues.  I don’t know, how about the war, or health care, or even the economy.  The politics of hate fuel the ignorant, just like imbeciles poking sticks at the monkeys in a cage at the zoo, deferring and entertaining at the same time.

“Studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades.”

Hmmm…Rome embraced bisexuality and homosexuality and was the longest-lasting empire in the history of the world.  Yes, their debauchery eventually consumed them and (helped) caused their down fall.  But they certainly did last longer than “a few decades.”

Doogs et al:

“People who are honestly and outspokenly worried about the supposed ‘spread’ of homosexuality are usually masking either latent homosexuality themselves or some other deeply shameful (to them) transgression.”

As others have pointed out, unlike Kern’s claims, there ARE studies that show this to be the case.

Alan:

“Sadly, it is undoubtable that her ‘Bible’ tells her she’s right.”

Actually, “my” Bible says different.  While it is true that the OT refers to homosexuality as an “abomination” and the NT (via Paul) refers to it as “unseemly,” I get my understanding from Jesus.  Because although He did not address homosexuality per se, there are two things He did that (should) give believers their guidance here.

First, Jesus “ate with” all manner of sinners, including prostitutes, publicans (no, not “Re"publicans…LOL), homosexuals, etc.  So if Jesus had no problem interacting with them, and accepting them - and showing them love, peace, forgiveness, compassion, humility, etc. - then neither should those who claim to follow Him.

Second, the incident with the adultress gives us an idea of His “position” re homosexuality.  As you will remember, He tells those who are about to stone her, “He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone.”  When her accusers leave, He asks her, “Who accuses thee?”  She responds, “No one.”  He says, “Neither do I condemn thee.  Now go, and sin no more.”

Note that He does not judge or condemn her, BUT He tells her to “sin no more.”  Does He really believe she will not do so?  Probably not.  But neither would He withhold His love and forgiveness from her if she did.  Thus, He is non-judgmental and non-condemning - but He does not condone her behavior either.

Given that homosexuality and adultery were equal crimes under the law - i.e., both were punishable by stoning - simply replace the adultress with a homosexual.

Thus, while they may not condone homosexuality as a lifestyle, if believers truly follow Christ then they may not judge, condemn, shun or denigrate them, and must show them the same love, peace, forgiveness, compassion, humility, etc. that Christ did.  To do otherwise is both hypocritical and un-Christ-like.

Peace.

The real threat to the U.S. is this kind of biblically-based pseudo-morality.  Seriously, how could nomadic goat herders from 3000 years ago possibly have any authority on our sense today of right and wrong?  People who are honestly and outspokenly worried about the supposed “spread” of homosexuality are usually masking either latent homosexuality themselves or some other deeply shameful (to them) transgression.

Poor Sally needs to come out of the closet. There was an interesting theory put out by Freud that the more hatred a person professed toward homosexuals the higher the likelihood that they were homosexuals hiding in a skin of a heterosexual. The outward hatred stimmed from self-hatred. This was put to the test of research in the last decade and shown to be the case.

She has it confused. It’s societies that embrace stupid leaders, not gays that only last a few decades.  We are in trouble as long as we have twits like her and Steve King of Iowa in our government.

Sometimes, when I get fed up with all of the problems that L.A. has and, I think about moving out into the country to escape them, things like this remind me, that country living comes with another set of problems.

Like her, and people who think like her.

this is fun to look at. i live in a small fla.city, we have a larger population than several midwest STATES. these states have the same number of senators as florida. this is just wrong. not that i am implying that our senators are more sane than this nutcake. she probably plans to run for the senate,fla’s are already “serving”. if you live in fla,don’t forget to watch the billion dollar fireworks going off in 38 minutes

Halliburton?  Brown & Root?  I think I fear unbridled corporatism more than radical Islam

What about stupid leaders of the free world who wage trillion dollar wars on small oil producing countries killing more people than the sadistic rulers they hang?

Wow!  We are really an advanced nation who all others should emulate

Someone find out which schools claim her as a proud alumna

Heterosexuality,the new world threat.

This person is fortunate that breathing is a reflexive action, because if she had to think about breathing on her own, she would never have made it this far in her lifetime. And yet she has learned very little for her wasted existence on earth so far. Just how does a persons (homo)sexuality endanger this country? I really want to know.

The biggest threat I have seen to America(world in general) are the breeders(heterosexuals)who over populate the planet and never think about twice about the damage excessive people create on the planet and ignorant REPUBLICANS like this person. It is obvious that intelligence is not a requirement to be elected for political office, as there seems to be an excess of ignorance running amok in the Republican party.

Why do these paranoid petty individuals feel threatened by homosexuals? Are they jealous? Most of the males I know are of the other persuasion (gay)and I find they are more educated, cultured, artistic, interesting and knowledgeable on a variety of topics and in general better company than the heterosexual males I have known in my life. I consider it a big plus to find males who are more well rounded and at ease with themselves than those narrow so called “straight” males who take their shortcomings out on their partners, children or as in the case of our current president-fight everyone else in the world to prove his manhood, unfortunately he is not the one fighting for this. But is a prime example of what I have seen come out of the heterosexual side of America. It’s pathetic that Sally feels she has to put others down to make herself feel self-righteous and superior because if she has to do that, she must have to be really ugly on the inside. She needs to learn to stop hating.

And she votes with that brain.  Does explain some things though.

And now Oklahoma leads by one point over Texas in the race for the “most self-righteous, dimwitted, bigoted, Republican politition”.  Bevo and Trent Lott are jealous!

I thought we have a gay problem and now this confirms it.

We’re doomed.

Oh Rae..

You know as well as I do that there aren’t any flippin’ STUDIES!!

And this woman is far beyond being a ‘dimwit’, since ‘dimwits’ aren’t necessarily DANGEROUS! This woman is MORE DANGEROUS than ANY terrorist, because as we KNOW, this kind of IGNORANCE CAN SPREAD!!

So it is KERN and her ilk that are the REAL dangers to society.

I agree with you about the freedom of speech though.

I think it would be easier to give them two lies, and after that, just permanently disable their vocal chords.

It would be far more effective than all of that paper work. People would get the message and quit lying.

I have so many bones to pick with this dimwit I don’t know where to start but…

““Studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades,” Kern said in her speech.”

OK… Ms. Kern, WHAT STUDIES, conducted BY WHOM, under what AUSPICES and FOR WHOM… and WHEN? Also, please forward the citations where these “studies” have been peer reviewed and accepted as valid by recognized academic agencies.

You see, that’s the main problem with “freedom of speech” - the speaker is under no obligation to speak THE TRUTH. Such a tiny omission in the Constitution - causes such GREAT AGONY to SO MANY.

There should be an amendment - “ANYONE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS FREE TO SPEAK ON AND MAKE CLAIMS ABOUT ANY SUBJECT - JUST SO LONG AS ALL CLAIMS ARE ACCOMPANIED BY DOCUMENTED PROOF OF THEIR LEGITIMACY. Otherwise all statements MUST CONTAIN the disclaimer… “THESE ARE MY UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINIONS AND MUST NOT BE TAKEN OR ASSUMED TO BE FACTUAL.”

Oh, yea, Ms. Kern, MY STUDIES SHOW NO SOCIETY HAS LASTED… PERIOD!