7truth, no two mutually exclusive arguments can not bot be true. However, since you have no scientific proof that your belief is any more true than my Wiccan belief, or Hindu belief, or any other belief, then all beliefs are equal in their non-provability. And yes, the Christian right is constantly trying to write the law to conform with their Bible. This very issue of gay marriage, which matters not at all to most people, has a constant parade of Christians calling for laws, Constitutional amendments, etc. Same goes for many laws concerning sex, morality, and behaviour that have no basis in anything except your Bible. You are not in charge anymore. You don’t get to make non Christians follow Christian morality and dogma.
 September 1, 2015 at 2:42pm
BULL!!!! There is no Christian persecution in this country. Your churches are not closed, your preachers are not arrested, you have the right to pray, your tax exempt status has not been repealed (though it should be), you can still push your mythology over the airwaves, and there’s a church on damn near every street corner. Not being allowed to force your beliefs on the rest of us, not being allowed to make the the rules anymore, and not being the group in charge do not constitute persecution except in the tiny minds of those who can’t stand being forced to accept that other beliefs are just as valid and equal to yours.
Well the bigoted hateful gay leftists that want to kill her, rape her, destroy her...certainly appear to embody everything that Mr. Flanagan stood for. Christians, like her are indeed persecuted and threatened daily with death. What part of persecution do you not get, Mr. Obama.
There have been atheists who have gotten death threats from Christians, so they are being persecuted as well then. Right?
This woman forced nothing on anyone.
Prayer is not a right given by govt
The church gives back far more than it gains. Removing status would violate the original intent of separation.
Prove that Christianity is a myth
No one wants to make the rules. just to have the same ability to vote and live according to conscience that the founders intended.
Other beliefs are not as valid, and are not equal to mine. They cannot be, since contradictory truth claims cannot both be true
Bull? Odd argument. In nature bulls mate with cows, in order to have calves. Bull? Steer!
@corohr… yes she as a Christian today is being persecuted and threatened with death by the bigoted hateful followers of Mr. Flanagan. What atheist today is threatened with death or persecuted? I did not see the story on NBC.
Here are some:
@corohr. I did not watch NBC in 2014 so missed these. Today I came across bigoted hateful death threats and persecution of a Christian lady, which appears to be from the same types as Mr. Flanagan or current BLM followers. Guess the pendulum of hate and persecution has swung in the last year, eh what?
7truth, no two mutually exclusive arguments can not bot be true. However, since you have no scientific proof that your belief is any more true than my Wiccan belief, or Hindu belief, or any other belief, then all beliefs are equal in their non-provability. And yes, the Christian right is constantly trying to write the law to conform with their Bible. This very issue of gay marriage, which matters not at all to most people, has a constant parade of Christians calling for laws, Constitutional amendments, etc. Same goes for many laws concerning sex, morality, and behaviour that have no basis in anything except your Bible. You are not in charge anymore. You don't get to make non Christians follow Christian morality and dogma.
I agree with you. All I’m saying is if what’s happening to her is considered persecution, then what is happening to Atheist, in the same way, is persecution as well. I just want to be intellectually honest. Christians do not have a monopoly on persecution in the U.S. or the world.
She is being persecuted in this situation.
 September 1, 2015 at 10:40am
Just- some of us are here. 2 points though. First, being a Christian, Libertarian, or anything else, does not give you the right to break the law. That is one of the founding principals, NOBODY is above the law. Second,even if she is opposed to issuing the licence, why has she forbidden anyone else in her office from issuing them? Her liberty does not extend to forcing others, either her office staff or people applying for the licence, to accept her personal religious beliefs. She is trying to use the power of her office to trample on the liberty of others. That is by no means libertarian.
 September 1, 2015 at 10:09am
Steve- does she interrogate all the people who want licences for 2nd and 3rd marriages to find out who was at fault? Does she refuse to grant licences for interfaith couples? No, she is standing on this one issue because a bunch of moronic clergymen have decided that this is a way to increase their coffers and political influence at the expense of the terminally sanctimonious. The Bible has no standing in US law and does not apply to everyone. She, like many others, has been brainwashed into thinking that right wing Christians still make the rules. She is utterly and completely wrong.
 August 31, 2015 at 10:19pm
And I never had a problem with Christians. Still don’t with real Christians like Episcopalians. But the Christian right needs to be strong armed. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that they don’t get to tell the rest of us how to live, that they do not own the term ‘marriage’, and their bible is irrelevant in the context of US law.
[-4] August 31, 2015 at 8:20am
Anyone who is shocked, outraged, or in any way upset by the sight of a bare breast or a pop diva’s performance is not someone that I want with any input into the running of this country.
Real: "Pop diva?" In my book, she's no Stevie Nicks. Although Stevie is getting older do you really think Miley will be all that long remembered? You can't be serious and what does the general election in 2016 have to do with any of this? If anyone on this board can possibly weave in a negative reference to Hillary, it's me.
Seriously why don't you people just quit listening, watching, and coming to the Blaze. Especially you Monk, if you don't like the blaze and Beck then leave already.
Cyrus is nothing more than a glorified whore, and not worth the time of day.
 August 27, 2015 at 2:05pm
Lots of job descriptions change as the market and conditions change. That’s basic in the beloved business world of the conservatives. I’d like to know if her contract has that boilerplate phrase so common in contracts “Other duties as required”. I’ll bet it does. Fire her, escort her to the door, if she protests, arrest her for trespassing.
 August 27, 2015 at 9:38am
The right keeps saying that the government should not be involved in marriage, and I agree with them. The government has no right to demand that we ask permission or pay for licences to get married. Simply a form stating that you are in a relationship with another person or persons and filed with the town clerk should be enough. Takes the whole religions objection angle out of the picture and leaves it up to the individual churches as to who they will or will not marry. We have given too many rights to the government that they now sell back to us. Time to remove the whole licencing culture.
Hahahaha. Bully the bench and play with the horns. But, but, but we only wanted larger FED for the rainbow and didn't digest ancillary issues sprouting from our hissy fit for bennies and power.
REAL, fully agree.
I disagree with your point – government should define marriage. Religion, which gave us the rite (spelled properly) of marriage, itself was a government system. It was a code of behavior as well as ritual based on a faith. The institution of marriage was to define the rights of survivorship and property (legitimacy). In a homogenous society of different religions and absence thereof, there is still a need for the arbiter of disputes (in this country it’s the government) to establish a definition of property ownership and survivorship.
That being said, a government can define the eligibility under the civil code as to who may marry, but it should not dictate that someone who objects to the marriage (in true libertarian sense) for any reason must conduct the rites of marriage (or participate in any such ceremony or ritual).
[-3] August 25, 2015 at 1:00pm
Sure, AK. Go ahead and believe that. Now run along. Don’t you have some praying for society to do? (pats on head)
[-3] August 25, 2015 at 12:47pm
Wow, AK, hit a nerve there? You seem to protest too much. Jealous, maybe? Friends who have an open situation while you’re confined to mowing the lawn and cleaning the garage? You can deny it all you want, you can call me a liar, though you have no proof, and you can ignore what is happening in front of your face, but truth remains. Sexual mores have changed and are changing. Younger people are dropping religion, don’t care about gay marriage, see no problem with bisexuality, and are not tied into the concept of monogamy. The puritan backlash of the last quarter century is coming to a close. Ashley Madison may be the most famous, but there are plenty of websites, gatherings and even conventions out there for ordinary people who want to broaden their horizons.
[-1] August 25, 2015 at 12:31pm
Sorry AvenJERK, but you have no idea who I know and what circles I move in. Intelligent, educated people, not knuckle dragging God botherers from the flyover states. Try and expand your knowledge, and don’t believe the BS that your pastor hands out every Sunday. There’s a whole world of people who don’t believe in sin and your Bible, and don’t care about it. Neither conservative nor liberal, the libertarian movement is growing, and with it the demise of the silly rules you have for controlling and engineering society.
[-5] August 25, 2015 at 11:49am
Well, usedtobe, I can only speak from experience that I know far more 20 and 30 year relationships that are open and happy, than I do 20 and 30 year relationships that are monogamous. Hell, it’s a miracle if couples make 10 years these days. We were much happier in the 60′s and 70′s, and those relationships have lasted. With all the emphasis on material wealth and the retread of the idea that monogamy and abstinence are the best way to live, I’m not seeing it as an improvement on society.
[-7] August 25, 2015 at 11:27am
Trying to con these people into believing they committed “sin” is what’s evil. Wake up to reality. There are very few people who can accept that one person can provide for all their emotional and sexual needs for the rest of their lives. The human animal is not wired that way. If you don’t believe me, look at the divorce rate. Yes, cheating is not the way, but accepting open marriages and relationships, or polyamory provides for saner, more stable relationships.
You say look at the divorce rate. I say look at the examples of those who keep their marriage covenants and have never broken them. I say look at the examples of those who have broken their covenants and repented and turned away from their sins. You say accepting open marriages and relationships or polyamory provides for saner more stable relationships. I say you're a liar. By definition, Stable: adjective
not likely to change or fail; firmly established. Nothing about that definition can be claimed for an open relationship because by your own statement a human is not wired that way. that a human must be in ever-changing relationships to be happy. Therefore, cannot be stable and proves your lie.
It also provides for a LOT more incest, spread of disease, rampant lust, etc. Don’t blame the rest of society or “faulty genetics” because you don’t have a clue how to control yourself. The only one to blame for that is yourself.
REAL, while I do not believe in any such thing as "sin" I do believe in evil. Evil being defined as hypocrisy (any violation of the Golden/Silver rule).
And while I do not disagree with your overall take about the folly of marriage, if one does enter into a marriage there is a commitment made and if that commitment is made then a violation of it is an act of hypocrisy, an evil act.
FTR, I think any man who enters into marriage is a fool. Marriage is a dead end institution and is dying as it should.
Well, usedtobe, I can only speak from experience that I know far more 20 and 30 year relationships that are open and happy, than I do 20 and 30 year relationships that are monogamous. Hell, it's a miracle if couples make 10 years these days. We were much happier in the 60's and 70's, and those relationships have lasted. With all the emphasis on material wealth and the retread of the idea that monogamy and abstinence are the best way to live, I'm not seeing it as an improvement on society.
Wrong. This is the exact kind of stuff libtards say that "its OK to do what ever you want"
Looking at the divorce rate as justification is like saying look at the national debt as a reason to keep electing socialists
By definition, sin is lawlessness: the violation of YHWH’s commandments. Believers are called be holy (set apart) from the earthly desires of the flesh and to follow Christ’s narrow path in order to perfect our spirit. The absolution of sin through belief in Christ’s blood sacrifice, the repentance of our sin (turning from lawlessness), and baptism is at the core of belief and a better alternative to shame than suicide.
Adultery and suicide are sins of the flesh based in selfishness.
But like I said RealLiberace.....go ahead sport....you first..LOL.
Sorry AvenJERK, but you have no idea who I know and what circles I move in. Intelligent, educated people, not knuckle dragging God botherers from the flyover states. Try and expand your knowledge, and don't believe the BS that your pastor hands out every Sunday. There's a whole world of people who don't believe in sin and your Bible, and don't care about it. Neither conservative nor liberal, the libertarian movement is growing, and with it the demise of the silly rules you have for controlling and engineering society.
Yeah I’ve told you before that you don’t use the term “God Botherer” correctly but you’re more in love with the sound of the phrase rather than it’s correct use.
“God Botherer” is English-vernacular for groups and individuals that “bother” or insult God either through music, film, actions..etc. You’re clearly not educated in it’s use.
And you’re a liar. You don’t know more married couples of 20 and 30 years who are in open marriages and happier than traditional married couples. You’re forced to say you do because you painted yourself in a corner with your puerile bait and when your bluf was called you had no where else to go.
You seem to confuse libertine with libertarian…which brings me back to point I made about you…you’re not very educated.
Wow, AK, hit a nerve there? You seem to protest too much. Jealous, maybe? Friends who have an open situation while you're confined to mowing the lawn and cleaning the garage? You can deny it all you want, you can call me a liar, though you have no proof, and you can ignore what is happening in front of your face, but truth remains. Sexual mores have changed and are changing. Younger people are dropping religion, don't care about gay marriage, see no problem with bisexuality, and are not tied into the concept of monogamy. The puritan backlash of the last quarter century is coming to a close. Ashley Madison may be the most famous, but there are plenty of websites, gatherings and even conventions out there for ordinary people who want to broaden their horizons.
You cannot be serious. LOL...this is laughable, childish reasoning.
Perhaps you have not learned this lesson yet, but being a "big boy" or grownup means making your body do what it does not want to do.
You basically say your body should do whatever it wants. That is the thinking of a child.
And dont' bore me with the insipid "urban dictionary" definitions of "god botherer" either. They're wrong. The term was first used to describe groups like black metal bands who write songs against religion and christianity.
And you're a liar..that's not hitting nerves, that's stating fact.
But as I keep saying to you champ..."you first". I notice you keep avoid that.
Sure, AK. Go ahead and believe that. Now run along. Don't you have some praying for society to do? (pats on head)
nannerpus...he's lying. he's just baiting the board.
The idiot doesn't know the difference between libertine and libertarian. He's preaching a libertine lifestyle while saying it's libertarian.
Have you worked out the difference between libertine and libertarian yet RealLiberace?
[-2] August 24, 2015 at 12:06pm
7truth, you, like so many others on the Christian right, seem to have forgotten two major parts of your Bible. Free will, given by your God. ‘Judge not, lest ye be judged’. And yet, the Christian right continues in its efforts to eliminate free will and to judge non Christians by Christian standards. Original source enough for you?
[-2] August 24, 2015 at 11:26am
Not widely then, since real Christians don’t try to force their will on others.
[-5] August 24, 2015 at 11:15am
Yes, but its not just the funding, is it? If the issue was just the funding, I’d go along with it, as long as the conservatives also were in favor of stripping the military budget and the corporate welfare. But the funding is a side show smokescreen. The (un)conservatives want to shut PP down completely, and remove the freedom of a woman to control her own body. So they bring up the usual crap about funding this one small budget issue, while ignoring the massive amounts wasted on kabuki theater security and pointless foreign wars. No, this has nothing to do with saving money, this is about controlling women.
[-2] August 24, 2015 at 9:56am
I haven’t seen any reports of women being kidnapped and forced to have abortions. I don’t care if you don’t approve of abortions, don’t have one. But it is not your place to stop other women from making their choice to have an abortion. that’s the problem, we don’t force you to have one, but you want to force women NOT to have one. As far as using taxpayer money, get back to me when I have the right to stop paying for TSA, foreign wars, and defence contractors.
[-4] August 24, 2015 at 9:45am
Roe is about privacy, something that the anti’s refuse to respect when it comes to abortion, although they sure scream about privacy when it comes to 2nd Amendment issues. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the government has any business in either issue. the (un)conservatives scream long and load when their privacy is invaded and then turn around and get in the faces of women who make their own choices about sexuality and reproductive choice. Just another hypocritical stance of the right.
August 24, 2015 at 9:25am
Evil is trying to make someone else run their life by your standards.
[-4] August 24, 2015 at 9:18am
Not murder. USSC determined that year ago. See Roe V. Wade. Suck it up.