User Profile: Auralae


Member Since: December 07, 2010


  • [1] July 2, 2015 at 4:12pm

    He’s just jealous. It’s 100% projection, deeeeeeeep down Takei knows that while his homosexuality is at least in part by choice, Thomas’ skin color is not. While there are thousands upon thousands of “ex” homosexuals, there are no “ex” black people. He also knows somewhere in that dark heart of his that it is G*d who grants that dignity, and not man. It is because we are made in His image that we have any dignity at all, and it is our rebellion against that Creator that costs dignity. Scripture mandated that any runaway slave not be returned, that anyone who kidnapped another human deserved capital punishment–the underground railway here in the US was never in violation of G*d’s law, merely man’s–and that is precisely why the slave did indeed retain dignity. Thomas is exactly right–the unborn murdered in the womb are murdered despite their innate “right to life”–and in spite of their obvious humanity.

    Responses (2) +
  • June 24, 2015 at 5:42am


  • June 22, 2015 at 7:34am

    “I am proudly a Christian” ? Gee, and I thought pride was the deadliest of sins to Christians.
    “If as a Christian you cannot separate fiction and reality, you are perilously close to picking up a sword and rushing out to wage Christian jihad against the sodom that is Hollywood, and all those who believe less strongly than yourself”

    LOL!! Ok, there are at least 2 glaring inconsistencies with Christianity here–1) If YOU can’t recognize pornography when you see it–and recognize that God is again’ it lol you are in some MAJOR trouble. and 2) For Pete’s sake! if you have to borrow from another religion (jihad) to describe an act, that should clue you into the fact that it’s not kosher! How one could possibly claim to follow the Deity who mandated loving one’s enemies—-and claim that following that mandate could EVER end in taking a sword to “those who believe less strongly than yourself”. Utter bs.

    There isn’t a smidge of pornography in the Chronicles of Narnia.
    Those cliff notes, or crib notes you’ve gotten ahold of are just plain wrong. “uncovering his feet” refers to…uncovering his feet. She (at Naomi’s direction) was asking him to serve as her “kinsman redeemer” – it was a proposal, not a consummation.

  • [2] June 14, 2015 at 7:40pm

    “Affirming children for who they are is simply the right thing to do, and rejecting a child’s deeply held sense of who they are can have very serious consequences,” James Parrish, executive director of Equality Virginia, told the Daily Press. “It is sad that this is even a debate.”

    It’s SHOCKING how exactly backwards this is from reality (i.e. it’s the exact perfect argument for the other side)

    From “Most children eventually outgrow gender identity disorder. About 75 percent of boys with gender identity disorder develop a homosexual or bisexual orientation by late adolescence or adulthood, but without continued feelings of transsexuality. Most of the remaining 25 percent become heterosexuals (also without transsexuality). Those individuals in whom gender identity disorder persists into adulthood retain the desire to live as members of the opposite sex, sometimes manifesting this desire by cross-dressing, either privately or in public. In some cases, adult transsexuals (both male and female) have their primary and secondary sexual characteristics altered through a sex change operation, consisting of surgery and hormone treatments.”

    Didja catch that?! 75% + 25% = 100% The percentage is SO small that these folks refer to them as “individuals”.

  • [7] June 8, 2015 at 12:30am

    I find this confusing. “Christian Gay people” is an oxymoron. How can one claim to be a follower of Christ, who not only taught from the “Old Testament”, not only quoted (often) from Leviticus, but ‘doubled down’ on the law?! This celibate rabbi taught that one was guilty of adultery for merely LOOKing with lust upon someone of the opposite sex—HOW does one then claim to be His follower, while practicing homosexuality?

    Responses (2) +
  • [3] June 5, 2015 at 7:59am

    Ah, did you miss: ‘ “The saddest thing for me as a reader was how, in books on the Bible and sex, Vines and Wilson concentrated almost wholly on the biblical negatives, the prohibitions against homosexual practice, instead of giving sustained attention to the high, (yes) glorious Scriptural vision of sexuality,” Keller wrote.’

    IOW, we’re all agreed that scripture is quite prohibitive of homosexual acts. This article is just focusing on the author’s additional view that G*d’s positive teaching on complimentarianism as well all the positive teachings on godly marriage are being utterly neglected by the “gay christian” side.

  • [1] June 4, 2015 at 2:47am

    Honesty, I’d never heard of Mr. Washington (I’m not a sports fan) -but now that I’ve looked him up–you know what the biggest thing I noticed from the article I found—it’s told from HIS perspective!

    You don’t see anyone defending Washington? -have you ever googled “Tony Washington incest”?

    Tony Washington’s NFL Story: How Wrong is Brother Sister…
    Dec 29, 2010 – Moral psychology has no answer as to whether brother-sister incest is wrong,

    Full Marriage Equality: End the Persecution of Tony …
    Sep 7, 2010 – I found ESPN’s coverage of the sad tale of Tony Washington, which I … Incest.” It can be painful to read this. Washington’s family stood by him.

    The first negative headline was 6th down. Interesting.

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] June 4, 2015 at 2:08am

    Not to mention the fact that the day after he touched the youngest sister’s behind–he was OUTTA THERE for 3 months. It simply doesn’t matter to these people. Hater’s gonna hate.

  • [19] June 4, 2015 at 2:06am

    Perhaps because you’re under the impression that Duggar did to his sisters whatever your cousin did to you. Duggar felt his sister’s chests–on top of their clothing, one at a time while they were asleep–he did the same to a babysitter—and each time he came crying to his parents and confessed. Had he not confessed–they’d never have been the wiser–and perhaps he would have gone down another road. As it is–he later copped one more feel–again, on top of clothes–and lastly, he felt the butt of his youngest sister while reading her a story–she was so young she had NO idea he’d done anything wrong, despite the multiple family meetings and discussions of what “good touch vs bad touch” constituted. (perhaps she thought he was merely shifting her weight–the report isn’t that detailed) The next DAY he was out of the house for 3+ months–and he’d been taken to the police station before being allowed back into the home. EVERYONE involved also went to certified licensed counseling.

    Duggar was also interviewed by their church elders, and according to some, had to stand before their whole church confessing what he’d done. These people did the opposite of sweeping his behavior under a rug.

    Your experience is your experience. Their experience is theirs. According to them, he is not a pedophile. Also, according to a 2009 DoJ report on analysis of several long term studies, 85-90% of offenders similar to Duggar do NOT reoffend. -pretty much the opposite of a pedophile.

    Responses (2) +
  • [4] June 4, 2015 at 1:53am

    Ha! Obviously people like the police chief who released the report–people like the editors of all these salacious articles about them—the VAST majority of which imply a good deal worse was done to the sisters….and evidently hundreds of thousands of commenters who take shocking amounts of pleasure in this public shaming.

    BTW -The Oprah interview was supposed to have taken place back in 2006. At that time, someone who came across a letter that had been tucked away in a book in the Duggar household–detailing the fondling incidents–that person called Oprah–and she called the authorities which started the ball rolling for an official investigation. The upshot of that investigation was twofold, 1 the original incidents having taken place from March of 2002 – 2003 (five separate incidents—NOT an ongoing situation as has also been implied) were outside the statue of limitations and therefore not prosecutable–and 2ndly, HE HAD QUIT THE BEHAVIOR and as such, there was nothing to prosecute.

  • [21] June 4, 2015 at 1:36am

    “A guy who molested his own siblings is a-ok,”

    Again—STRAWMAN ARGUMENT –as literally NO ONE has EVER said that what Josh Duggar did was “a-ok”. -What some people may have tried to say is if he’s repented, and has NEVER done anything even remotely similar EVER AGAIN, he might indeed be ok now. Did you pay any attention to that little bit of Megyn Kelly’s report about the DoJ’s analysis of long term studies showing that the majority of offenders like Josh are 12-14 and 85-90% of them go on to never commit sex crimes again??

    “…but a guy who stood up for consensual love” -I believe it’s the fact that Harvey Milk was quite above board about his proclivity for teen aged boys….specifically, drug addicted teenaged waifs….iirc. Today, he could very well have ended up meeting Chris Hanson up close ;)

    “…. and a man who personally chose to do something that only affects himself are sick?” -Ah….ask his ex-wives and kids if this “only affects himself”.

  • [10] June 4, 2015 at 1:16am

    And here’s your salacious accusation–”This guy is disgusting” As IF he’s still doing similar things! As IF this behavior wasn’t confronted–and confronted in the most serious of ways AT THE TIME.

    I seriously doubt you’d have the courage to say exactly that to his sister’s face. -And if you would–that speaks even LESS to your character.

  • June 4, 2015 at 1:14am

    You can only call it 16 months from the first incident. It was 3.5 or a little less from the last incident–i.e. before he was allowed back home.

  • [50] June 4, 2015 at 1:10am

    4. Does it matter that they went to the police when it took them more than a year after the acts happened for them to do so.
    Absolutely it matters that they FIRST confronted Josh–when he volunteered the information–and disciplined him at the time. 2nd they informed the girls and started taking precautions so that this was far less likely to occur. 3rd they informed their church elders–and a year later–when it happened AGAIN, to the youngest, they got him OUT of the house for a significant amount of time–they also arranged licensed counseling for EVERYONE involved–including Josh–so it wasn’t just the family friend who mentored him while having him work–away from home. They voluntarily took him to the police station. It’s not their fault that the mandatory reporter chose not to report him at the time! And let’s be clear here–it was a year from the FIRST incident–it was 3 to 3.5 months after the last incident—i.e. before he was allowed to come home.
    “There’s so much that the Duggar’s left out….”
    And another strawman argument as NO ONE is excusing Josh’s behavior. No one is acknowledging the fact that his behavior was confronted and addressed at the time either.
    Now here’s a question for you: Does it matter that most young offenders (of crimes like Josh Duggar’s) are boys aged 12-14, and according to a 2009 DOJ analysis of long term studies, 85-90% of those offenders are never arrested for similar crimes again?

  • [51] June 4, 2015 at 1:07am

    1. Does it matter if Josh “didn’t touch any skin”? Touching private parts is a violation no matter how it’s done.

    Yes. Speaking as a woman who grew up with a brother–YES it matters.

    2. Does it matter if he was 13 or 14? At that age, you know that going into your sister’s bed and touching her private parts while she is sleeping is an act of violation.

    Correction–he had just turned 14 when the first incident happened, and 15 when the last incident happened (his birthday in the first week of March–both the first and last incidents happened in March) Secondly–strawman argument–NO one is arguing that a violation didn’t occur. I would argue that at much younger ages, people know it’s wrong. Not remotely rare–but wrong.

    3. Does it matter if he felt bad and confessed to his parents, when it is fact that he continued to violate his sisters even after his confession

    Resoundingly YES. –And misdirection–he violated EACH of his sisters, excepting the oldest–and a babysitter. He did this once per sister. The elder sisters were asleep and had no memory–the younger ones didn’t realize he’d done anything wrong–so no trauma (other than him being whisked out of the house after the last incident) occurred at the time—but NOW–what the media is doing–and what the hoards of their followers are doing presently is absolutely traumatizing, salacious, and slanderous.

  • [1] June 3, 2015 at 6:30pm

    Good grief, literally 5 verses later from what was quoted in their little shock video: “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.”

    Meanwhile Islam NEEDS to be taken head on and confronted with it’s ACTUAL teachings.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 10, 2015 at 8:14am

    Good grief! My youngest two children both were QUITE shy as babies and toddlers, I can’t even remember how many times they hid AND cried when even church members came up to them even while they were in a parent’s arms –heck, my son was nine months old before we got to sit through a whole sermon without being buzzed down to the nursery because he was INCONSOLABLE, and the lovely lady in charge of the nursery had a GIFT for babes and toddlers (she was also a kindergarten teacher) This woman needs to take a step back and start LOOKING for some positive–after all, there’s a reason for that old cliche, you find what you look for.

  • [3] March 10, 2015 at 7:29pm

    He probably paid a portion of the first fine because technically the sidewalk IS still there….his yard has just buried it up to…looks like a couple of feet or so on the upper slope. At this point, to uncover the sidewalk, he’d not only have to shovel the snow–but also dig out the sidewalk–a MUCH more significant job indeed!

    If the concern is actually for safety–a partial job would be more dangerous, since it would merely expose ice…or a muddy slope…making a treacherous path indeed. Pedestrians are better off walking the street, or hiking over the snow.

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] March 6, 2015 at 11:41pm

    I don’t think Prime Minister Netenyahu was alluding to us as Esther….I believe HE was in the position of Esther, and we (America) would be the King.

  • March 5, 2015 at 9:24am

    This article is a quite civil confirmation of exactly what you are saying. Inclusion isn’t the point at all–Murphy showed zero problem with full inclusion, right up to and including loving homosexual individuals, “investing” in relationships with them–but that is NOT enough, it is NEVER enough until we celebrate their debauchery.

    What you say concerning your youngest daughter touches my heart. I have a similar issue with one of mine. She left for college and joined lambda. I have never been so grateful for reformed theology.

    Responses (1) +
Restoring Love