Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Doing Good While Doing What Is Right

January 12, 2014

To The Reader’s Forum: Marriage equality went into effect almost two and a half years ago....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(142)

Regelski

Jan-27-14 1:10 PM

(cont.) something got garbled. Sorry. But the idea is still there: relying on scripture is evidence of a lack of faith; or misguided faith in the authenticity of the scripture, and that's not even arguable, given translation, historical context, and the like.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-27-14 1:07 PM

Gravelpit: Faith is the essence. Those who defend their beliefs by reference to the Bible, as a how-to manual from God, show no faith, only obeisance. Faith, as I said, is belief in the absence of proof; the Bible is not proof, and those who have faith without it are true to their religion. The philosopher/theologian Kierkegaard coined the expression "the [blind] leap of faith" as being the essence of relihave propound having "found Jesus" and use the Biblical stories as prescriptions or recipes, are not the true believers. True believers are those whose faith is without condition. I don't agree with most of them, but I respect the idea of faith: mine is that I die, and that's it: no promise of life ever-after. That's it: I need to live this life, the one I'm in, the best I can. I am tempted, however, from time to time to accept Buddhist accounts of "rebirth" based on the lives we previously lived: what an idea. Religiosity can be punishment, then,

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-26-14 1:24 PM

The story of Jesus' multiplication and distribution of fish, or the banishment of capitalists from the synagogue seem to be lost on Bible thumpers like Paul Ryan (who subscribes to the socioeconomic theories of atheist Ayn Rand) and Rick Santorum, who ignore what doesn't fit their ideological convictions. It isn't possible to have a civil and reasonable conversation with someone whose only evidence for a belief is the Bible. I don't know why I wasted these words: more of the same will come out of the woodwork, and this newspaper will publish any and all of it. Faith is the acceptance of belief when there can be or is no proof: the Bible is not historical or scientific proof of anything, but a great source of faith in its teachings. Why can't believers satisfy their needs and not embarrass themselves that the earth is 6000 years old. Come on. Get real. You have to be blindly ideological to ignore the science from multiple disciplines. So you're left with your faith; good luck.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-26-14 1:13 PM

The worth of studying the bible is that is offers both a lot of wisdom and food for thought.The King James version is studied as literature-for the elegance of what it expresses.A recent news story showed a PDF of a 4th grade "science" exam. The student was expected to answer "true" to the claim that the early is only 6000 years old; that dinosaurs existed on earth with man (impossible!), and that dinosaurs were the size of sheep. A drawing of Noah's Ark was to be labeled false (who knows why since no one was there) and other indoctrination. The father, seeing this, was alarmed and proceeded to remove his daughter from this fundamentalist school. He apparently thought she would get a good Christian education; what she got was religious propaganda. That should be a sin when affecting impressionable minds. But those who are persuaded of this were similarly brainwashed. The Bibe can teach us a lot; but not the facts of history

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-26-14 12:59 PM

ApologeticsNow: No sense arguing with you; you ignore or reject science and accept that the Bible is the Word of God. Whose word, by the way? Which translation shall we follow. They're often very different! Read about the Tower of Babel? And that God has to dal "words" is almost amusing: Words are notoriously interpreted. "Love thy neighbor" means (in its historical context) love the member of your tribe. In today's world it doesn't mean your gay neighbor, or your black neighbor, or your Islamic neighbor. No sense in arguing with someone who ignores science--come on: there is no possibility that humans and dinosaurs existed at the same time on the plant; no evidence. I don't even hope to 'convert' you, I just wish you'd admit that your faith belong in the home, the Church, and your personal worship. Why can't you be satisfied with that? Do you think your God wants more? The sin of hubris lurks at your door.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

apologeticsnow

Jan-25-14 4:55 PM

Reg, what is the worth of studying the Bible if it is not the Word of God? Jesus claimed it as such when he would preface what he said with "It is written." Also, He spoke as God in saying."I tell you the truth." Are you saying it is not true? And who are you to say it?

The matter you bring up about marriage is patently ridiculous. God instituted marriage in the beginning. See Genesis 2: 24-25 where the word "wife" is in the text itself. Besides that, Jesus himself went back to that passage when confronted with a question about marriage. He read and talked about it as marriage. What makes you say that it is not marriage? I think you need a slice of humble pie and maybe the whole pie.

Dinosaurs are talked about in Scripture. See Job 40: 15. They were made on day 6. Even references outside the Bible have made to them from China to Europe and America. The descriptions of what people wrote concerning what the saw fit the description of a dinosaur.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-25-14 1:13 PM

(cont from below): That's a sin of hubris (look it up) and consider it in the "holier than thou" ideology that you aspire to. Every hateful word in your post is unCristian: ask yourself, what would Jesus do/say?

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-25-14 1:09 PM

kawasakikid: how amusing. The Bible is worth studying but not on the assumption that is the word of God (consider the Toward of Babel). In Genesis (which ever version you prefer), God did not "marry" Adam and Eve. Sorry. And for many eons women and men cohabited before the (RC) Church sanctified marriage. Were our Greek ancestors to be heard from, "marriage" would have involved same-sex communion; but we take from the Greeks only Plato's notion of a "soul" that outlives physical reality. My knowledge base of the Bible is actually is considerable: I doubt yours. You make the usual fault of dismissing those whose views don't agree with yours as not worth considering--as blasphemy (how lovely a Christian act of charity). Your God and mine are the same; I'm comfortable that mine understands the differences, as Pope Francis has recently acknowledged on these topics. You, however, prefer to think that you, and you alone, understand God's words. That's a s

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-25-14 12:56 PM

EagalsWings (Is the intent to align yourself with the American Eagle? No way!).

The Bible is not only translated differently in the same language (compare the Catholic, St. James, or feminist translations), but it is an oral history (especially the New Testament), 70 years of more after the fact. And consider the translation into other languages (talk about a Tower of Babel). Do you have any idea of the differences between languages of "spirit" (as in holy spirit), "esprit" (in French) or "geist" in German. I doubt it. Bible thumpers don't seem to acknowledge these differences, any more than they do the science that proves that man and dinosaurs could not possibly have existed at the same time, or that the earth is more than 6000 years old. Don't ask me for facts of proof; it's all around you. You need to prove your faith--which is impossible since, by definition, faith is belief in the absence of evidence. It then becomes convenient to ignore evidenc

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SCALLYWAG

Jan-21-14 5:11 PM

Again reg that was absolutly priceless. U sure u ain't that monkey fella

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SCALLYWAG

Jan-21-14 5:07 PM

Honistly how can you really try to convince regular folks this behavior is ok and the way to fly. It just ain't right fellas it just ain't right at all. Think I'll go drive my Chevy truck with my shot gun in the back window and load some extra tool and chain saw while drinking a Budweiser. I'm feeling a bit creepy. Anyone want to arm wrestle

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

threestrikesout

Jan-21-14 4:52 PM

I'm feelin kinda bad now, Scally. The way he was talkin at us, I was thinkin maybe he was an ex golden gloves or something.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SCALLYWAG

Jan-21-14 4:44 PM

Reg. get a grip. Let me let u in on a little secret. This may not be politically correct but what the boys say is 99.44% of the planet earths opinion. For god sake man that thing just don't belong in a bum. Did you order the code red. Reg. did u order the code red. Be a man. Man the heck up. A man don't act like that. Did your mammie slap your hand for touching it as a young fella. U are some twisted misguided souls

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SCALLYWAG

Jan-21-14 4:32 PM

Reading along this afternoon I see ya fellows peed on ol regs pride parade a bit. Been here for a number of years now and I can say hands down that is the best melt down I have ever seen. To only be a fly in the ointment. Lol. My visual ol reg laying on the floor in his best blue sequin skirt with an orange tube top with spaghetti straps throwing his lime green 4 inch stalletos at his life size poster of libroraci kicking his fishnet covered hairy lets wrists just a steady limply flailing and cans of nair flying from the dresser. You get the picture.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesWings

Jan-21-14 2:13 PM

@ 1:46 PM Regelski says "...sociopaths trying to impress each other with as to who can be more socio-pathic than the other."

It looks like you win.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

threestrikesout

Jan-21-14 2:01 PM

well said, kawasakikid. It seems as though the only reason people like her and regelski come here is to argue and call people names that don't agree with them.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

threestrikesout

Jan-21-14 1:58 PM

Regelski complains about "put-downs" and then continues with his own verbal misgivings by calling people sociopaths, nerds, losers, etc. Your rhetoric is a tangled web of nothingness. You complain about people "hiding behind screen names" but I must tell you this - it for protection from people like you. An old disc-jockey once said, "If you don't like what you hear, turn the dial." With that said Regelski, if you don't like what you read, turn the dial.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kawasakikid

Jan-21-14 1:57 PM

emelye, way to wiggle out from under your own mistakes. You said, "The Bible has nothing to do with the law in our society." Now you're saying you meant the Constitution. If you read history you'd find the Bible greatly influenced our society in many ways, including the law.

But you really show your ignorance when it comes to the Bible. Just because you are confused and mistaken about the Bible doesn't mean everyone is. Stop projected your ignorance. You raise questions about the Bible, yet never enter an intelligent conversation about it, which leads us to believe you really don't want to know, you just want to argue. There are intelligent discussions about the issues you raise, but you don't really want to enter discussion, you just want to attack.

Your vision for Jamestown is like Greg Rabb's -- drag queens, lesbian follies, gay bath houses, etc.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Regelski

Jan-21-14 1:46 PM

The inanity on this site leaves me speechless. I'm reminded of the aphorism: "Try to reasons with a fool and s/he calls you foolish." The blather here contributes to what? A contest of one-upsmanship as far as put-downs are concerned, with no concern as to the topic at stake. What losers. And, as usual, the loudest mouths hide their invective rhetoric behind screen names because, were they exposed, they'd feel guilty , odd, or anti-social--all of which they are. The free speech on this site is so irrational that it would take psychologists years to decipher. Sociologists would have more luck: The typical respondents on this site, those complaining and at each other, are sociopaths trying to impress each other with as to who can be more socio-pathic than the other. And this, editor, is a public service? Why allow a public forum for this exhibitionism? Answer (not from the nerds but from the editor)?

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesWings

Jan-21-14 7:27 AM

Hey Emelye, EaglesWings didn't skip over nuthin.

Did ya'll notice how Emelye skipped over my question "How about the O.T. law regarding sexual perversion?"

It must mean that sexual perversion, including homosexuality, is serious business in God's eyes.

Emelye says "I'm not going to argue Scripture because it doesn't apply." Another lie - She's not going to argue Scripture because she's not going to win.

Did eberybody notice how Emelye is avoiding my question - Interpret ROMANS 1:25-28 AND the passages in LEVITICUS - PRETTY PLEASE...

Emelye wants to discuss politics - so I'll take a page out of her playbook - Emelye, that's not what this letter was about.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye

Jan-20-14 11:31 PM

kawasakikid, read the 1st amendment to the US Constitution. That's what counts, not some inscriptions on some monuments. Your example is ludicrous!

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye

Jan-20-14 11:27 PM

EaglesWings skips over Leviticus 20:13, did ya notice that? This is it: “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them."

So can we conclude, that EaglesW wants gay men to be executed? Why not quote Matthew 7 or 1 Corinthians 13? Or do they not count?

I'm not going to argue scripture because it doesn't apply. If you believe same sex marriage is a sin then by all means don't marry a member of your sex. You're perfectly within your rights to do that. You do NOT have the right to force your interpretation of scripture onto everyone else. Using scripture in an argument about civil rights to marriage equality is irrelevant.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Emelye

Jan-20-14 11:16 PM

Name one framer who envisioned women being able to vote, apologeticsnow. Or African slaves to own property, let alone be elected president. Your examples are laced with biased interpretations. When they referenced the Creator why do you assume they meant your version? When the 5th amendment was written and the 14th amendment was ratified, why do you assume the authors didn't realize there would be evolution in legal and moral thinking and thus wrote them general enough to be reinterpreted over time? Why did they create the Supreme Court to make decisions? When you claim "the writers never meant that to be distorted to justify a perverted arrangement of marriage," how is it that you can go back in time to read their minds? If you look at everything through your own narrow lens, apologeticsnow, it's no wonder you can't see the intellectual bankruptcy of your arguments.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

EaglesWings

Jan-20-14 7:34 PM

@ 2:17 PM Regelski says: "Let's begin with the FACT that the Bible is translated, and thus allows considerable space for interpretation of words"

Who set the interpretation rules? You?

Do you have any sort of a Bible degree? Where have you studied the Bible? In order to make an outrageous claim like that, you must have some sort of seminary training? Do you carry a Th.D, D.D. or maybe something along the lines of the study of theology or ministry?

Where does your expertise lie?

When are we going to get your Biblical wisdom on Romans 1:25-28

How about Leviticus 18:22?

How about the O.T. law regarding sexual perversion?

How about the N.T.regarding sexual perversion? - I Corinthians 6:9; I Timothy 1:10, etc.

If you get stumped, ask Dr. Emelye, who all of a sudden doesn't want to talk about Scripture @ 4:01 PM.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kawasakikid

Jan-20-14 7:03 PM

"The Bible has nothing to do with the law in our society." Oh, why then are multiple Bible verses carved in stone all over the capital city, Washington DC, and Bible characters like Moses cast in stone all over our official buildings? Why are the ten commandments posted in these buildings? No, the Bible has nothing to do with the laws of this society. Shows how much you know. nothing.

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 142 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web