Why don't you guys just get it over with and start a Nazi party? Your damnable blog is truly evil. Every post is inspired by Satan himself. You offer nothing but hate and exploitation, and I can't say just how much I detest your philosophy, your ideology, and your utter lack of morality. What do you think life is for, anyways? It is obvious you think it is all about hate.
If I understand you correctly Goebbles, you want "us" to start a "Nazi" (Nat'l Socialist) party? Would this be the same type of Nazi part we saw in recent history that exterminated Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Mentally Handicapped, and others who are different from the "pure race"?
This Nazi comparison thing gets really old, really fast. Your mind of a 5 year old can muster nothing more than some fringe tantrum and make over-reaching and ignorant comments. I truly feel sorry for you.
I highly doubt that you in any way truly understand the poster's philosophy, ideology, and sense of morality.
If you wish to have a debate on a matter or offer your opinion, do so. I’m sure many would rather you didn't waste everyone’s time with childish outbursts. I can’t believe I am actually wasting my time responding to your comments.
As far as the marriage / civil union issue goes, why reinvent the wheel? As many have said, marriage is a union between man and woman. If two people of the same sex wish to be recognized as a family or union as well, fine, what ever floats your boat. Don't try to squeeze it into the definition of a marriage or stretch the definition to encompass this type of union as well. Just because a relatively small number of people want something changed doesn’t mean we should run right out and do it. Last I looked this country was still a Democracy. Each day it seems to slip further and further from one, but at this point it is still a Democracy. This being said, the majority rules. The squeaky wheel may get the grease, but majority rules.
"What do you think life is for, anyways?" Well, if you follow most major religions, life is for creating life. A man and a woman join together to bring life into the world to further humanity and to love and serve their God. Many major religions condemn same sex couples / relations. I'm sure the mental institution you hail from has a bible or two lying around, try thumbing through it, you might just learn something. You don't have to like what you read or believe it, but you might just get an understanding of what millions upon millions of people worldwide believe. P.S. Good luck with that tinfoil hat.
Goebbels is off the deep end here. But I have a few comments...
Last I looked this country was still a Democracy. Each day it seems to slip further and further from one, but at this point it is still a Democracy. This being said, the majority rules. The squeaky wheel may get the grease, but majority rules.
Yea, look again. The USA is not a democracy, it is a representative republic set up to protect the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.
I don't believe in satan and I don't give a rats ass what the pope says. I don't need some theocrat elected by an exclusive club telling me the difference between right and wrong.
The USA is indeed a representative republic. The church (most of them) is not. Marriage is a religious institution. The tiny minority is fighting tooth and nail to pervert marriage. This is what happens when church and state intersect. Most religious people would be accepting of civil unions for homosexuals. Fine, give them the rights afforded other legal unions. But we all know that's not the real objective. The real objective is to force the majority to accept the demands of the minority and declare homosexuality "normal".
So who needs to protected from whom?
Yeah Smithers, why listen to a guy who is bringing 2000 years of wisdom on the human condition to the table?
It's probably smarter for you to just wing it yourself and see what happens.
You might have a few things figured out by the time it's all over.
Sounds like a great plan.
why listen to a guy who is bringing 2000 years of wisdom on the human condition to the table?
Wisdom like when they called Galileo a heretic for saying the earth revolved around the sun? The Catholic church has always been anti-science and I no more pay attention to what they have to say that I do Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or the Islamic mullah du jour.
You are free to listen to the Pope's advice and live your life as you wish. Once you start telling others to live their lives the same way then you are out of line as far as I am concerned.
I see you don't know history either Smithers. Read Dava Sobel's (She's a scientist) book Galileo's Daughter and you'll see Galileo's troubles had little to do with religion or ideology and more to do with the politics of the time. The Church by the way was the only institution which preserved science in Western Europe through the middle ages. It's only in the current materialist-humanist fantasy and revisionist history that faith and science are necessarily opposed.
Yea ok, that must be why today's Catholic church is all about evolution...
Evolution Smithers? Come on, why would the Catholic Church be behind it. First show us a scrap of evidence to back this dated theory and then maybe that institution would discuss it more.
First show us a scrap of evidence to back this dated theory and then maybe that institution would discuss it more
Thank you for making my point.
I think Mr. Goebbels just broke "Goodwins Law" going to the Nazi name-calling right out of the gate.
There by he has lost the argument.
That south Minneapolis church might as well shutter their building. It has committed suicide in the eyes of the Lord by sanctifying "buggery" as some sort of form of marriage.
I am glad our enemies are coming out in the open.
Greg likes playing God. Sanctify yourself, philistine.
Well Smithers, the majority still rules here, maybe not for long. It still takes a great number of people to make certain changes. The squeaky minority does its best to do so but usually fails for many reasons.
"I don't need some theocrat elected by an exclusive club telling me the difference between right and wrong." Replace "theocrat" with democrat, republican, etc. and you have the US. And for the "exclusive club" replace that with PAC's, lobbyists, etc. it works just as well.
This is a little off topic, but I want to correct Smithers:
Yea, look again. The USA is not a democracy, it is a representative republic set up to protect the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.
No, the US is a Federal Republic…or at least that was the founders intention…
I love it when people think they know what God thinks or advocates. It might be time to remove the "South Park Conservatives Unite!" phrase from the top of this blog.
I love it when people think they know what God thinks or advocates.
I’m sorry…I’m not a very religious person, but I do know that what I have read in the bible, and been taught in church, seems to indicate that the purpose of marriage is to reproduce and give life. Please explain to me how you do that with a same sex partner?
I’m sorry…I’m not a very religious person, but I do know that what I have read in the bible, and been taught in church, seems to indicate that the purpose of marriage is to reproduce and give life. Please explain to me how you do that with a same sex partner?
I can't. I'm against same-sex marriage, too. But I don't like it when someone tries to tell me what God thinks. I believe there's much more to God and his Son Jesus than a Being that went about condemning things, walking on water, and healing the sick. But then again, I could be completely wrong.
The overall tone of the post is what irked me. It sounded like a lefty ranting about the end of the world coming due to global warming. Only in this case, global warming was replaced with "culture wars."
I can't. I'm against same-sex marriage, too. But I don't like it when someone tries to tell me what God thinks. I believe there's much more to God and his Son Jesus than a Being that went about condemning things, walking on water, and healing the sick. But then again, I could be completely wrong.
Fair enough...
But the one that that I think you will find about most of us here at the Anti-Strib is that we are againse gay iage, but we don't have a problem with civil unions or any OTHER term that "they" would like to use. But marriage should be left for a man and a woman.
" Yea ok, that must be why today's Catholic church is all about evolution..."
Actually Smithers, Benedict and JPII both declared there was no incompatibilty between the theory of evolution and Genesis. In their joint humility (an excellent trait, pro-evolutionists should look into it), they realized that some expainations are beyond human understanding. God created nature, it does what He designed. You look at effect and think you see cause.
I think Mr. Goebbels has the look and feel of a troll....
...as they say over at LGF, DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.
Actually, I would debate the statement that marriage is a religious institution, and that a civil union is its legal equivalent. As long as the word 'marriage' is used to describe a contract between a man and a women in which the government recognizes the two as a single entity for tax purposes, and extends privileges to couples that are not offered to single people living together, marriage must be a legal institution. Since separation of church and state is necessary to the functioning of our republic, it must be recognized that this distinction exists: the religious institution of marriage, entered into by many millions in this country in various houses of worship, is separate and in addition to the legal contract into which couples enter in their town hall or local government office. I support equal legal privileges for both heterosexual and homosexual couples, and I would have no problem calling that a 'civil union,' so long as when I go down to town hall myself, and enter into the same contract with my girlfriend as a heterosexual man, it is also termed a 'civil union.' Then, if we choose to be married in a church representing one of our two faiths, we can receive that designation in accordance with the tenets of that faith, which preclude homosexuality. In other words, I have no desire to force homosexuality into the religious sphere, but I also do not want to see religion used as a tool to affect our purposefully secular government.
Alcibiades-
You just summed up the official position of Sequel, Tracy and Shark Bait of this blog.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Well, it's the South Park take, so I figured it should be the official position
I must admit, though, that I was surprised you agreed with me, based on rambix's post. In fact, his position doesn't seem to acknowledge the existence of marriage as both a civil and a religious institution, since he's using the Pope as a source for advice on running our government. So I'm curious--do you agree with them, Rambix, or do you have a unique take on this? Personally, I think the Minnesota pastor's actions, while a bit looney, illustrate the need to even more clearly separate the Christian notion of marriage between a man and a woman from the American ideal of getting nifty tax breaks.
P.S. If you're wondering where I stand politically, I'd have to say I'm a Libertarian, but I think Ayn Rand's a whiner. And speaking of South Park, does Isaac Hayes suck or what?
Hayes is a moron!
What you said, is EXACTLY the position I take when it comes to marriage and civil unions. I believe that while the former is religious the latter is governmental/political. If a church doesn’t’ want to marry someone, that’s their business…but I believe that we have come to the point where civil unions are necessary to protect the individual’s and couples rights.
Commenting by HaloScan
