Three commentaries on N.C. that are far more moral than Billy Graham’s cruel embrace of ignorance

Where in the Bible does it say that Christians should lie in accordance to their beliefs?

Exodus 20:16

That’s not simply lying. Stating that a person/community does something abhorrent when there are no actual facts in evidence simply to vilify said person/community sounds to be like ‘bearing false witness’.

 Yeah, you missed my point.

Just concerning Pastor Wooden: am i the only one that thinks a man who clearly hates gay men (and, probably any one in the {i think its called} QUILTBAG community) is talking a little too much about what gay men like up the ass? I mean, my gay friends dont talk about it like this. And, the detail. He really seems to be trying to go into as much detail about gaping anus as he can.

Anyone besides me think the pastor has something to hide?

The thing is, this seems to be very common among a lot of anti-gay people.  The number of anti-gay folks who found it necessary to describe my alleged sex life during debates with me in more excruciating detail than I ever have (and I write erotic fiction for fun!) is frightening.

I’d guess this is related to the monomaniacal “gay romance is only about sex” theme we hear from many opponents. I don’t know if their heterosexual relationships are in fact only about sex, but it seems unlikely (gods, I hope it’s unlikely)–yet there’s a substantial number of voices arguing that there’s no such thing as gay emotional bonding, commitment, romance, long-term partnership.  And working hard to *make* this true.

Someone in this debate is obsessed with sex, and despite claims to the contrary, it’s generally not the QUILTBAG side.  “I want to be able to visit my partner in the hospital” is not about putting tab A into slot B, and it’s really deeply offensive to pretend that it is.  (This one hits home for me as my dad has spent a lot of time recently visiting his gay friend in the hospital.  That is not a sexual relationship at all–they are life-long friends but not lovers–but it’s a relationship that shows the kind of love Christianity ought to involve.)

poor hamsters.  I’d always hoped that was just a rumor.

 To clarify, I’m not suggesting that these resenters are secretly gay or wish to be gay. That may be true in some cases. I’m suggesting instead that they see homosexuality as a form of slacking or goldbricking.

A whole lot of straight men like stuff in their butts too. So do a whole lot of women. This anal sex obsession among homophobes is therefore off in more ways than one.

 I’m going to go with “A cell phone”.

i want to marry a horse.   it is not  about hate. but reality of what marriage  is  and is not.  there are other laws that one can make for cohabitation with out making marriage in to a sexual lie.

And, the reality is that what marriage is and is not has changed, not just recently but throughout history.

It has changed from women being chattle and a status symbol that you use to display your superiority via number of wives.  It then changed from being a purely business arrangement where one purchases a primary home-management personelle.  It then changed to a voluntary union of domestic worker/submissive and income-based worker/superior.

The idea that we have to freeze the laws of marriage so that they are exactly what they are, including any related injustices, for fear that other changes may happen is not only a futile attempt in the first place, but cowardly on the face of it.

Can the horse consent?  Is it capable of saying ‘I do’ in a manner that is consistent with someone who is self-aware and not under coercion?  If so, then that’s quite surprising, seeing as only humans have exhibited that level of sapience.  Sadly, though, no: A horse — or any animal — is not capable of this sort of granting of consent.  B-2.

So let’s cut you off at the pass since I BET you’re going to say something about pedophilia and incest!  Those and bestiality are always the three gatling gun barrels the opponents of marriage equality try to take aim with.

Children and relatives are sapient and self-aware, unlike a horse.  But can a child consent?  Depends on the child, but in general, until they’re about 18-ish, children aren’t generally considered capable of making their own decisions — certainly not life-changing decisions like marriage or sex. At which point, of course, they’re not longer a child.  B-3.

With incest there is almost invariably a power disparity which renders moot any ability of one party to say that they are capable of making a decision without coercion.  Especially if they are blood family — one is older or has a superior role in the family, for example.  It is impossible to have what we consider to be a healthy relationship when there is such a power disparity inherently in place.  (In addition there are generally concerns about the progeny if the couple is capable of producing any, but let’s leave that be for now, since marriage isn’t always about makin’ babies/having sex, right?  Side-note: OM NOM acknowledged this in the recent Prop 8 court case.)  B-5.

Finally, marriage isn’t about sex (necessarilly.)  It is about power of attorney.  It is about visitation rights.  It is about health insurance coverage.  It is about being able to say that you are with someone you love.  It is about being able to take care of your loved one in case something happens to you and you can no longer support them, through life insurance and survivors’ claims.  It is about a hundred-plus things that the state allows for married couples by the simple expedient of saying ‘I do,’ and signing on the dotted line — stuff that most jurisdictions conveniently ignore for anything other than heterosexual couples, or grant people only after going through virtual death marches of bureaucracy.

B-4.  I sank your battleship, jackwagon.

The problem with Wooden isn’t that he’s a liar or that he bears false witness.  It’s that he’s not really a Christian. He is what Jesus would have referred to as a false prophet, a “whited sepulcher.” He’s what the Apostle John was talking about when he said “antichrists.” Until Christians who actually think the world “Christian” should mean “Christ-like” instead of “Pharisee-like” will stand up and denounce the Woodens of the world as the false Christians and agents of Satan that they are, there will be no hope for mainstream Christianity in this country.

As is so often the case, Roy Zimmerman says it best. (Version with a rather nice slide show here.

And, just a thought, if you ever need to borrow someone’s cell phone and the Rev. Wooden offers to let you use his–well, I wouldn’t.  

Of course not; people should marry people they can dominate or submit to, as appropriate.  What is this ‘love’ you speak of, hew-mon?

It’s conflating adult humans with non-humans.  S’very othering, come to think.

Yes. “false witness against your neighbor.”

The definition of just what or who a neighbor is can be, shall we say, very elastic.

One of the reasons I enjoy roleplaying games is the opportunity to get inside the head of someone from a very different culture.  So I thought it would be interesting to ask my fantasy-Borgia player character what she thought about gay marriage.  (She is about to make a purely political marriage–she’s 19, he’s 58, and the extent of her affection is that she told a confidante “I know it might be expedient to kill him, but I’m fond of him so I’d rather not if I don’t have to.”)

Her first thought is “Dynastic marriages are supposed to tie families together via shared bloodlines in the children.  No children, no point.  Just take a lover if you want a same-sex partner.”

Her second thought, on more consideration, is “Well, same-sex marriage could work for making alliances, especially if one partner had pre-existing children the other could adopt.  If both are childless it would seem simpler to adopt one of them into the other’s family directly.”  (Her society practices adoption of adults, especially when someone lacks an heir.)  “But maybe if you didn’t want to go with adoption because both partners were more or less equally highly placed…hm.  I don’t see why not, actually.”  Followed by a burst of giggles as she imagines marrying her two chief political adversaries to one another.  She *is* nineteen and sometimes shows it.

Her third thought:  “The noble families are dying out as it is; our birthrate is too low and we kill each other off too often.  I’d hate to discourage childbearing, so this had better come with cast-iron contracts about having to produce and legitimate some kids.  Legal concubinage might be the way to go.  Given that, I’m happy to legalize it as soon as I become Mayor.”  Evil grin.  There are a lot of things she’ll do as soon as she becomes Mayor, most of them more alarming than this.

Will it make people happy?  Will it contribute to their virtue?  What silly questions!

In any case, her point is that in her social stratum–and it’s a fantasy society but real-world models are not far to find–marriage is not about partnership between individuals, it’s about alliance between families.  Obviously marriage rules and ideas that originated in her society would not fit well in ours or vice versa.  We barely mean the same thing by the word!

I actually encountered a homophobe who insisted loudly and repeatedly that cats can and do consent to sex with humans, in order to call people stupid for using consent in their arguments. 

WHen someone is willing to go around shouting about how his cat consents to sex with him as part of his argument against gay rights, I think logic has given up and gone home (Ironically, he was a hardcore aristotelian, who kept falling back on the idea that homosexuality was wrong for teleological reasons)

   I read of a man that wanted to sex a horse and the horse kicked  him and he died; obviously a horse can consent or not and that was a not. No? I’m still looking for one that will not  not consent  and that will be a consent.  i do not want to tie the animal down , that will be rape. don’t be a bigot now , animals have family needs too, and i love  horses . big !~.

   How stupid are you?  a dog is not human to understand human marriage! you are the human , the smart one. Go to Australia and or Africa study the wild dog packs and court the dog the dog’s way . Did you ever have a dog on your leg  trying to sex it , but you will not let it; let it have some sex and then dog  court it as you will see in the wild  how the pack  looks for a mate , mostly with smell, and it will accept you as it’s mate (consenting in a dog way  ; you need to study dog ) , than you can adopt some puppies  and the dog will have a family and soon you will have a pack of your own!  

  People who did not know how to write , placed a X or their mark on the paper  with witnesses,  and a legal document was legal. (how smart are you  that you do not know that?)  a horse can mark it with it’s hoof  . 

No surprise that the horse kicked him.  They tend not to like being prodded in the junk in general. 

But the idea of consent is that it must necessarily be informed.  Does the one offering the consent understand what it is consenting to?  With an adult human, you can establish that, you can talk and communicate, such that both partners understand and agree to what is being done.  But with a creature that lacks language, you cannot make that confirmation.  Of sure, you can ask if it understands and it can make happy noises, but does is that really consent?  Maybe it is just happy that you are paying attention to it? 

That is why beastiality does not work as an argument in a debate about marriage.  A beast cannot understand what kind of contract it would be entering into. 

      Are you serious?  or just do not know what a marriage is.  Marriage is a social sexual legal contract , that is inforced by law the obligation of the marriaged people to one another and  to the society that licensed them; for the security  and to  the well being of the parties of that marriage  and there institution that they engaged in as a marriage that society cultivates for it’s nations well being. 

   You  are stating “ Are you saying people should not marry people they’re sexually attracted to? ” .  It is a requirement to marry one you can have sex with,  pleasant sex will be even better ; and a marriage  requires sex or it is not a legal marriage.  it was once a requirement and may still be in some places  , that  a marriage is not legal untill it is consummated .     

    Sex is important to a marriage do to marriage is mostly  about sex.   To love and have a good friend in your partner will be even better,  but not a requirement. Marriage  is not a feeling , prostitute or their   clients do not look to  marry one another  , do to sexual  attraction , the  prostitute want only the money;  and  clients  want the attraction  sexual.   Children masterbate and so do adults , and that is not a possible marriage do to it has  not a possible consummation. 

   Sex is two parts of Man coming together  Man male and Man female  in a biological union that  marriage call  a union to a one body.  like a puzzle piece it must click together and make one piece.  There are people who find animals sexy ,  but that is no marriage even if    it is sexually attracted to them;  same as for what is called homosexuality; do to   homosexuality can not click in to  a biological sexual  union .( to call it a marriage will be a lie, a sexual lie) .