The American Spectator : Amnesty for Same-Sex Couples?

Text Size

Amnesty for Same-Sex Couples?

By Mark Tooley on 10.18.10 @ 6:07AM

Religious supporters of liberalized immigration are divided over the issue, with Catholic bishops opposing.

Liberal Democratic Senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Patrick Leahy of Vermont introduced their “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act” on September 29. Of course its centerpiece is a “pathway” to citizenship for the “undocumented,” which critics would call amnesty for illegals. It also includes a “Uniting American Families Act” (UAFA) allowing “permanent partners” of U.S. citizens, which seems to mean same-sex couples, to obtain U.S. residency.

Speaking for the Catholic bishops, who typically support liberalized immigration, Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City reportedly wrote Senator Menendez explaining “that a controversial provision, which would confer marriage-like immigration benefits to same-sex couples,” would “preclude the U.S. bishops from supporting” it as introduced. Bishop Wester noted that the same-sex provision “in a comprehensive immigration reform bill will make it far more difficult to achieve the compromise that will be needed in order to enact a fair and balanced comprehensive immigration reform bill.” Last year, Wester warned against similar legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would “erode the institution of marriage and family by according marriage-like immigration benefits to same sex relationships, a position that is contrary to the very nature of marriage which pre-dates the Church and the state.”

Another liberalized immigration proponent, the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, also warned against the same-sex provision. “That’s the sad political reality,” he lamented to Episcopal News Service. “Politically in Washington it has been very difficult to engage Republicans and conservative Democrats on the issue of immigration reform.” Rodriguez and his group for Hispanic evangelicals oppose same-sex marriage. “Finally we were able to acquire support and galvanize the white evangelical community in support of immigration reform and that coalition stands to be jeopardized if those agenda items are morphed together.”

But Church World Service, the relief arm of the National Council of Churches, is full throttle enthusiastic about the Leahy/Menendez legislation, despite its provision for same-sex couples. “This new legislation is a welcome contrast to controversial immigration proposals in Arizona and elsewhere,” a church relief official asserted. “This legislation offers true solutions that will put our immigration system back on track and benefit the United States as a whole.” The Church World Service spokesman urged others senators to cosponsor, declaring: “We applaud the leadership exhibited by Senators Menendez and Leahy in introducing this bill.” Although all but a few of the National Council of Churches over 30 member denominations oppose same-sex marriage, its relief agency recognized no concerns about UAFA. One website lists Church World Service as a specific supporter of the same-sex partner provision.

One of the few denominations supporting UAFA is, of course, the Episcopal Church, whose news service offered a full virtual editorial for the Leahy/Menendez initiative for same sex couples. Episcopal News Service specifically spotlighted a Washington, D.C. Episcopal priest who is married, under D.C. law, to a same-sex Filipino doctoral student struggling with his visa status. “If same-sex marriages were recognized federally this would be a nonissue,” the Filipino student opined. “Just like anybody else, [my partner] would be able to sponsor me.”

Episcopal News Service also highlighted a Chicago Episcopal priest with an immigrant same sex partner similarly on a student visa. “I believe we [gays and lesbians] will be sacrificed in the negotiations,” the priest complained about the likely outcome of any final immigration legislation. “How can the majority legislate the rights for a minority? It’s not fair. It’s not just. I love this country… but it’s discouraging.”

Naturally, the Episcopal Church has an official policy statement demanding “immigration equality” for same-sex partners, ratified at the denomination’s General Convention last year. That resolution denounced as an “outrageous injustice” the lack of recognition by federal immigration law for same-sex couples, when “similarly situated heterosexual immigrants are free to marry at any time.” Presciently, the Episcopalians even specifically endorsed the Uniting American Families Act, of which the Leahy/Menendez legislation is the latest incarnation. “By supporting this civil rights legislation, the Episcopal Church can add a Christian voice to those demanding that all citizens be treated equally under U.S. immigration laws,” the Episcopal resolution insisted.

Earlier this year, a United Methodist lobbyist spoke at a press conference for the same-sex partners immigration initiative. “Just as Jesus did not set any preconditions on identifying himself with, and loving, the sojourner, so too does he call all who claim to follow him to love and welcome the sojourner without moral preconditions,” said Bill Mefford of the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society. “To demand the right to prophetically challenge the nation to incorporate hospitality into our immigration policy, but then to work to exclude some people based on their sexual orientation, is to lose the moral basis for making that prophetic challenge.”

Apparently the Quakers and Unitarian Universalists have also joined with the Episcopal Church and the United Methodist lobby, along with the United Church of Christ, for federal recognition of same-sex partners in immigration law. Liberalized immigration legislation has virtually no chance of passage in this Congress and probably even less in the next Congress. So the Leahy/Menendez legislation is likely just a bit of flag waving for the moment. But “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” supporters have touted backing from religious groups, not just eccentric Episcopalians but also Catholic bishops and groups like the National Association of Evangelicals. The push for same-sex couples in federal immigration legislation will strain that ostensibly wide coalition.

About the Author

Mark Tooley is president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington, D.C. and author of Methodism and Politics in the Twentieth Century. You can follow him on Twitter @markdtooley.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (224) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Brian Mc| 10.18.10 @ 6:32AM

...sorta like letting termites have a little wood and then, wondering why the house comes tumbling down...

Allen| 10.18.10 @ 1:13PM

At its core, the pro-homosexuality movement is an attack on the authority of the Bible. The Bible's books were written across the span of about 15 centuries; and throughout that time span, God's Holy Spirit warned through the Bible's writers that He forbids homosexual/lesbian behavior. There is not even one positive Bible verse about it.

The attack against Biblical authority concerning this issue takes one or more approaches: The Bible is not the word of God but only the musings of men who misunderstood the issue or were blinded by bigotry; and/or same-sex acts in Bible times were different from today's (i.e., performed as part of pagan worship ceremonies, not between loving couples).

No matter what form the attack takes, its ultimate target is the authority of the Bible. And on the authority of the Bible hangs every question about sin, salvation and God.

"There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death." -- Proverbs 14:12.

Margie| 10.18.10 @ 1:43PM

Allen nailed it. The anti-God Left picks and chooses which parts of the Bible they want to believe, even rejecting the Apostle Paul!

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths." 2 Tim. 4:3 & 4.

Yet God never changes and will never change for anyone:

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever." Heb. 13:8.

t| 10.18.10 @ 6:26PM

Jesus, who are you people?!

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:39PM

They're people who confuse centuries-old tribal prejudices with God's will.

Blow Job| 10.18.10 @ 9:25PM

They're icky.

t| 10.19.10 @ 1:04PM

Yes Blow Job, they are icky, but their men are sexy & I want them on my team !

Richard Hodapp| 10.19.10 @ 12:38AM

This country was founded on freedom of religion which, includes freedom from religion. Your families immigrated here probably fleeing from radicals like you. If your religion is not strong enough to stand alone by a persons choice, making laws to abide by your bible is not the answer. You want laws to do your job for you which is to teach the ways of Christ. God gave us the freedom of choice. Our own will. He did not give us the choice of who we are, who we shall love. You are UN-AMERICAN. unpatriotic as is a majority of the right winged movement in this country. Separation of church and state!!!!! now and always. Don't like it move to Afganistan.

FTM| 10.19.10 @ 5:23AM

I'll concede your point, that people shouldn't be able to use the law to inflict their religious position on the non-religious. However, by the same point how is it that you can use the law to inflict your non-religious position on the religious? I pay to finance the acquisition and maintenance of public property same as you but when I want to call a Christmas Tree a Christmas Tree or God Forbid erect a nativity on the court house lawn the ACLU (American Communist Lawyers Union) goes into Spasms.

Just wondering.

FAEN| 10.23.10 @ 11:27AM

but when I want to call a Christmas Tree a Christmas Tree or God Forbid erect a nativity on the court house lawn
-------------------------------
Simple. The court house lawn is public property ergo no religion. And of any kind mind you, not just Christianity.

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 12:08PM

"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."

~Thomas Jefferson

Study up, friend. There's no "separation of church & state" in the Constitution.

And we Christians don't want new laws promoting perverted Marriage between "Gays," or special favors for illegals, "Gay" or not.
We think laws ought to be followed, period.
Don't like it? Too bad.
And FYI~ we don't need anymore new laws. We'd like to keep things as they are.
But as usual, you are projecting.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 1:50PM

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1802, to the Danbury Baptist Assn.

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 2:23PM

Nope. No "separation of church & state" in the Constitution, troll, and you know it.
How very disingenuous of you.
But then, that's why you're a Leftist lawyer.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 2:28PM

I'll take Tom Jefferson's assessment of the First Amendment over yours any day, Margie.

Your name calling is more befitting of a junior high student than an adult.

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 4:32PM

Well you are trolling and posting and adding to the words of the Constitution falsely. There is no separation of church & state in there, and you know it.

Where is that in the Constitution? What clause? It's a Liberal implied clause.
Now it would befit you to act like an adult and stop making things up.

And I am in agreement with it. as it is written.
That's what Left Wing Trolls do, lie. And that's what you are doing.
Have a nice day.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 10:06PM

I am having a nice day, thank you. I hope you are as well.

The Constitution is a set a governing principles, not a book of specific statutes. The application of those principles to specific issues is left to our courts on a case-by-case basis, and a body of jurisprudence develops over time.

Because they are general governing principles, they leave much unsaid. For example, the Fourth Amendment says that the People have "the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.". It's not a discussion of specific issues, and the courts have to figure out how this principle applies to, for example, listening in on phone conversations.

The same is true of the First Amenment, whose religion clauses prohibit government from "making any laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The "wall of separation" Jefferson refers to is simply shorthand for what the courts have come to call the "excessive entanglement" doctrine, in applying the two governing religion clauses to the cases before them.

I'm sorry you don't like the term, but it's well- grounded in decades of constitutional jurisprudence. I didn't make up the term.

Margie| 10.20.10 @ 1:28AM

You're simply gloating over the fact that the courts with their Liberal Leftist judges have perverted the First Amendment to suit their anti-God leanings. (And no doubt with your help).
You know it. I know it. God knows it.
There is no separation of church and state written in the Constitution.
That remains the truth.
I know it. You know it. God knows it.
Good luck with defending a lie on Judgement Day.

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:48AM

Liberal Leftist judges have perverted the First Amendment to suit their anti-God leanings.
--------------------------------------------
Judge Tauro who ruled DOMA is unconstitutional is a Republican appointed by Nixon.

Judge Walker who ruled prop. 8 as unconstitutional is also a Republican, nominated by Reagan and appointed by GHW Bush. His appointment was held up ironically by the Dems because they felt Walker was too liberal!

Who exactly are the 'Liberal Leftist judges' you speak of?

Margie| 10.21.10 @ 1:53AM

Your stupid point is to who appointed them. Mine is to the fact that Leftist Judges have perverted the written meanings of the Constitution.

And I am speaking generally as well. And it matters not a whit who appointed them. They have their own warped minds and aren't clones of them that appointed them.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:00PM

With one breath you speak of the Constitution and with another you speak of god and religion. There is separation of church and state in this country.

And as to my 'stupid point is to who appointed them'......Reagan, Nixon and Bush are all Republicans. They nominated and appointed conservative judges such as Tauro and Walker who are both Republicans. So again, who are these liberal judges you speak of? And what does it say about your position if even Republican judges are ruling that preventing GLBT tax paying American citizens from marrying is unconstitutional?

FAEN| 10.25.10 @ 11:17AM

OMG, youre Christine O'Donnell!
And you make me laugh. Thanks!

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:43AM

You are mistaken for it is the Christian right wing that pick and choose. They hate homosexuality because it's in the bible yet ignore lots of other issues.

As for the attack on the authority on the bible...were a country run by laws, not theocracy. No one is attacking anything.

seth Chodosh| 10.18.10 @ 3:02PM

BUT....

The Bible is NOT a legal primary source for LAW in this Country...(thank Gawd....!!)

If it was... wouldn't there be an awful lot of stoning to deaths, in the public square.....for MANY Biblical "offenses"...??

ShortNSweet| 10.18.10 @ 5:32PM

The Bible is NOT a legal primary source for LAW in this Country...
No = but it should be.
If every time some body walked in to your local bank and pointed a gun at the teller and said give me all your money - someone cut their hand off, and their tongue out...maybe it wouldn't happen Quiiiite so often!
Wrong's wrong!!! Just saying.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:41PM

Therecare plenty of places you can go to if that's the kind of society you want to live in - Saudi Arabia, for example.

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 6:47PM

All law is the enactment of someone's morality. The left's immorality has been ascendant far too long and the social pathologies we see in this country is the chaotic result.

While the country did not enshrine any particular denomination (religion in the founder's parlance) the principles that had guided the founders are found in the pages of the Bible. The founders themselves overwhelmingly admitted that.

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:49AM

If you feel living under that kind of religious law is the way you want to live your life, I suggest moving to Iran or maybe even Saudi Arabia.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:01PM

You would feel very much at home in Saudi Arabia.

Jasperbob| 10.18.10 @ 3:47PM

Belief in the Bible as "God's word" comes BEFORE actually reading the book. Reading the book generally produces confusion as a souce of "God's word" since there are several types or personalities God appears to take on---creator, damner, destroyer, enslaver, killer of innocents,miracle worker, demander of the impossible, and down right nasty guy. Allen, wake up before its too late!

KyMouse| 10.19.10 @ 3:22PM

Jasperbob, you will have ample opportunity to call God all of those names on Judgment Day.

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:50AM

Were going to be attacked by a cyborg from the future?

Jones-Munoz| 10.18.10 @ 10:57PM

As a person of faith, it is not our position or responsibility to introduce issues that are based on the Bible. Many Americans do not believe or have the same faith as I, nor should their liberties be subject to my faith. It is unacceptable to do so. The sooner we realize that the better we all will be. Secular issues are secular as is the immigration issue, let's leave it that way.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:03PM

Thank you for your comment. I wish there were more people of faith like you.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:41PM

An attack on the bible? I don't think so.
Were not governed by any religion but by laws. All GLBT Americans want is to be treated equally under the law.

ICanSeeClearlyNow| 10.18.10 @ 3:35PM

We should all pause for a moment and consider the embarrassing intolerance of the God of Jews and Christians. While Christians are determined to profess their infinite inferiority to God, it’s quite obvious that the reverse is actually true: the average "sinner" who has posted on this blog today is much more tolerant than the God of the Bible.
After all, the God of the Bible was obviously racist (he preferred Jews to non-Jews), intolerant (he preferred Christians to non-Christians), and sexist (he said fathers could sell their daughters as sex slaves, with the option — but not the obligation! — to buy them back if they weren’t "pleasing" to their new masters).

The God of the Bible was homophobic, as are his most fervent followers, to this day. If Yahweh showed up here on earth, we’d have to cart him off to the jail house in order to protect our minorities, women and children. He was one angry, violent dude.

And if God is good, as all of you will claim, why does the Bible command infanticide, matricide and genocide (the "slaying of everything that breathes")?

I'll leave this question for AmSpec's deeeeeeeeeply religious fanatics to ponder for about two seconds.

I could go on and on and on about the Bible being hate literature, but why bother.

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 6:53PM

A Holy God that would detest people that sin without the slightest hint of being sorry for it? Heaven Forfend!

God made the rules, my young friend. He's God whether you acquiesce to that fact or not. He hates all sin, but he is gracious to the repentant. And that includes those queers that repent and leave the lifestyle behind.

A way past his wrath has been provided by God himself. You refuse to accept because you like your sin. God will allow you to enjoy it for now, but then the time will come and will reap the whirlwind as he lets you have your way for eternity. It won't be fun existing apart from the only source of life. To call it an existence would be a pretty weak under the circumstances. That's why it's called hell.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:42PM

What does god or any religious text have to do with treating gay Americans equally under the law?

Alan Brooks| 10.19.10 @ 12:19AM

You Rightwing "Christians" want to pick on homosexuals because you can't pick on blacks any more.
You need a new scapegoat.

Hiroshi| 10.19.10 @ 8:42AM

Alan,

How right you are about the "Christians" on this blog picking on homosexuals because they can't pick on blacks anymore.

The gays are the new "niggers" for the right wing to bash about, and, boy, do they know how to bash.

AmSpec is the most hate-filled site I've ever visited, and this is my second week of browsing this malignant blog. And the funny thing is this: they claim to be Christians! Christians! Can you believe it! The nerve! They are anything but.

Christ would disown every one of them.

Blow Job| 10.19.10 @ 1:07PM

Hiroshi, are you one of those cute asian types ? If so give me a buzz at 867-5309.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:44PM

It's interesting to me because all of their arguments against equality are religious based which says to me they have no argument and are grasping at straws. They are still unable to explain why religion should have any say when it comes to law. Or why equality for gay Americans has anything to do with religion.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:04PM

You are quite correct....the new scapegoats are GLBT Americans and/or immigrants.

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

I amLiving a Moral Life Free From the Bible's Evil Guidance.

Much good is in the Bible, but so much of it is evil. E.V.I.L. ! So many of the scriptures teach ancient, barbaric, patriarchal tribal laws that have no relevance today.

That's why I have no use for it. My sense of ethics and morality are far superior to those found in the Bible.

The posters on here who are defending it never consider its dark side. It's a hateful book embraced by ignorant and immoral bullies who like to use it to support their own evil beliefs.

And the Bible bullies are here on this thread spewing the evil teachings of an evil book.

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

I amLiving a Moral Life Free From the Bible's Evil Guidance.

Much good is in the Bible, but so much of it is evil. E.V.I.L. ! So many of the scriptures teach ancient, barbaric, patriarchal tribal laws that have no relevance today.

That's why I have no use for it. My sense of ethics and morality are far superior to those found in the Bible.

The posters on here who are defending it never consider its dark side. It's a hateful book embraced by ignorant and immoral bullies who like to use it to support their own evil beliefs.

And the Bible bullies are here on this thread spewing the evil teachings of an evil book.

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

I amLiving a Moral Life Free From the Bible's Evil Guidance.

Much good is in the Bible, but so much of it is evil. E.V.I.L. ! So many of the scriptures teach ancient, barbaric, patriarchal tribal laws that have no relevance today.

That's why I have no use for it. My sense of ethics and morality are far superior to those found in the Bible.

The posters on here who are defending it never consider its dark side. It's a hateful book embraced by ignorant and immoral bullies who like to use it to support their own evil beliefs.

And the Bible bullies are here on this thread spewing the evil teachings of an evil book.

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

I amLiving a Moral Life Free From the Bible's Evil Guidance.

Much good is in the Bible, but so much of it is evil. E.V.I.L. ! So many of the scriptures teach ancient, barbaric, patriarchal tribal laws that have no relevance today.

That's why I have no use for it. My sense of ethics and morality are far superior to those found in the Bible.

The posters on here who are defending it never consider its dark side. It's a hateful book embraced by ignorant and immoral bullies who like to use it to support their own evil beliefs.

And the Bible bullies are here on this thread spewing the evil teachings of an evil book.

R. Hierra | 10.18.10 @ 7:17AM

Federal recognition of same-sex partners in immigration law?

I am all for it!

As usual, AmSpec is hyperventilating about nothing of any importance. Much ado about nothing (except AmSpec's own rot-gut bigotry)!

Get over it! Get over it! Get over it!

You're beginning to sound like a one-note song.

Now . . . back to more important matters--the economy, for example.

Dave M. (in S. Korea)| 10.18.10 @ 7:23AM

What a fantastic tactic! Calling your adversary a bigot to avoid substantive debate. How did you ever think of such a thing? Did you hear the one about the "tea baggers?"

Dave M. (now in S. Korea)| 10.18.10 @ 7:19AM

"By supporting this civil rights legislation, the Episcopal Church can add a Christian voice to those demanding that all citizens be treated equally under U.S. immigration laws . . . ." What Christian voice are the Episcopalians adding? Since they have long left the pail of Christianity it would seem they must borrow the voice of another.

Devoted Methodist| 10.18.10 @ 7:34AM

This civil rights legislation provides lesbian and gay individuals the same opportunity as different-sex, married couples to sponsor their partner.

The United States lags behind 19 countries that recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

Brevan from Denmark| 10.18.10 @ 7:38AM

I'm from Denmark and my partner from Texas ! we have been registered partners since 2000 in Denmark, my partner had to go back to US in 2005 for working and save up for his retirement ! I'm retired and get my pension from Denmark ! But to be together as much possible I have to travelling Denmark USA ! and I have big problems with the US custom ! they say I can't stay here more than 4-5 month a year, so my partner and I have to be apart 7-8 month every year ! My partner has 10 more years before he can retire ! so 10 more years with commute are unbearable ! My partner and I are not breaking any law, we just want to live in peace.

ConantheContrarian| 10.18.10 @ 9:23AM

Brevan, does your keyboard have a "period" (.)?!!!?

James| 10.18.10 @ 7:03PM

Idiot.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:48PM

I'm sorry you guys have to go through this kind of insanity. Believe it or not, you and your partner are lucky. I know lots of binationals who are stuck. Unable to move to the other partners country, unable to reside in the US and unable to find a third country that will take both of them. An extremely difficult, emotionally and financially draining position to be in. I wish you and your partner all the best.

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 8:36AM

Methodist, thanks for listing the 19 countries that already recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes.

You have made a strong point by including this salient fact.

Ike| 10.18.10 @ 1:18PM

That 19 foreign nations permit or do certain activities is a feeble argument, friend. It does what us lawyers call, "proving too much", like a prosecutor arguing that the Fourth Amendment makes the policemen's job too difficult. Right is not a matter of counting noses. Right is a matter of reason applied to principles.

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 3:33PM

And the leaves a few hundred countries that don't recognizethem. So What !!!! I don't want any of my tax dollars supporting this degenerate behavior.

Christian, not in name only| 10.18.10 @ 7:40AM

Why should gay people have to suffer and not be granted the same basic rights as their straight counterpart. I don't know how ANYONE can argue about this bill and say its not just. Immigration is one of the most basic human rights in the world if it concerns families.

Come on Christians, show a little love!

ConantheContrarian| 10.18.10 @ 9:26AM

Since when is immigration a basic human right? Where does it say that?

Don't fool yourselves| 10.18.10 @ 12:44PM

"Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality ... shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

"And such were some of you; but you are washed, you are sanctified, and you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians6:9,11)

Homosexual sin, like every other sin, must be repented of and resisted in our hearts, minds and souls with the help of the Holy Spirit. However, other sins, such as stealing and lying, don't have parades in their honor.

Don't be fooled -- sin is still sin.

Patrick| 10.18.10 @ 1:36PM

"There are two ways, one of life and one of death; but a great difference between the two ways."

Is it not by the love of the Father that begets His Son? Is it not the love of the Father for His Son (and vice versa to the filioque crowd) that the Spirit procedes from? Is it not in love that God breathes everlasting life into mankind? Is it not by love that Christ condescended to earth, that He may suffer and die, that we may live? Love brings life, and selfishness death.

Life comes with suffering, and that which is convenient may seem good and loving, but it often is a sweet tasting poison. Christians are mocked, for they cry out, "don't drink the poison, even if it is sweet."

Homosexual partnering, as with any form of sodomy, is closed to life. There are no if's or but's about it, homosexual unions, as with other forms of sodomy, bear no fruit. They are vain struggles for fleeting pleasures and passing release. There is no life within this act.

It certainly would be convenient to grant the benefits of marriage upon homosexuals. It would be easier to simply let be whatever people want. However, that which is easy is not necessarily that which is right. Monogamous marriage is recognized by the state for that which it produces - another generation of citizens.

Don't drink the poison, even if it is sweet.

Mr. Heavy Tech| 10.18.10 @ 7:44AM

So, you're arguing that the bill should not be put into the Comprehensive legislation that helps EVERYONE avoid injustice?
Oh, I get it, it isn't CHRISTIAN to help gays. Yeah, I forgot that part.

Juno| 10.18.10 @ 7:57AM

Same-Sex Partners.
Same-Sex Couples.

We're here! we're sincere! We will not disappear!

And we will demand, demand, demand until we have equal rights. We will NOT accept second-class citizenship any longer.

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 3:38PM

You already have equal rights !!! What you want are exclusive rights.

Christopher| 10.18.10 @ 6:53PM

Exclusive Rights? If I want to sponsor my partner who is the same sex, I can't. If I wanted to sponsor one who is of opposite sex, I can. You might need to right and study this issue first before commenting about it.

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 7:01PM

What you want is the "right" to engage in something that historically has had approval only from seriously degraded societies. There is no "right" to marriage, including heterosexual, which is the only kind of marriage.

I don't like Lincoln, but one little saying that is attributed to him is apropos, "how legs does a dog have if you call a tail a leg? Four. Just because you call a tail a leg does not make it a leg." You can call queer "marriage" what you will, but unless you can get your boy friend pregnant, and both have only the normal male equipment, you have no case.

You are utterly without an argument, and squealing about rights and bigotry changes nothing. You're too much like the 4 year old screaming at the store because mommy won't buy him a lolly pop.

Christopher| 10.19.10 @ 2:53AM

@Quartermaster:

How can you define marriage? Because you don't believe in it doesn't make it wrong. You comment about it only being accepted by seriously degraded societies is rubbish. Please review history and then open your mouth. To base your argument on the past is really narrow-minded. If we actually listened to your logic, then we would be on a flat earth with the moon, sun, and the stars revolving around us. Procreation isn't the only reason for marriage. Marriage provides friendship,companionship, and love. If a marriage has to be consummated by pregnancy, then many straight couples wouldn't be considered married also.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:06PM

Straight Americans: 1138 Federal Rights

Gay Americans: 1 Federal Right

How is that equality?

Onward Christian Soldiers| 10.18.10 @ 8:12AM

When it comes to moral evolution, you American Spectator right-wingers are lagging way behind. You're still moral Neanderthals.

It's time for you to cut the hate-fueled crap about gays.

Gays are not going to be the "niggers" your right-wing ancestors loved to degrade and dominate. Oh, no! Gays will not be "niggers." You will not degrade us! Got it?

Time to move on. Move on, and move on now!

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 12:52PM

You have been sweating to use the "n" word haven't you lefty? The right wingers who post here don't use it.

mbatty| 10.18.10 @ 1:08PM

No, the right wingers who post here just think it. And the left-winger put it in quotes. Know what that does to the word, ncatty? It means the left winger is attributing the n word to others, not himself.

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 2:43PM

And to prove you are correct, why don't call an African-American a "n" (being sure to use quotation marks) and let me know the reaction. Take your race-baiting elsewhere.

James| 10.18.10 @ 7:06PM

Twat.

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 1:08PM

You go Onward christian soldiers, I'm for cocksucker rights also !

Look Everyone!| 10.18.10 @ 3:42PM

Madge --a vulgar and violent imposter for the real Madge, a delightful character who makes fun of some of the pretentious posters on here--wants to call our attention to her/his favorite word: cocksucker.
So let's take the bite out of this obscenity by chanting it out loud. Everybody ready?

COCKSUCKER

Now, do you feel better? Such an ugly word, but so many of you on here love to use it. Now take a deep breath, and now exhale.

Look Everyone !| 10.18.10 @ 5:06PM

OK OK I have a confession to make, Cocksucker is my favorite word too & everytime I say it it gets me in the mood.

t| 10.19.10 @ 8:46AM

And are you a Christian Cocksucker, Cocksucker?
You've been watching too much porno.
I've read that you right-wingers sure do get off on porno, and the more violent and degrading, the more you like it. Suck it, Cocksucker.

t| 10.19.10 @ 10:52AM

Not that I have anything against cocksucking porno, just trying to recruit you to my side. Come join this silly boy !

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.18.10 @ 8:19AM

Hey, I got an idea!

Let's just freeze ALL immigration for ten years, until we send every illegal home.

No discrimination at all then...Ta Dahhhhh!

Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 8:32AM

Old Texican,

As a farmer of over 400 acres, I could not gather my crops without the help of my Mexican workers, and some of them are illegal. Yes, I hire illegals and I pay them well. I pay all of my workers way above minimum wage, and I give them bonuses as well. And they are the hardest working men and women I have ever had work for me, and I have been farming for nearly 30 years.

I support giving the Mexicans legal status. I would have no work force without them. And I cannot stress strongly enough their commitment to work and to bettering themselves.

My workers are good people who are working hard to make something of their lives. And you know there are born and bred, lazy Americans sitting on their butts drawing government checks.

They would not do the hard work Mexicans do. And this is Gods truth.

You need to reconsider your thoughts about "illegal" immigrants.

Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 8:39AM

Old Texican,

One more thing: I would'nt care one bit if some of my workers were same-sex partners. Would'nt bother me one bit. "To each his own," is the way I look at the world.

gearjammer| 10.18.10 @ 10:06AM

I don't think you ever farmed so much as a single turnip.

Gay Hog Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 1:11PM

Thanks Farmer, my son's a cocksucker & I support him, who am I to judge the poor illegal cocksuckers ? Power to illegal cockers now !

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 4:22PM

It's because of jerkwads like you that I have to pay a monthly fee to Life Lock because some Mexican asshole stole my social security number. It was used by someone in AZ, working for a landscaping company. It has cost a lot of time and money to get control of my situation. Ever had the IRS chasing you for anything? let alone something you knew nothing about until they confiscate your tax returns. Or the following year when I received a letter stating I owe over $8k in unpaid taxes. So spare me your boohoo crap about immagrant rights and caring for the least of us. Each one of these ILLEGAL immagrants has to steal from someone else to seek their better life. How is it justified that I lose my standard of living so some other asshole can improve his?

Texas Mom 2012| 10.18.10 @ 10:05AM

You may think that it is OK to hire illegals but that is horse hockey! One of my brothers-in-law owns a landscaping service, it is a costly and time-consuming process but you can get them temporary work visas for seasonal work if they are only here for the work. You have to apply each year but you can have the same workers return repeatedly.

We have huge financial drain on Texas and our other border states caused directly by massive illegal immigrants who are not 'melting' into our cultures. Where you have second and third generation students still struggling with basic English proficiency you also have a poverty
problem.
I am tired of press 1 for English, dual language printing on all goods, etc.
All of this was caused by the last Amnesty package passed in 1986. Fool me once, never again!

Until the border is SEALED and all criminal illegal aliens deported there should be NO AMNESTY. It is not Christian to steal and that includes taking my tax dollars to give to others regardless of the fact that I may prefer to donate to other causes than what the politicians wish.

And I include in these criminals those who commit
identity theft, those who drive and cause accidents without having insurance, members of street gangs, drug smugglers and pushers, human smugglers, felons and those illegal immigrants who vote. Remove all of them and seal the border and I will be willing to discuss a 'path to citizenship'!
Otherwise, I learned my lesson in 1986, never again should we have blanket amnesty. I do not care about your 'partner' and your sexual orientation, I do care about this country.
Throwing sex into the mix is another de facto attempt to usurp the legislative process and the right of the Texas to defend the DOMA. Reading the posts from the rabid gay advocates, reminds me why we should not allow this small minority to dictate the definition of marriage. If they want partners, fine, get the legislation passed but forget calling it marriage.

Texas Mom 2012| 10.18.10 @ 10:10AM

By the way I do not care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home but I am tired of the strident in-your-face attitude of the pro gay marriage crew. The gay pride parades have sent back their cause for decades.
And I also don't like seeing straight people indulging in the same type of behavior...
Equal opportunity prude here. Keep your sex life to yourself or at least don't simulate it in public, please! And thank you...

Jim Hlavac | 10.18.10 @ 12:04PM

You got it backwards, Mom -- gay pride parades have pushed things forward -- for just four decades ago we were taken out of our bars, where we hid at society's request -- and beaten, arrested and imprisoned, fired and thrown out of our houses anyway -- and paid for the privilege of our own repression by our own tax dollars -- in your vain attempt to stomp gay folks off this earth. And the riots to stop the crude harassment and state sponsored hate and police state tactics, which ensued in June of 1969, is what the gay pride parades are all about. It's a celebration of freedom -- and Pride that we managed to come out pretty darn well despite straight hate for your fellow Americans who might be gay.

You don't see straight folks indulging in "the same type of behavior"? Oh come now -- the child killings, the wife beatings, the husband stabbing, the rape, the little girl molesting -- we don't even do that! -- Not to mention the obligatory soft core porn sex scene in every movie, TV show and soap opera, and you put scantily clad babes on the fronts of Cadillacs so you might sell another. You straight people have so sexualized the culture you don't even recognize it -- and then you abort the inconveniences; another thing we're not involved in -- And one stinking day a year we're allowed out for a bit of public displays of affection -- and this you think sets our cause back? You jest, no?

And still the churches hate us, with pathological malice against the children of their own congregation who might be born gay. Or do you think the slight flimsy wispy sissy boy is faking it for his whole life?

Keep your sex lives to yourself, eh? You people are wonton displayers of your sex lives, the likes of which no gay man ever dreamed of doing in public. You're blind, Mom.

Now go down to the Victoria's Secret in the Mall and look at the delicates on display and the ads for Club Med with their sexually poised couples, and then tell me you don't flaunt it and shove your sexuality in our faces. Egad, keep it to yourselves, will you please. That's the problem with screaming heteros: your hypocrisy of a fine sort.

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 12:35PM

There is no confederacy of gay people. We are as diverse as the population at large.

A large percentage of gays do not approve of gay pride parades because of the extreme examples that make up a tiny fragment of our population.

Richard| 10.23.10 @ 1:23PM

I am gay and 100% agree. This is the problem with Gay pride parades now. Leave your high heels and ear rings at home. We need to show that we are not all drag queens, that we are normal every day people. This small percent of the gay population has set the gay movement back years. Yes I am pissed off about it. We need a parade that shows we mean business, that we want respect and equal rights. Something like they did during the civil rights movement. All the pride parades do is - in our face, piss you off and never leads to any changes or good. We need a Gay Anger - we want it now parade. No costumes, no floats, just to show every day people that have rights and desire to live in equality.

FAEN| 10.25.10 @ 11:21AM

If you don't like gay pride parades then don't go to them. To say we should show people were not all dragqueens....I think most rational people know that. We should not be changing who we are so that conservatives and Tea Baggers hate us less because that would be the end result. They would not embrace us, just hate us less.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 5:51PM

but I am tired of the strident in-your-face attitude of the pro gay marriage crew
--------------------------------------
Unfortunately when it comes to equality for GLBT Americans, nothing gets done unless there is a strident in your face attitude and even then it takes forever. Just look at the DADT repeal. The majority of the country is behind it. It makes no sense to throw qualified people out of the military and yet it took a LOT of strident in your face protesting JUST to get a hearing and we see what happened there. The GOP, cowards that they are on this issue, fillibustered.

I'm sorry you feel our push for equality is tiring but think of how we feel. My community and I live without basic civil protections straight Americans take for granted every day.

We will continue, with the help of our straight allies, pushing until GLBT's are treated equally under the law....just as straight Americans are.

Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 10:37AM

Texas Mom 2012,

There is truth in what you say. Among the Mexican immigrants, unfortunately, are the criminal element.

But I am speaking of those who work for me, the ones I see on a daily basis. They are good people, good families, and I have yet to have any trouble with any of them--not even the teenagers. But the teenagers are with their parents. This makes all the difference.

When young single Mexican men come into this country on their own, they tend to be wild and unlawful.

It's a complex subject, and I am being too simplistic.

Purple Lips| 10.18.10 @ 10:57AM

You're the first farmer to spend 8 hours a day at an internet cafe in San Francisco. I seriously doubt you can even grow witchgrass.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 5:52PM

Among the Mexican immigrants, unfortunately, are the criminal element
------------------------------------
Can you please back that up with stats and a link?

Sheila| 10.18.10 @ 12:06PM

Personal experience does not good national policy make - i.e. "but my maid is such a good person" is not justification for the Mexicanization of what used to be European America. Demography equals destiny, diversity equals war, and tribalism + democracy + stupidity = racist idiocracy. Have you ever heard of the "commonweal," Farmer? Decline and fall.

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 12:58PM

Just for argument's sake we could view the migration from Central and South America into North America as the repopulation by native americans of the continent. You know, before the "Europeanization" took place.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 11:54PM

"the Mexicanization of what used to be European America". LOL!

California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico - the Southwest certainly was never "European" in culture.

Gay Hog Farmer| 10.19.10 @ 10:55AM

Yeah they won't let raise my hogs out there.

Stammon| 10.18.10 @ 12:19PM

I am also a farmer. When I did tobacco I would hire about 15 Mexicans to cut, strip, house and bail. They were cheap and worked hard. They were very grateful for the good food, and the $20 bonus I would hand them at the end of a good day. It was impossible to find enough locals to work my tobacco, a few of us would be always busy helping other farmers as they would come over and help us.
I still want the laws of my country respected and enforced. If they are illegal they do not belong here.
Period.

MikeBee| 10.18.10 @ 1:01PM

Farmer,
Are you withholding Social Security and Medicare taxes from your illegal Mexican workers, and also remitting the employer match for both Social Security and Medicare? Do you provide them with health insurance? If not, you are part of the problem which this country, and, in particular, border states, is encountering.

Most folks don't mind Mexicans working here, and acknowledge that they are hard workers. What most folks object to are 1) Mexican gangs, and 2) the use of Social Security and Medicare to pay for their healthcare, when they don't even pay into the funds.

mames| 10.18.10 @ 5:28PM

You are breaking the law by hiring illegals. If the law were enforced you would soon see that american workers could be hired at market rates. Our prices may increase but the gain from the kind of dollars lost on illegals would be worth it. But its seems it is alright if it works for you, you self absorbed idiot.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:33AM

Yeah that will work.....not.

Too Cool to be AmSpec Fool| 10.18.10 @ 8:19AM

"Inclusive" is a word AmSpec readers detest. Nothing inclusive about them. You're wasting your breath talking to them. There is a huge grab bag of people and ideas the right-wing Specs loathe, and gays are just part of the jumble.

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 1:16PM

Why these AmSpec people can't get the fact that cocksucking is as old as time, proves they are backwoods hicks ! Cocksuckers of the world unite !

Louis Jenkins| 10.18.10 @ 8:46AM

Wow, for the first time the posters on this thread are almost all gay positive. They even used the "N" word which is never used here. So why stop with gays, how about the Mormons, the Muslims, and others? They have rights too you know! Call me old fashion, but I believe the scriptures speak negatively about Gay rights, so drop the Christian stuff already. It "ain't in there." Or did God Burn Sodom and Gomorha for the fun of it?

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 8:55AM

PROGRESSIVE Christians. I think you would label these posters Progressive.

They are NOT fundamentalists. Only fundamentalists believe the brutal and savage verses from the mostly defunct Old Testament.

Time for you, Louis Jenkins, to read some modern, progressive Christian theologians. May I suggest you begin with J.S. Spong. He'll open your reptilian eyes.

Louis Jenkins| 10.18.10 @ 9:57AM

Mostly defunct Old Testament? Modern Christian theologians? Reptilian Eyes? That might be the closest comment you have made, but I can still see pretty well. However, you have either a blief in the scripture or you don't. To add or take away will get you no where. Obviously, you, 34spg, Mr. or Mrs, or whatever, do not. The "mostly defunct Old Testament" comment is beyond the call.

Ryan| 10.18.10 @ 10:17AM

Where is homosexuality condoned in the New Testament?

Gay Hog Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 1:18PM

I did'nt know Spong was a cocksucker too. Cool

Jim Hlavac | 10.18.10 @ 12:25PM

The Scriptures speak not a whit of gay rights -- nor of gay people. But there's a lot of negativity about adultery, divorce, coveting thy neighbors wife and maidservant, and not killing babies, which you all ignore such Scripture about. All of which you all do with wanton abandon. Sinners all, you be, with great disregard for the commandants of God, not one of which mentions gay folks -- other than "walk a mile in another man's shoes before you condemn him."

And God burned Sodom and Gomorroh for rape of the Angels, not a loving relationship between consenting adults who were born gay.

And the Scriptures speak highly of Jonathan and David, who went out to the desert, and Jonathan did ungird himself, and threw down his sword, and went unto the tent, and was with David three days and three nights. Jonathan loved David more than he loved his own wife whom he was forced to marry by his father Saul. And David didn't bother to tell Beersheba he was leaving town with Jonathan on his arm. It's all there in First Samuel -- the greatest gay love story ever told. Or did you think they were playing pinochle?

Read you Bible -- treat others as you would be treated; love thy neighbor as yourself -- I don't see gay folks excluded from the Commands of Jesus, do you? Ironically, often quoted is the King James version. The same King James of whom it was quipped "we have had King Elizabeth and now we shall have Queen James." Whose father was the fabulously well known gay guy Lord Darnley, and the very gay King who kept Robert Chamberlain around as his bed mate for years -- all while working up a new Bible in English.

And God is rather clear that thou shall not eat pork or shellfish, and not mix cloths, so the next time your eating your pork chops stuffed with shrimp in your cotton-wool blend come talk to me about your selective beliefs in the Bible.

You straight folks have abandoned nearly all the Bible, and found nothing about us gay folks in it, so you all just make it up apparently, for you are fearful of something -- perhaps our 5% of the population is so powerful we'll make you gay -- that seems to be the gist of it.

How hypocritical is a Defense of Marriage Act that bans marriage by any name or word or slightest recognition and yet keeps divorce among you perfectly legal. I do believe you'll find in Scripture what Jesus said: Hypocrisy is the worse sin. Amen.

Bernard| 10.18.10 @ 12:40PM

You tell it, Jim! Let 'em have it.

Excellent points!

Ouch!| 10.18.10 @ 1:11PM

Ouch!

Jim you're giving the homophobes whiplash. You're speaking the truth, man, and the truth hurts.

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 1:20PM

You go Girl !

Ouch!| 10.18.10 @ 4:16PM

I'll go all right. I'll go far in life.

Much further than you, loser.

We gays are determined to succeed, to thrust ourselves into leadership roles. Yes, we are ambitious and unafraid. Gay to the future! Gay every day!

Look out! We're coming like an oncoming freight train. You better get out of the way, loser, or Ouch! And I mean Ouch!

Okay, Madge (the imposter), time to call me a cocksucker. What a pathetically limited vocabulary you have.

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 4:49PM

OK, you go cocksucker! & hey for the record I'm the real Madge, cross dressing, cock loving, freight train taking about take over everything . So all of you Am sec readers beware, I'm coming with my pantys in a wad ! The other Madge is the imposter !

Ouch !| 10.19.10 @ 1:12PM

Did you like the way I used "thrust" get it "thrust", ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...........

Allen| 10.19.10 @ 11:07AM

Jim, I'll take a moment to address one or two of your points, because time doesn't permit me to address all of them.

"And God is rather clear that thou shall not eat pork or shellfish, and not mix cloths, so the next time your eating your pork chops stuffed with shrimp in your cotton-wool blend come talk to me about your selective beliefs in the Bible."

When discussing biblical laws, it's important to remember that they can be divided into three basic groups: ritual laws (for Jews living during the Temple eras); civil laws, for Jews and/or gentiles in ancient Israel; and moral laws, which are for all people at all times. Laws concerning sexual sins are in the "moral" category.

In addition, one should remember that Scripture is the best interpreter of itself -- in other words, find out what other (and later) Bible verses say about the law in question.

Concerning "unclean" foods, therefore, we should note that the Holy Spirit says through Paul in Colossians 2:16, "Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat or in drink..." And remember Peter's vision from God (Acts 11:5-10), in which he was instructed to eat animals that were previously considered unclean (..."what God has cleansed, don't call unholy").

As for your comment that the Bible has "nothing about us gay folks in it," please read Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; and Romans 1:24-27 (among other verses). There are no Bible verses that supersede or cancel God's warning on this topic.

It's important to note, however, that God also forbids every other sexual sin as well. There are plenty of people who consider themselves Christians who are in sexual relationships that the Bible calls "fornication," and God's warning is just as stern to them.

I'll also add that, although homosexual/lesbian relationships are still forbidden, the teaching of the New Testament is not that the parties concerned should be executed. That kind of ritual law was superseded by Jesus. His teachings are clear that God requires repentance, turning away from our sins, and accepting His gift of payment for our sins. His famous command to "Go and sin no more" (John 8:11) doesn't mean "It's okay to keep doing what you're doing." It means, "Don't do it again."

KyMouse| 10.19.10 @ 1:47PM

Jim writes, "Sinners all, you be, with great disregard for the commandants of God, not one of which mentions gay folks -- other than 'walk a mile in another man's shoes before you condemn him.'"

Are you saying that's a Bible verse? Sounds like an old English proverb. What's the Bible verse reference for it?

Jim writes, "But there's a lot of negativity about adultery, divorce, coveting thy neighbors wife and maidservant, and not killing babies, which you all ignore such Scripture about."

Jim, we're all sinners. You are, I am. But I'm ashamed of my sins; I don't go around proclaiming that they aren't sins, and organize a parade about them. When was the last time you saw an Adulterers' Pride parade? Or one celebrating stealing or lying?

KyMouse| 10.19.10 @ 4:51PM

Jim says, "And the Scriptures speak highly of Jonathan and David, who went out to the desert, and Jonathan did ungird himself, and threw down his sword, and went unto the tent, and was with David three days and three nights. Jonathan loved David more than he loved his own wife whom he was forced to marry by his father Saul. And David didn't bother to tell Beersheba he was leaving town with Jonathan on his arm. It's all there in First Samuel -- the greatest gay love story ever told. Or did you think they were playing pinochle?"

You are reading into the text something is not there, and the burden of proof is on you. If David and Jonathan were homosexual lovers, the Bible would spell it out, because it pulls no punches about David's sins. His immoral pursuit of Bathsheba is a case in point: You can read about it in I Samuel 11, which ends (in verse 27) with, "the thing that David had done displeased the Lord."

If David and Jonathan were having a sexual relationship, the Bible would have added a verse 27 for them as well. But it doesn't.

It is common in many countries for men to kiss each other one or both cheeks as a greeting. Would you assume that they are homosexual?

Denver Todd| 10.18.10 @ 8:54AM

If you were to find a song that represents the combined doctrine of these liberal churches, as well as their stance on immigration for same sex couples, it would be "Love is All You Need."

Liberal Christian| 10.18.10 @ 9:13AM

"Liberal churches" reflect Christ's teachings far more than fundamentalist churches. I, personally, think Christ would denounce the fundamentalist mind.

Christ cares about how we treat each other. I don't think he could care less about whether we believe he "arose from the dead."

Christianity is about servanthood, not control. And it is sustained in relationships in the community of men and women. I believe that what gives us life is the loving relationships that come to us, sustain us and call us beyond our prejudices and limitations into being giving, loving people. Give your life away. Give your love away. That's where wholeness -- and holiness -- comes from.

Show a little love to all--especially those who are persecuted--gays, for example.

Harriet Tyre| 10.18.10 @ 9:14AM

Amen and Amen.

KyMouse| 10.18.10 @ 10:03AM

L.C. says, "Christ cares about how we treat each other. I don't think he could care less about whether we believe he "arose from the dead."

Why not actually read the Bible and see what Jesus says? Matthew 17:22-23, for example: "And while they stayed in Galilee, Jesus said to them, 'The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: And they shall kill Him, and the third day He shall be raised again."

You'll find that reiterated in Mark 8:31 and Luke 9:22. Clearly, Jesus wanted His followers to understand and believe in His resurrection.

Read I Corinthians 15, in which Paul explains the necessity of Jesus' resurrection. Especially note verse 17: "And if Christ has not been raised from the dead, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins."

As for Jesus' caring only about how we treat each other, please read the third chapter of John's Gospel, in which Jesus clearly spells out (verse 18) that "he who believes in Him is not condemned, but he who doesn't believe in Him is already condemned..."

L.C., remember the biblical warning about making up one's own version of Christianity: "Anyone who preaches a gospel to you other than that which we have preached is under God's curse" (Galatians 1:8).

Texas Mom 2012| 10.18.10 @ 10:17AM

Liberal prigs are not all about servanthood. What a crock! They are about forcing you to be a servant to the state which is really enslavement.

Servanthood in the bible is about choosing to serve others because of your personal love and belief in Jesus. Progs believe you should be forced to serve because they know what is best for the collective. This is not Christianity... Progs believe you should give unto them not that which is Ceasars but also that which is God's.

Margie| 10.18.10 @ 1:59PM

Progressives make themselves their own God. They pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe and then create their own gospel. How convenient this life is for them!
Yet they are slaves and wish to enslave others, all in the name of their false God, Socialism:

"They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved." 2 Pe. 2:19.

FAEN| 10.24.10 @ 12:04PM

Progressives make themselves their own God. They pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe
------------------------------
Progressives believe that religion and faith is a personal matter ergo it has no place in the rule of law. It is the religious community that picks and chooses. And have done so for decades.

CH| 10.24.10 @ 2:10PM

Dear Margie,
You are so wise and all knowing. I love and respect your knowledge of the bible. I am so amazed that you follow every word of the Holy Bible. Can you please give me some advise. I found a letter on the internet written to Dr Laura that ask all of the questions I would like you to answer. I was unable to find and adequate reply.
This is not my letter but a fellow christian seeking guidance. Please define the following for us.
note Delete Laura and insert Margie.

Dear Dr. Laura

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend
the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can
you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don.t agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn.t we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident
you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is
eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,
Jack

PS answer quickly - Its Sunday and my neighbor went to work this morning. Should I start to gather stones?

FAEN| 10.25.10 @ 11:23AM

Well said!

gearjammer| 10.18.10 @ 10:21AM

Gays are glorified in America. They are always portrayed as special people so wise and wonderful and creative etc, etc, and those of us who have lived a few years and know our share of them understand that these portrayals are just another load of liberal, not my mainstream media crap. The Catholic Church is on the one hand for illegals being granted citizenship-but only if they are prolific breeders and this is hand in hand with the dems plans to flood the country with young Marxist oriented latino voters-on the other hand they have their opposition to homosexuality. If gays want Catholic support they must attend mass, give money and find some way to multiply the flock. They want at least one billion little commie air heads occupying our borders by 2050. Fortress America is our only hope. Ya want shovel ready jobs I got em-digging holes for the fence posts on our borders-yes borders-these Canadians are the worst.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 11:58PM

Is there anyone you don't hate?

Purple Lips| 10.18.10 @ 11:02AM

"Christ cares about how we treat each other. I don't think he could care less about whether we believe he "arose from the dead.""

Christ did not suffer the Cross in order for you to worship yourself, your gay lovers, and your "community". He did not suffer 3 hours of utter torment in order for you to spread heresey. And yes, I think he very much is interested in peoples faith -especially the heretics.

Melvin| 10.18.10 @ 9:18AM

I must admit attaching homosexuality to the Civil Rights Movement is tactical brilliance. Co-joining homosexuality with with Black Americans is Kryptonite to White Christians.
But let me tell you. I used to be rabidly anti-homosexual, I used to feel that I would fight to the death any queer that would put the moves on me. Well, maybe not to the death because there is some pretty damn tough homos out there (humor people). But then my personal views changed.
The change in me wasn't mandated by some law handed down from a bureaucrat. It wasn't from being forced by the radical in your face homosexuals, and no it wasn't from a personal encounter.
My change came from the simplest of acts. One was joining the Marine Corps. When I first joined I was a little older than most, and joined out of patriotism as a defender of freedom. The defending freedom part was and still is a huge part of my life. This personalized oath of defending freedom was not just regulated to protecting White Christians, but to defend all people period. I didn't break it down along any ethnic lines or gender lines, just all people, even the people I totality disagree with.
The second act was getting married. My wife, bless her heart, taught me patience, humility, and understanding.
She had a cousin who is an attorney and is gay, and for the longest time I didn't even know it. We interacted at family functions and one day for some reason, my wife asked me, "Did you know my cousin is gay?" I guessed she was expecting me to go on a rant and rage against homosexuals, and the only comment I made was, "hmm really."
It didn't change my personal feelings or attitude towards him. To me, he was just another human being trying to make a live in this crazy mixed up world.
He and I eventually broke the barrier and talked about his homosexuality, and he told me, "Your reaction is something that I wouldn't have expected in a million years from you." "Ahh, your stereotyping me again." He kinda laughed, "Yes, I suppose I was."
"Sinnin, it wasn't your homosexuality that changed me, it wasn't your cousin, it was me, who changed me."
Many of the above posts have a radical streak in them, but radicalizing homosexuality or even equating it to the Civil Rights Movement for Black Americans is not going to change peoples minds to the mass degree that is wanted.
Going up to a devout Christian with a box of matches and a can of lighter fluid isn't going to change their minds one bit.
Do I have the magic answer, "No." Because the change came from me from within. I decided because I had the freedom to decide. It wasn't coerced or forced.
Onward Christian Soldiers, this isn't going to change peoples minds one bit. You need to look at yourself in the mirror and see who the real one that is spewing anger. I make a sure bet you won't like what you see, because it totally goes against the outcome that you want.
I lived through the strife of the Civil Rights movement. You have absolutely no idea, what people went through, no idea at all.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:58PM

Terrific post from an obviously thoughtful guy. Thanks for sharing and thanks for your service to our country.

Gay Hog Farmer| 10.19.10 @ 11:00AM

Thanks Mel, it's people like you that gave me the courage to come out of the hog pen at my Future Farmers of America meeting, but they still did'nt except me, so I showed them & started Furture Gay Farmers of America, & Mel, I just made you an honorary member. Give me your phone # honey so I can feel you... in on the details.

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:10PM

If I were a farmer, I would absolutely join!

Vaemar| 10.18.10 @ 9:58AM

"Just as Jesus did not set any preconditions on identifying himself with, and loving, the sojourner, so too does he call all who claim to follow him to love and welcome the sojourner without moral preconditions," said Bill Mefford of the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society. "

I'm having a little trouble reconciling this with the words: "Go, and sin no more!"

Harriet Tyre| 10.18.10 @ 10:00AM

And you, Melvin, have no idea what suffering gay people have been through. Even blacks, who have endured generations of bigotry, are known for their homophobia.

As contemporary current events show, gay children are bullied more than others, and the bullying has resulted in the suicide of many gay children and teenagers.

I applaud gays who are speaking out and speaking out loud and clear about their inferior position in society. They are telling the world they will not accept their inforior status any longer. They are standing tall and strong. Media gays, such as the handsome Anderson Cooper, are speaking out as well.

But I suspect gays are hated for the same reason most Jews (and I am one) have been hated: Homosexuals, in general, tend to be more intelligent, more talented, more creative than the average heterosexual. The same has been said and can be said in general about Jews.

Gays have contributed enormously to world knowledge and culture. I applaud them and their hard-won achievements!

More power to you!

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 10:05AM

Harriet, you're wasting your breath. Your words will have no effect on AmSpec readers. Posters will continue to spew their poison about gays, just as Jew-haters will continue their antisemitic rants.

And by the way, if you read this blog often, you will see a lot of bigotry, including religious bigotry.

Melvin| 10.18.10 @ 10:47AM

Bigotry from whom? Just because people won't roll over en-mass gives you the self proclaimed righteous right to call them bigots?
I have posted many years on the American Spectator and many of you who do so regularly know my views and personal views, but sure as the sun rises every morning, there are no religious or otherwise bigots who post here on a regular basis.
Further more by your blanket calling us and this blog site, "Bigots" is a bit narrow minded don't you think?
We here do disagree with each other from time to time in the free for all of freedom of speech, but never, never do we stoop to the depths that some in the homosexual movement or any other movement descend to.
For those leaders in the homosexual movement, I say to you, "Time to clean your ranks, their babbling nonsense again."

Beebop| 10.18.10 @ 11:45AM

Melvin, you say there are no bigots on here? Ever read Margie's post.? She frequently expresses her anti-Roman Catholic thoughts, and you know it.

Margie| 10.18.10 @ 2:12PM

It's a matter of doctrine.
If the doctrine of any Religion be unbiblical it is wrong.
Each person has to decide whether they are following Christ's gospel as it is written in the Bible or another.
Bigot is the name given to those who adhere to the Bible by those who reject it.

FAEN| 10.24.10 @ 12:02PM

What does the bible or any religious text for that matter have to do with the rule of law?

JP| 10.18.10 @ 11:07AM

The last time I looked gays have got it pretty good. Thye are in entertainment, law, politics, medecine; many are CEOS, priests, bishops, , run major political parties, universities, and foundations; some are high ranking military officers, and most enjoy a comfortable life style that is far beyond the middle class. And in civil and pop culture gays are elevated.

No, what you complain about are the "bitter clingers" who see sodomy as an abomination. So, please do not associate your repulsive life style with those who suffered true injustice.

Doyle R.| 10.18.10 @ 11:43AM

Yes, gays, as a group, tend to be very successful.

This is another reason why they are vilified. Same for the Jews.

Jews too have been more educated, more successful than the average person.

FAEN| 10.18.10 @ 11:52AM

Gay and lesbian Americans have 1138 LESS rights under the law than their straight counterparts. I would hardly classify that as 'gays have got it pretty good'.

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 4:35PM

BS, you have the same rights as I do. You want exclusive rights, not equal rights.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:36AM

Sorry youre either badly informed or just ignorant of the law in this country. Because of DOMA GLBT Americans are denied 1138 Federal rights that you as a straight person has. I do NOT have the same rights as you do. If I did, the UAFA bill wouldn't be neccessary...I would be able to sponsor my partner like every straight person can, and does every day.

FAEN| 10.18.10 @ 11:53AM

Thank you for your comment.

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.18.10 @ 10:15AM

Melvin,
well spoken. I was being facetious above to a degree.

Farmer,

I have no problem with your hardworking helpers being here. I worked for two different foreign based companies that sent foreigners here for extended periods to help with the work.

What concerns me is that there should be TWO routes for foreign workers. One: a fair and equitable "guest-worker program".

Perhaps if the foreign worker lives here...say ten years...and gets good verifiable references...and learns english: then fine. Encourage him/her to apply for citizenship...With a sincere pledge of allegiance to the US.
Our laws need to be modified....then enforced to the letter.

Farmer| 10.18.10 @ 10:40AM

Good point, Old Texican.

As I said above, it's a complex issue, and I'll have to give it a lot more thought.

I'd just hate to lose my workforce. I'm sure you can understand my stance.

Louis Jenkins| 10.18.10 @ 10:39AM

What is so sanctimonious about a Gay Pride parade when two men are humping each other on a float? And tying it to illegal immigration is a sham. The Progressives are trying another ploy to ram the legislation down the throats of unwilling Americans. Call it Episcopalians, Methodists, or whatever, cannot make it acceptable to me, or many of the "other" folks who post here. Call it bigotry if you will, but there's a difference between cutting edge religion, and plain religion. Get off of it! Now we're asked to play nice and remember that God loves all of us. I'm here to tell you God does not love everyone, and if it's too brusque for you then too bad. And stating that Christ's re-birth is of little importance, that's about as lame as I've ever heard.

FAEN| 10.18.10 @ 11:50AM

I'm here to tell you God does not love everyone
-----------------------------------
That's certainly your opinion but what does any of that have to do with the rule of law? And what does any of that have to do with treating gay and lesbian Americans equally under the law?

Jim Hlavac | 10.18.10 @ 12:31PM

Oh, Jenkins, you heteros hump publicly daily, hourly, by the minute, on every TV show, in every movie, on every magazine cover and when you pick each other up at the airport, and stroll down the mall on the way to Victoria's secret. Go rent a room already -- who wants to see your wanton displays of your sexuality?

Meanwhile, gay folks are allowed out once a year for a little of the same, and your offended that your fellow tax payers might do the same as you do. What a guy Jenkins, what a guy.

Louis Jenkins| 10.18.10 @ 2:55PM

Mr. Hlavac:

You do not know me, and while heteros may hump daily I do not, nor do I get a room already. Keep your nits out of it. Wanton displays of sexuality may be okay for you or others. Trolls abound on this website today.

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 10:43AM

They're trotting out the old "Gay Pride Parade."

Gay Pride Parades are lewd and stupid. The overwhelming majority of gay people would not be caught dead at them, and gay commentators have long condemned the lewdness of these events.

Yeah, there are bad elements that make gays look bad.

mleppla@ec.rr.com| 10.18.10 @ 11:19AM

What the heck to you expect people to think when in public view see behavior such as that?
To you it's a few that go above and beyond the shock and awe. But to a regular person on the street that you are trying to convince that homosexuals are not the boogie man and they see that behavior on a parade float, I'm sorry but first impressions mean everything.
Do regular people ever see the homosexual that is successful and working right next to them, not ever knowing that their coworker is gay. No, they go out in the street during a gay pride parade and see two queers dry humping each other dressed in leather and chains.
If your going to change peoples minds, your definitely not going to do it like that. Wouldn't you agree.

Harriet Tyre| 10.18.10 @ 11:40AM

See 34spg's post above yours.

DRed| 10.18.10 @ 3:37PM

Have you ever been to Mardi Gras?

FAEN| 10.18.10 @ 11:47AM

What do gay pride parades have to do with treating GLBT Americans equally?

NG| 10.18.10 @ 10:43AM

Some of you are promoting a false dichotomy. One can love people while excluding their relationship from government sanction. I'm sure there are all types of relationships where people love each other, but I prefer to promote two people of the opposite sex.

Are there any relationships you'd exclude from amnesty? Do you "hate" them?

Shove it to the Metal| 10.18.10 @ 11:50AM

"Kill a Queer for Christ!" Dats whut i sez.

uvula| 10.18.10 @ 11:52AM

My, aren't you clever!

FAEN| 10.18.10 @ 11:46AM

As an gay tax paying American in a bi-national relationship I wish to be treated equally under the law. Nothing more, nothing less. My partner and I have been together for 10 years. We are fast running out of options. We either find a third country that can take us or we have to break up. The very thought fills me with despair and deep sadness. This is just an example, but why should my straight counterpart be able to meet someone in a bar, get married and be able to sponsor that person for residency while after ten years together I can't sponsor my partner? That isn't right. There are thousands of gay tax paying Americans in the same position. Some are lucky since their partners country treats GLBT couples with equality ergo they are able to move to their partners country. Too many of us are not that fortunate. We struggle to stay together while this giant ticking clock gets louder and louder. The UAFA is NOT amnesty. It simply provides the same immigration benefits for gay couples that straight couples have had for years.

CommonSense| 10.18.10 @ 11:58AM

For Gods sake, people. Let's discuss something of substance. All this yelling and screaming and foot stomping over same-sex partners in immigration law.

Who in hell will it affect other than the same-sex partners? Damn, you act like this is the most important topic on earth.

Get a grip and lets talk about something that will affect all of us--jobs, foreclosures, devaluation of the dollar, and so on.

Naturalborn Texican| 10.18.10 @ 12:04PM

It is pretty sad how some people believe their sexuality defines them. Is that all a person is about??? No!!!!!
A person is so much more than their sexual "preference". The limitations those folks put on themselves is suffocating! I personally believe that man and woman were made for each other...period. And I don't like it when someone pushes their sexual "orientation" in my face. I prefer to be friends without having to tiptoe around these folks that wear their "choice" emblazened on their foreheads!!!

Such a waste.........

Hank| 10.18.10 @ 4:49PM

I object to the term "sexual orientation." Instead, I use "affectional orientation'" because this more adequately describes the feeling one man has for another man or one woman has for another woman.

It's not all about sex.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 10:46AM

My sexual orientation does not define me. It is a big chunk of who I am but that doesn't mean every single part of my life is ruled by my being gay. It isn't.

The limitations I have on my life is not being treated equally under the law. That's all.

Bojean| 10.18.10 @ 12:05PM

It would seem that the word 'bigot' has been redefined to mean anyone who is in favor of traditional marriage (even if their concern is 'for the children'), and/or opposes the building of the mosque at ground zero (even if based on 'feelings' that it is 'insensitive' to do so), and/or voted against the most liberal president ever (even if they were a lifelong conservative who consistently voted against liberals).

And really? Jesus doesn’t care anything about the religion he himself established? Gays are smarter than anyone else? And did I truly see the N-word being tossed? AND if all that isn't bad enough, the smarmy originator of the sexual slur used to smear tea party folks is now 'the handsome Anderson Cooper'?

Enough!| 10.18.10 @ 12:53PM

Stop it!

All this bickering is nonproductive. Get off your fat asses and do something constructive. And I'm talking to every damn one of you.

And as for you Christians, turn your computer off and go down the street and help some elderly person with a chore.

Your sanctimony is making me nauseated.

Get the hell away from your computers and make the world a better place by visiting a nursing home, or a lonely person, or voluteering, or do something to make someone's life a little better.

Instead of quoting the bible, why don't you emulate Christ by doing good deeds.

You're a bunch of jackasses who post your demented drivel on this shitty blog all day and night.

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 1:25PM

Enough is one pissed off cocksucker !

CH| 10.19.10 @ 6:32PM

Madge is one hypocritical Christian.

Bojean| 10.18.10 @ 2:35PM

This appears to be in response to my taking issue with the all the nasty invective being hurled about by those who can’t seem to handle being disagreed with and seem incapable of forming a rational response. A little over the top, doncha think?

And thanks for the tip, but I’ve been doing volunteer work for years—decades in fact—so you’re a little late to that party. I just hope, since you have so much to say about it that you walk the talk.

H.E. Hurt| 10.18.10 @ 12:57PM

Bojean,

The poster used "nigger" in quotes. The quotes mean that that ugly utterance is attributed to others--perhaps the kind of "others" that support AmSpec's politics.

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 1:09PM

Really? The use of quotation marks makes it ok? Nice projection, lefty. The mask slipped and you cannot push it back in place.

Bojean| 10.18.10 @ 2:25PM

Who made those ‘ugly utterances’? This is my first posting here but it isn’t my first time reading the comments. I haven’t seen that word tossed around. And the poster further clarifies his intent by his revision of history to dishonestly malign the opposition.

Onward Christian Soldier: “Gays are not going to be the "niggers" your right-wing ancestors loved to degrade and dominate. Oh, no! Gays will not be "niggers." You will not degrade us! Got it?”

Fact check: the two parties’ political platforms for 1860 clearly show which party ‘loved to degrade and dominate’…slaves (yes, I changed the word), and it wasn’t the fledgling Republican Party. This was, of course, the year the first Republican president, Honest Abe himself, was elected.

And I truly do not know anyone who wants to ‘degrade and dominate’, much less enslave, folks who have a different sexual orientation—or anyone else for that matter. Over the top rhetoric much? Yeah, that always helps sway opinions.

I'd say you're attempting to defend the indefensible, H.E.

Oldefarte| 10.18.10 @ 1:24PM

From the NATURAL LAW witch is the basis for and supercedes MAN'S LAW]:
[1] Honor thy father and thy mother [ie a man and a woman]
[2] Thy shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife [ie a woman, not a man]

My law:
HOMOSEXUALS, GO BACK INTO THE CLOSET AND STAY THERE

Margie| 10.18.10 @ 2:36PM

Well said.
And I say that no one is "casting homosexuals out" (God Himself will be their Judge when the time comes).
To dispel the lying anti-God anti-Christian Leftists here among us, (and even if you call yourself conservative)~
Christians do not reject the human being who is homosexual but what we reject is the practice of the behavior, as does God. If you think He accepts it you haven't read the Bible. The point is that the homosexual agenda seeks to destroy the normalcy of the sacred institutions that Americans have lived by ever since its creation. Namely, Marriage.
But since a government is only as good as its people we get the cow towing to this and other anti-God groups and thus the ruination of the very foundation of this country, that of belief in God and His will as a nation.
Whether a person is a "nice" person or not isn't the basis of acceptance by God but whether a person obeys Him. If someone wants to practice a behavior that is against God and His will they are allowed to do so in this country but to force inclusive new laws upon the rest of us and to change the face of the country by so doing is just plain wrong.

Louis Jenkins| 10.18.10 @ 4:05PM

Mrs. Margie:

Agreed. Unfortunately scripture and you make too much sense for folks to understand. God does not love everyone-particularly those who transgress against his will.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 5:22PM

Fortunately, this isn't a theocracy and the likes of the two of you aren't running this country. We are a land of liberty and equality, and our country continues extending freedom and rights to all our people. It took more than a century to extend equal rights to Black Americans, even longer to female Americans. Only in the last decade have we seen a sea- change for the better in our treatment of Gay men and women. To most young people, the anachronistic treatment of gays makes no mores sense than the shameful treatment of Blacks 50 years ago. I'm proud of our country and the progress we've made in liberty and equality. There is no turning back on this front.

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 1:21PM

Typical Leftist lawyerly response. You didn't read what I said if this is what you have to say. A very twisted response.

You are the consummate Lefty lawyer and you twist for a living.
My post said nothing about a theocracy, nor do I want one.
What I said was clear.
No special treatment of "Gays" whether legal immigrants or not.
And your touting of the Race card is also deplorable. But then that's what you do.

FAEN| 10.24.10 @ 12:00PM

No special treatment of "Gays"
----------------------------
Straight Americans: 1138 Federal Rihts
Gay Americans: 1 Federal Right

Who exactly has special rights?

Allen| 10.19.10 @ 3:40PM

As I alluded to in an earlier comment, Christians who warn about God's prohibition against homosexual behavior must not omit His prohibition against fornication, adultery, and all other sexual sins. For example, there are several young people in my extended family who are "living in sin" (as our grandparents' generation called it) with others, even though they consider themselves to be Christian. One sin is as forbidden as another.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 4:14PM

Got that, Bristol?

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 12:04AM

You might try not casting stones, as Jesus commanded, since you like me are hardly without sin. Leave the judging to Him.

Salt and light| 10.19.10 @ 3:58PM

If you'll actually read that incident (in John 8), you'll see that "casting stones" referred to executing the woman. What some of us are doing here is obeying Jesus' command to be "salt and light" (Matthew 5); i.e. try to be a preservative and a guide for the culture around us.

We are reminding other commentors that, as 2 Timothy 3:16 puts it, "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right."

If you knew that a bridge was out and saw someone driving toward it, wouldn't you try to get them to stop? And if you saw a co-worker doing something that the boss forbids, wouldn't you remind that person that he is putting his job in jeopardy? Those (imperfect) metaphors are a bit like what some of us are trying to do here.

You say, "Leave the judging to Him." We are reminding our fellow commentors here that He will indeed do the judging, and reminding them of what He (as the God of both the Old and New Testaments) has stated as the grounds for His judgment on this particular sin -- e.g. Leviticus 20:13, etc.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 4:13PM

If He's enforcing Levitticus, I hope you're keeping kosher.

Allen| 10.19.10 @ 4:35PM

RCV, I'll re-post my comment from earlier, in answer to this:

In addition, one should remember that Scripture is the best interpreter of itself -- in other words, find out what other (and later) Bible verses say about the law in question.

Believers in Jesus, whether Jewish or gentile, are not under the ritual laws of Leviticus, because of the New Covenant, which the Jewish prophet Jeremiah foretold in Jeremiah 31:31-34.

The New Covenant in Messiah Jesus' blood is discussed further in the Letter to the Hebrews, e.g. 9:8-12: " The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation. But when Messiah appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation ; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption."

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 4:44PM

Nice try, Allen, but I'm not buying it. Of course Paul scuttled the Law in his Epistles, because it was getting difficult to get Gentile converts when they learned that had to undergo adult circumcision and observe Jewish dietary laws. I have great respect for St Paul - his brilliant organizational skills were responsible for the rapid spread of Christianity, for which I sincerely thank him. But he was a human being, not Jesus. The decision of the Church councils to call his personal letters "Scripture" would have even appalled him. He knew he was a fallible man, and never confused himself with our Lord.

You can use all the sleight of hand you wish to justify your picking and choosing which OT laws to follow or not, but the rest of us ain't buying.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:43AM

My law:
HOMOSEXUALS, GO BACK INTO THE CLOSET AND STAY THERE
----------------------------------
Thankfully were not living under your law.
GLBT Americans are never going back in the closet. All I can say is, you better get used to gay people living openly and honestly. Were not going back into the closet.

God| 10.25.10 @ 4:14PM

Thankfully with a name like OldeFarte you will be 6 feet under before too long and your outdated, imaginary ideals will die with you.

JKS| 10.18.10 @ 2:24PM

The homosexual movement in this country makes up between 1 and 10 percent of the population. Yet they try to dictate to the rest of us how we should think. They do not want equal treatment, they want preferential treatment. They demand tolerance, but really want acceptance. They change the meaning of words because they refuse to fit into societal norms.

I use to tolerate homosexuals demanding 'equal treatment'. California's vote for gay marriage changed my mind about the whole issue. The way homosexuals treated straight people - especially little old ladies and men was atrocious. I will not support any 'gay' initiative again because of this.

'I can stand rudeness in a man and I won't tolerate it.' Captain Woodrow F. Call

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:46AM

They do not want equal treatment, they want preferential treatment.
-------------------------------------
Straight Americans: 1138 Federal rights
Gay Americans: 1 Federal right
If anyone is treated with preferential treatment it's straight Americans.
And please explain to me how and why I don't want to be treated equally.

ton| 10.18.10 @ 3:31PM

Was the Saudi prince married to his boy-toy "servant"? The one he just murdered? Just wondering. Would they have been candidates for immigration?
Then again, if the US began offering asylum to wealthy sodomites, the English upper class would no longer have to go to Algiers to find boys, and the Swedes could come here instead of traveling to Southeast Asia. Multi-cultural pederasty! That ought to make the Europeans like us.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 10:40AM

The Prince is a citizen of Saudi Arabia not the USA which means he would have no right to sponsor his 'boytoy' as you like to put it.
I on the other hand AM a US citizen and I should be allowed to sponsor my partner of 10 years. The UAFA is only for US citizens and their partners, not anyone else.

You speak of asylum like it's an easy step to take. It isn't. In fact, asylum, when it comes to gays and lesbians, is almost impossible to get.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinion....you are not entitled to your own facts.

mames| 10.18.10 @ 5:45PM

Homosexual behavior can be declared perversion because it is. Every homo act is an attempt to mimic the real thing, sex between and man and a women. Check out the plumbing it was designed to work only one way, going up into an exit is by its very definition a perversion. There and I didn't have to invoke God once. And oh yes sperm and shit makes shitty sperm and nothing else, which is why you guys have to adopt babies.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:38AM

I never understand why treating gay Americans with equality gets you and people like you THIS angry. Honestly, what are you afraid of?

Ian| 10.25.10 @ 4:07PM

At what age did you choose to be straight? You're a moron.

mames| 10.18.10 @ 5:47PM

Oh yes the Lesbos also mimic the real thing or they would not need strap ons and dildos.

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:15PM

My you're really obsessed with this, aren't you? Wonder why?

victor| 10.20.10 @ 1:12AM

My you're really accepting with this, aren't you? I wonder why?

Troll Hunter| 10.18.10 @ 6:26PM

Looks like all the trolls are out in force, this time for "gay rights."

Trolls hate us conservatives so much, yet come here constantly to condemn us and call us vicious names.

Do they really expect us to listen to them? Doubtful. No one is that stupid--they just come here to unload on conservatives, a "safe" target. Pathetic.

Blow job| 10.18.10 @ 9:32PM

I take exception to that comment Troll Hunter !

FAEN| 10.21.10 @ 11:35AM

I disagree with you. I have been trying to have a conversation in order to try and understand why treating GLBT tax paying Americans as second class citizens is teh way to go and all I get is religious rhetoric. No facts, just religious messages. What does that have to do with the rule of law? Why should some Americans have 1138 less rights than others? Why should I not be allowed to sponsor my partner of 10 years while straight Americans can sponsor their partners they may have known for a week? I'd love some factual answers, not religious rhetoric.

whapazing| 10.18.10 @ 8:02PM

Homosexuals already have equal rights, in that they may marry a person of the opposite physical sex - same as those who are heterosexual. The argument cannot be about equality when it already exists. Also, could we keep love out of it. Love can be adultery or incest, but I don't believe any one in this commentary is arguing that the privilege of marriage be extended to either.

FAEN| 10.21.10 @ 11:31AM

You don't understand what 'gay' means do you.

Jake| 10.25.10 @ 4:06PM

thats a retarded statement

Robert Hagedorn| 10.18.10 @ 8:48PM

Anal sodomy? To get the really big surprise google The First Scandal Adam and Eve.

Tony in Central PA| 10.18.10 @ 9:17PM

I did find it noteworthy that the religious denominations cited as supporting the UAFA will likely be nonexistent or practically so by the end of the century if their present membership trends continue. Simlarly, the 19 countries with a similar law have the lowest fertility rates in the world with the exception of S. Africa. What could this mean ?

John DuBose| 10.18.10 @ 10:27PM

Seems to me:

1. Maybe "gays" cannot help themselves, but it is nuts to glory in homosexuality.

2. I want the homosexuals to give back the word "gay" It used to mean a happy state of mind.

3. All that said, just because you have odd tastes, does not mean that you ought to give up your rights. It does mean that in certain specific situations, a "gay" person might not be ideal for some jobs.

4. If there was good faith all around, this debate might not even be occuring.

FAEN| 10.24.10 @ 11:58AM

I love how you refer to 'gays' like we don't exist lol.

Yosemeti Sam| 10.19.10 @ 12:47AM

" Amnesty for Same-Sex Couples? ...."

No doubt legislative efforts for 'amnesty' from HIV would be the next clarion call.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 2:40AM

'amnesty' from HIV would be the next clarion call.
-------------------------------
Please explain further.

Yosemeti Sam| 10.19.10 @ 4:26AM

The rhetorical absurdity of suggesting legislating amnesty from HIV was exactly that - a rhetorical absurdity!

IOW, what? The PC amnesty theology - sky's the LIMIT?

For everything under the SUN?

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 10:41AM

You make absolutely no sense.

Yosemeti Sam| 10.19.10 @ 11:30PM

" You make absolutely no sense."

Please explain further.

Sodomite| 10.19.10 @ 1:16PM

Yeah take that Yoseman , oh seman , I love it !

Yosemeti Sam| 10.19.10 @ 11:33PM

Bugger OFF.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 4:32PM

Thanks to a federal judge who enforces the Constitution, the Pentagon just announced it is advising its recruiters to enlist openly gay men and women.

RIP DADT.

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 10:14PM

RIP DADT.....not quite as yet but certainly a step towards it's death FINALLY!

Now hopefully DOMA will die a swift death as well.

Jake| 10.25.10 @ 3:59PM

My partner and I have been together for 5 years, longer than most marriages last. We don't need 'marriage' itself a FAILED institution. Constitution guarantees equality I dont care what an old book of fiction claims. However, I deserve, as a tax paying American the right to sponsor him as a citizen.

FAEN| 10.26.10 @ 6:21PM

I am so with you there Jake.

The American Spectator

Special Report

Amnesty for Same-Sex Couples?

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (224) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Brian Mc| 10.18.10 @ 6:32AM

Allen| 10.18.10 @ 1:13PM

Margie| 10.18.10 @ 1:43PM

t| 10.18.10 @ 6:26PM

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:39PM

Blow Job| 10.18.10 @ 9:25PM

t| 10.19.10 @ 1:04PM

Richard Hodapp| 10.19.10 @ 12:38AM

FTM| 10.19.10 @ 5:23AM

FAEN| 10.23.10 @ 11:27AM

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 12:08PM

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 1:50PM

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 2:23PM

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 2:28PM

Margie| 10.19.10 @ 4:32PM

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 10:06PM

Margie| 10.20.10 @ 1:28AM

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:48AM

Margie| 10.21.10 @ 1:53AM

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:00PM

FAEN| 10.25.10 @ 11:17AM

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:43AM

seth Chodosh| 10.18.10 @ 3:02PM

ShortNSweet| 10.18.10 @ 5:32PM

RCV| 10.18.10 @ 6:41PM

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 6:47PM

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:49AM

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:01PM

Jasperbob| 10.18.10 @ 3:47PM

KyMouse| 10.19.10 @ 3:22PM

FAEN| 10.20.10 @ 2:50AM

Jones-Munoz| 10.18.10 @ 10:57PM

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:03PM

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:41PM

ICanSeeClearlyNow| 10.18.10 @ 3:35PM

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 6:53PM

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:42PM

Alan Brooks| 10.19.10 @ 12:19AM

Hiroshi| 10.19.10 @ 8:42AM

Blow Job| 10.19.10 @ 1:07PM

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:44PM

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:04PM

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

Living a Moral Life| 10.19.10 @ 8:02AM

R. Hierra | 10.18.10 @ 7:17AM

Dave M. (in S. Korea)| 10.18.10 @ 7:23AM

Dave M. (now in S. Korea)| 10.18.10 @ 7:19AM

Devoted Methodist| 10.18.10 @ 7:34AM

Brevan from Denmark| 10.18.10 @ 7:38AM

ConantheContrarian| 10.18.10 @ 9:23AM

James| 10.18.10 @ 7:03PM

FAEN| 10.19.10 @ 1:48PM

34spg| 10.18.10 @ 8:36AM

Ike| 10.18.10 @ 1:18PM

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 3:33PM

Christian, not in name only| 10.18.10 @ 7:40AM

ConantheContrarian| 10.18.10 @ 9:26AM

Don't fool yourselves| 10.18.10 @ 12:44PM

Patrick| 10.18.10 @ 1:36PM

Mr. Heavy Tech| 10.18.10 @ 7:44AM

Juno| 10.18.10 @ 7:57AM

Kishego| 10.18.10 @ 3:38PM

Christopher| 10.18.10 @ 6:53PM

Quartermaster| 10.18.10 @ 7:01PM

Christopher| 10.19.10 @ 2:53AM

FAEN| 10.22.10 @ 12:06PM

Onward Christian Soldiers| 10.18.10 @ 8:12AM

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 12:52PM

mbatty| 10.18.10 @ 1:08PM

ncatty| 10.18.10 @ 2:43PM

James| 10.18.10 @ 7:06PM

Madge| 10.18.10 @ 1:08PM

Look Everyone!| 10.18.10 @ 3:42PM