NBC is not going to let this story die till that poor woman is admitted to that club. Wanna bet, they cover the birth and show baby pics?

Must be hard reading a feel-good news story. Just keep breathing, you'll make it through. In and out, in and out.

As they should.

We are done with the U.S. Military. They no longer represent our beliefs. I will not counsel my sons or anyone else to join the US military. We are Christians. This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians. Any form of homosexuality is totally unacceptable.

happy for her and her family.

Rocky, you must've missed it somewhere along the line.

Pedophilia is a crime.

Homosexuality is not.

Ok Mr Blowhard...

Get ALL mad! Ha!Ha! Not a very CHRISTIAN attitude.... or is it?

It warms my heart to know that even the stupidest Americans can read. Cognitave abilities might even follow, if Imnotlost and Rockyroad get lucky.

Congratulations!!!!!!

Because she's a great spouse or because she's gay? Which one won her the award?

Hay GetmadStaymad, Big news now this isn’t a Christian country, it’s a country with freedom of religion that accepts all religions. You must have missed that part of the constitution when you were trying to defend the second amendment. You are a sad – sad person who wants’ to twist any reality to fit your own sick paranoid and frightened view of what is actually a beautiful world. Unfortunately freedom of speech (another part of the constitution you would probably like to ignore when you aren’t talking) means we have to hear the poison and hate you like to spread. I really do hope you crawl back into your diseased hole and don’t come back out again.

Steve-446003

Because she's a great spouse or because she's gay? Which one won her the award?

I know the word "Lesbian" must scare you, but try reading the article to save yourself some embarassment.

Broadway has volunteered to tutor soldiers’ children in reading, briefed inbound Army families on local school districts, and helped transferring soldiers with housing-location decisions.

Getmad,

This is "The Land of the Free," not "The Land of the Christians." Your religious entitlement is quickly fading, this story proves just that. The world is realizing now that people are people. It really is that simple. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can release the hate and persecution you hold inside because your "God" commands you to...

RHD-

There are lot's of examples of things being a crime in the past that no longer are crimes. Should we not allow interracial marriages to take place because they were against the law at one point? Do you honestly believe that at some point in our future our lawmakers will make it ok for an adult to have sex with a child? Why would that happen? Who is pushing that agenda? Who supports that agenda? There is no victim involved with a homosexual relationship. There is a victim involved with pedophelia. There is a difference.

RHD-99999 what did you write?

@getmadstaymad. In all the documents from which the formation of this country is based, The Declaration of Independence, The United States Constitution and The Bill of Rights, not one contains anywhere in them, any of the following words, God, Jesus, Christian.

This is not a "Christian" country as Christians so wish it to be. It is a nation that has no national religion, but rather is based on freedom of religion, or from religion if one so chooses. So stop using your religion based biases to promote bigotry.

Truthfully the military is improving and progressing and it doesn't need close-minded people like you in it anyway.

[Reply to 1.23] An animal cannot consent. A minor child cannot consent. An adult can consent.

I always enjoy reading your responses Sarah. Very eloquent and to the point.

Sarah, please don't use logic or common sense. It confuses bigots.

Getmadstaymad

How dare you be so disrespectful to the men and woman of our armed forced whom ever they are. You should give some respect to the men and woman, some of who are gay who fight for your right to be so disrespectful.

Shame on you, shame. You sir are an embarrassment to what this country stands for.

Sarah-3043284

Damn skippy! Good for Ft. Bragg.

Getmad,

Who the hell taught you civics? I'm assuming it must have been your mother. You have home schooled written all over you.

more like dropout

It may be OK for many, but marriage is still between a man and a woman as plainly written in God's word.

Until June. And your God's word means jack @!$%# in this argument.

RHD,

No problem. I do what I can. Now can you actually make an argument against what I posted? Or did I just hurt your pride and you wanted to snipe back, but weren't able to on a substantive level?

KK-

just because you believe a god has given you orders, it does not mean that that god really exists. A nation can not be run by the laws of a god that some people believe in and many others don't.

Hey GETMADSTAYMAD, how's that anger thing working out for you? Sounds to me like you need to READ what our forefathers wrote in the Constitution- FREEDOM of RELIGION!! How you people get this "Christian Country" business is beyond me. Get over yourself already!!!! Are you a member of that psycho West Boro Baptist group? Bunch of fanatical haters!!!! Guess what? I'm not gay, and I really don't think anyone should force their beliefs on anyone else- and I think the Fort Bragg Spouses club has a right to not accept this woman if that's their choice- but you go WAY TOO far- and you hate too much. I hope this woman accepts the clubs "conditional" invite and shows them that she is worthy of full membership and they have nothing to fear from her or her "personal" choices.

kkwilson

The one thing we were always taught is no one knows the mind nor the reasoning of god. You have no idea what god intends or wants, no idea at all, to state otherwise is at least arrogant.

Perhaps the reason we a stuck with an antiquated, out dated and frankly impossible to follow holy book is becasue people like yourself are stuck in the past.

Bigotry is still bigotry even if you hide behind the bible.

RHD, if you want to continue your career as a donkey lover, I have no problem with that. It has always disgusted me, but it isn't my place to decide how you live your life. You make a compelling pro-bestiality argument.

Yes, times are changing. Fortunately, the world is not as narrow as some people's mentalies. Houston currently has an openly gay female mayor - elected twice by the public at large.

If one person is married to another, they're spouses. Being a spouse to a member of the armed forces is no easy task, but having to deal with the hate of others because you're not a member of the hetero group has to be heartbreaking. I'm glad there were enough people out there who wanted to send a clear message: supportive spouses come in all packages and backgrounds. All of our services members deserve the love and support of family and friends, including their gay/lesbian spouses.

NICE! LOL!

Fort Bragg, well done. I am laughing with you I promise, and at the 'Spouse's Club.'

@Getmadblahblahblah:

Two things: One is:

We are done with the U.S. Military. They no longer represent our beliefs. I will not counsel my sons or anyone else to join the US military.

I am glad the military will be better off with people busy with fighting and defending the country without wasting time on bigoted nonsense. So please, have no one you know join the military. We'll all be better off for it!

And two:

We are Christians. This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians. Any form of homosexuality is totally unacceptable.

Not only is this not a Christian country, but you aren't even Christian, or acting like one. I'm just telling you to help you out, pal. I'm thinking of you!

Oh, and this:

Forest Roamer

RHD, if you want to continue your career as a donkey lover, I have no problem with that. It has always disgusted me, but it isn't my place to decide how you live your life. You make a compelling pro-bestiality argument.

Hilarious! :D

Again, nobody cares about your Bible or God, it's completely irrelevant. And "God" is not Christian or Bible specific. So according to you Atheists can't be in the military either?

And THAT'S the truth, SO HELP ME GOD!

Ok...I'm gay and married to my male partner. When we applied for our License, no where on it did it ask if we where or are a morally upstanding religious person. Nor did it ask if we believed in God.

What you people that are against us having equal rights refuse to understand is that a marriage license is a legal document...Not a religious one.

I still have the right of freedom of religion, or would you have that denied of us too.

Sick2deathofit :

SO HELP ME GOD !!!....LOL... your an idiot....In God we Trust is printed on our money, and the term GOD is used as a general understanding that it is GOD as we understand GOD....Not one version.

Government > Your Religion.

Unless you live in Iran. So if you don't like the way it is, there's someplace you can move to!

Otherwise, try reading the constitution while you are busy reading the Bible. Maybe that's where the reading needs to be done here.

Steve - the younger generation is far more progressive. My teen daughter and her friends don't get why others have issues with the those who are not heterosexual. In the near future, this will be a non-issue. Hang in there. There are plenty of us who support you. I'm happy you've found your mate and was able to marry him.

Jean - I'm an atheist who is raising a daughter. She's the most loving, compassionate, giving human being I know. Many people could learn from her - also an atheist.

Riverboy21

Steve-446003

Because she's a great spouse or because she's gay? Which one won her the award?

I know the word "Lesbian" must scare you, but try reading the article to save yourself some embarassment.

Broadway has volunteered to tutor soldiers’ children in reading, briefed inbound Army families on local school districts, and helped transferring soldiers with housing-location decisions.

I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Was she nominated BEFORE all the fuss about the club refusing her entry or after? Somehow I truly doubt she is the ONLY one who does such good things around the base.

Getmad

You know, there are still countries out there where homosexuality is illegal and punishable by death. Please go there. You will be much happier, and all of us disgusting 'free-thinker' types will rot here together in our obviously uninformed and blasphemous bliss.

Ballot totals were not revealed. As one of the 154 base-level winners, Broadway now is eligible to be nominated for Army "spouse of the year."

So she is or is not spouse of the year? It sounds like the writer of this article is counting their chickens before they hatch, and assuming they will win out of sympathy for gays. You mean there's a 154 other spouses who could be nominated, but these two are just getting recognition cause they're gay? I'm positive out of the 154 there are some other interesting stories as well. Officers are expected to lead by example, when was the last time that officer passed a PT test, or height and weight?

@Sarah

Here's a test to prove this is true. Give a check to your dog, staple it to his collar or something, when he comes back with the cash after making the transaction at the bank, your fears will be realized. Until that can happen your argument is bunk.

So you're arguing that a dog can't make a legal transaction. Assuming the above poster even has a dog, how did Fido make it to the bank again? Assuming he/she made it inside, I don't know of any dog that's high enough to make eye contact with a teller.

P.S Bestiality is legal in ALASKA, ARIZONA, COLORADO, Connecticut, FLORIDA, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, MISSOURI, NEBRASKA, Nevada, New Hampshire, New jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, TEXAS, Vermont, WASHINGTON (The ever green state not DC), West Virginia and Wyoming.

If informed consent applies to animals, then I think Fido should have to pay the neighbors the next time he gets into their yard.Until he/she does, your argument is bunk

Gay mortgages haven't led to toaster home ownership, have they? Gay checking accounts haven't allowed horses to open checking accounts, have they? Gay business ownership hasn't allowed a child to get an LLC on their own, has it?

I've heard of mortgages, but never gay ones. I've heard of checking accounts, but never gay ones. Tell me, do gay mortgages have special interest rates? Are gay checking accounts free? I had to pay to open one last time. Oh wait, you mean a mortgage that belongs to a human being with a self identified homosexual preference? That would seem to indicate that aforementioned people have the inability to distinguish themselves from their sexual preferences. I don't think I've ever seen two male, or two female, checking accounts having sex with each other. Maybe you know something we don't.

Jean,

No, the Bible IS irrelevant and means jack @!$%# in this argument. So does your God. The point is, no one cares who or what you believe in. It doesn't matter, as we're free from it.

And any future child I have will make his/her OWN decision about what they believe in. But I promise you, they will not be arrogant enough to make the claim of being right or forcing that belief on anyone. Unlike you.

ITIS,

Of course that went over your head. I'm not surprised. It's about informed consent. If you can't grasp that relatively simple concept and analogy, I can't help you.

A source for your beastiality claims??? You do realize that those states that you say it's legal in STILL have cruelty to animal laws which prohibit it, right? And that NONE of those states grant animals informed consent.

http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ovuszoophilia.htm

So let me get this right, because this woman didn't get into the spouses club, that now makes her spouse of the year because of all her publicity? Really? So to the other spouses at Fort Bragg, noone cares of what things they go through on a daily basis, but because she is a lesbian, she gets special treatment?

Let's talk about the wife of Cpl. Janokoski at Fort Bragg. While her husband was on his second tour of duty in Iraq, he lost both of his arms from an IED placed in the roadway. Mrs. Janokoski, or around the base known as Carol, has been taking care of 3 children, working a full time job and now taking care of her husband, and since he has returned to rehab, the VA has not given him the home care he was told he would to help ease the burden on Carol.

Or can we mention Mr. Davidson, who his wife is doing her 3rd tour in Afghanistan and he is home with 2 young children and a full time job. Todd's wife is an Army Sergeant stationed at Fort Bragg and his family and hers are both in California. Did I forget to mention that both their children are on the A honor roll at school because Todd takes the time every night to make sure they do their homework before spending time with friends?

The list goes on and on, and that is just Fort Bragg! So to all the people that feel this woman is deserving of this award because she and another woman are married, then this is a truly sick world we live in today. Where your publicity is more important then your actions.

BTW, look up Lt. Col. Heather Mack in your military guides as to her service. During Desert Storm she was assigned stateside and was suppose to deploy to Kuwait, but never made it. Then during Iraq and Afghanistan, she had very minimal deployments and never really amounted to any action. Here just a short ways back, she got a promotion because she was openly gay, not because she had any neceassary credentials to receive the promotion.

I am truly ashamed of America for what they have done. I don't care if you are gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, but this whole thing has gotten out of control. This is my opinion and we all have a right to voice those opinions we feel. Now I am sure I will be called biggot, homophobe or something else because I don't agree with the Liberals on this website, but I am secure enough to know what is right and what is wrong and not giving the true people who deserve this award even a chance, is wrong.

Robin's Serendipity 1

Thank You for your support and teaching your children tolerance compassion and understanding. That is something sorely lacking in our world today. ((((Smiles & Hugs)))))

BC,

Two reasons. First, someone made the ridiculous argument of comparing homosexuality between two consenting adults with zoophilia and pedophilia. Both of those consist of adults engaging in sex with those who aren't granted informed consent under the law. Second, marriage is a contract. Meaning, in order to enter it, much like a mortgage or checking account, one must ALSO be granted informed consent.

Yes, the age of consent varies in different states, but that means nothing as the concept of informed consent is still there, as are the elements of contract law. If those people want to change that, they have to make a valid legal argument and amend their legislative documents.

Now, that DOES NOT need to be done in regards to homosexuality and gay marriage. Why didn't straight marriage lead to legalization of pedophilia and zoophilia? The answer to that question is the reason why gay marriage won't. Gay marriage has nothing to do with animal rights or the age of consent, and the slippery slope isn't applicable to expanding rights. It's an argument used when contracting or narrowing them.

It's more logical to say that a ban on gay marriage sets up a precedent where inter-racial marriage could once again be banned. If you're worried about pedophilia and zoophilia being legalized, you have to look at precedents and legislation regarding animal rights and age discrimination.

This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians

@ Getmad ... Er, no. Because if it was ... God, Jesus and Christianity would be PROMINENTLY mentioned in the Constitution, which is the basis of the law of our country. There are only TWO references to religion. The first is the establishment clause. If you actually read it, you'll see that it FORBIDS a "state" religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

That has been interpreted that there can be NO favoritism of one religion (including, but not limited to) Christianity over any other (or no) religion.

The second reference is the religious test clause.

no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States

As you will note, the only references to religion are the ones that FORBID the imposition of religion (including, but not limited to, Christianity).

Now, there is also the free exercise clause ... that gives YOU the right to be a Christian and to worship as you please. It does NOT give you the right to make others live by your rules.

Hopefully that cleared things up for you.

Yes millions of people care about the Bible and God..

And millions of people do not. Either way is fine if you live in the USA.

JJ 101

This became an issue and news worthy as the "club" was holding it's meetings on the base, thus falling under the federal law of no discrimination of sex,color, religious background or sexual orientation. when the spouse wanted to join the club, she was denied, and was giving the "special guest" privileges....One of which was not the ability to vote on honor awards. because both of these ladies are deeply involved in their civic duties and involved in community, they have the right to be treated equally....and that is the story. If we can't be treated equally...who will be next.....maybe you?

Steve - great big squishy hug back (what my daughter use to say when she was little). She'd die if she knew I shared that. Our secret, okay?

Jean: I have read the Bible (love it actually), but can't find where Jesus condemns homosexuality. Paul does, as do most Jews and former Jews who wrote in the Bible, but I've never found where Jesus condemns anyone except for hypocrites and people in power.

Matt. 19:4, John 5:46-47 and John 16:12-15 have all been cited as Jesus being anti-gay; however, that is out of context because he was only talking about becoming true to themselves.

IMHO, too many people attribute their hate to what Jesus taught, but he never taught hate. He taught that all people have salvation and hope in him.

Also, our Constitution allows for religious freedom, and that means freedom for all religions, which is how I like it.

Love to hear your thoughts.

Steve, apparently you are very disinformed or you just believe everything MSN tells you. For one, any orginization can use the facilities on any military base, ie. meeting halls and such if approved by the base commander. The Boy Scouts use military bases all the time for some of their meetings and they have their bylaws that have not yet been compromised. And I don't understand where you got the "sexual orientation" part of the rebuttle. Even the US Military, which is still under the DOMA, until a repeal is finalized, which it is suppose to be on the Senate floor soon, does not recognise same sex marriages and this woman has no Military benefits, not even a dependant ID.

As far as her membership into the "spouses club", go back to answer 1. She is not "legally" considered a spouse in the eyes of the Federal Government, yet. As she was told by the spouses club, which of course noone cared to add to their articles, is that when the Federal Government passes the new Respect Marriage Act, she can then join as a spouse, until then, she is a "special guest".

I am a Christian and have been treated very unfairly on this blog site numerous times. I never bring my thoughts of religion onto the blog, but keep them to myself, but so many people on here talk so poorly about religion, that they forget that when they open their mouths to belittle someone else, they take away their points that they are trying to fight for in the first place. To curse at someone because they don't agree with you, is just as bad as the person you are cursing at to begin with.

Just because you and I don't see eye to eye, I only state the facts of the situation.

JJ 101 - For one, any orginization can use the facilities on any military base, ie. meeting halls and such if approved by the base commander.

At least as long as it doesn't violate DoD policy. This spouses group should be treated just like the KKK or any other bigoted private club and denied access to base facilities.

The Boy Scouts use military bases all the time for some of their meetings and they have their bylaws that have not yet been compromised.

Not anymore. That practice has been stopped.

I am a Christian and have been treated very unfairly on this blog site numerous times.

You've probably been treated the way you have because you're a bigot, not because you're a Christian. Not all Christians are dumb bigots, and any ridicule of religion is intended for the Christofascists who think their cult belongs in other people's lives.

If you keep your cult in your own life where it belongs, no one will criticize you for that.

Robin's Serendipity 1

I promise I won't say a word......Teehee

Skrekk, How is this club any diffrent from any other club? Can I, being heterosexual, join the ILGA, No. As a white woman, can she be on Mrs. Black America, No. As me being an American, can I join the Native American Club, No, so again, get your facts straight.

As for the Boy Scouts, you better call the Pentagon, because just last week my friends boyscout group had a meeting and medal ceremony on Whiteman AFB.

And as far as calling me a bigot, or should I say "dumb bigot" apparently you didn't read my post that basically states, since you can not understand properly, that when someone uses angry words to lash out at others for not having the same beleifs as them, their debate is moot and means nothing.

So again, look into the facts and read past the words were I say I am a Christian, don't let your leftist hate stop you from continuing to read the rest of the paragraph. :)

Herald9

Oh Jesus Christ get off the cross we need the wood.

That is YOUR VERSION......How many times does it need to be said here......WE STILL HAVE FREEDOM OF RELIGION. YOUR VERSION OF GOD DOES NOT APPLY TO EVERYONE UNDER THE LAW.

Okay you guys get it.....Now stop with all the BS. So your God doesn't approve...Mine does....So what.

If you have something else to hang your hat on besdies religion as a bases for your bigot views....bring it...Or Shove it.

Beth, please don't include facts in your argument. If the religious right knows the truth, they will pull their heads out of their asses and we won't have anybody to argue with.

You always right?- I wish gays could have a different term instead of marriage.

I wish blacks would use separate drinking fountains.

All of you did a swell job covering this story. I do have one question, WHO is the Baby's Daddy??

JJ 101 - As for the Boy Scouts, you better call the Pentagon, because just last week my friends boyscout group had a meeting and medal ceremony on Whiteman AFB.

I wasn't aware of that, but I do know providing military facilities for the Jamboree has been stopped.

Sounds like more work needs to be done so that a bigoted private club isn't being subsidized by the public. The BSA should also lose its Congressional charter.

Can I, being heterosexual, join the ILGA, No. As a white woman, can she be on Mrs. Black America, No.

We're not talking about the Mrs. Black America contest, we're talking about private clubs on military bases. Clearly, those clubs which discriminate unjustly against some service members (or service-connected civilians) should be banned from any use of DoD facilities. If the spouses club were whites-only (as they all were not very long ago), there's no way in hell they'd be allowed on base today.

GetMadStayMad,

The most compelling evidence that America is NOT and was NOT founded as a Christian country is to look up the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796. It clearly states that the United States supports no religion over any other and was ratified by the Congress at that time. Being the same time frame as the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, there's no doubt that America was never founded as a Christian nation and never intended to be one that catered to it or any other religion.

This myth of America being founded as a Christian nation is pervasive, but is not based on any facts or reality to support it, and clear facts and evidence to dispute it.

Your anger is based on a myth. You should be mad at the people who lied and misled you to believe something that clearly isn't true.

Wow, Steve, is "your" god the one who taught you write rude, ignorant, offensive crap, or does it come naturally?

JJ 101

I'm sure if someone from Whiteman AFB saw a legal bases for filing a suit to halt the meetings there they would.

It takes someone to file a suit most times to have action under the Federal Discrimination Laws. They do not always rise to this level...but they could.

spider-737231

NO that was my mother....She taught me to defined myself in the eyes of ignorance and intolerance....Go try your GOD guilt trip on someone that buys it.

IXLR8

Why does it matter to you how they got children? I don't get that.

@Sarah,

A source for your beastiality claims??? You do realize that those states that you say it's legal in STILL have cruelty to animal laws which prohibit it, right? And that NONE of those states grant animals informed consent.

Actually laws vary from state to state but Nevada, Wyoming, New Mexico, Texas, Hawaii, Florida,Alabama,Kentucky,West Virginia, Ohio, New Jersey,Rhode Island, and Vermont are states where bestiality is legal. Like I said, informed consent doesn't necessarily apply to animals or children because they're under the care of their respective guardians. Also, arguing that bestiality in and of itself is animal cruelty is disingenuous. It can be done in cruelty, or because of cruelty, but animals can be trained to perform, or engage in, a wide range of behaviors. Pavlov proved this by showing dogs could be trained to salivate when a certain event took place.

Yep, this person will be forever known as "Lesbian Army Wife" thanks to our wonderful media. God bless the USA!

Steve, your joking right? If they saw a legitamate reason to file suit? Apparently you don't know that the US Government gets sued approximately 40 to 50 THOUSAND times a year! How many cases do you hear about......? The US Military alone had 26,349 lawsuits filed against them both foreign and domestic. Did you hear that, FOREIGN and Domestic. You see, you don't have to be a US citizen to sue the US government. Say I am joe smoe from kokomo driving down the road and a US Humvee drives by me. I write down the ID number off the bumper and say that something flew off and struck my car. I sue, the US Government settles out of court for thousands of dollars and doesn't even question it for investigation. You know who pays that law suit? I will give you one guess? You and Me = taxpayers.

So I am sure there has been numerous lawsuits nationwide, but unless they involve gays, lesbians, illegals or muslims you will never hear a word about it...lol.

If we are not supposed to see the color of a person's skin or care about the sexual orientation of a person, then why do we have the First Black this, or the First Hispanic that, or in this case a lesbian getting a "Spouse of the Year" award? The only reason she's getting it is because she is one half of a military gay couple.

Ballot totals were not revealed.

Why not? Why not reveal them?

@You Always Right. Um, you so wrong! So many inaccuracies it is hard to know where to start, but first off, most pedophiles, and you can look this up, identify as heterosexual. Read a freakin magazine, or book. Second, why would you want to hear (that is how that word is spelled by the way) about a "gay" person raping a child? Is that some sort of sick turn on for you?

Read - and i mean read !- any Bible, book of scriptures, Christian tomes, etc

Ok... let's see here. Hmmmmmm....

Oh, look at that. Apparently I am going to be in hell, right next to homosexuals, because I had a wonderful lobster ravioli last night. Well that sucks. Oh, I also cut my hair and have been known to dress in nice cotton and polyester blends. And on top of all that, I don't banish my wife out of the house when it's "that time of the month". Wow, I am like a super-evil abomination.

On the bright side, that means hell will be full of clean-cut, well dressed people enjoying lobster and some nice girl-on-girl action. Sounds AWESOME. It's like a never-ending Playboy mansion party... and, of course, KISS will be playing because they are the "devils music".

It's a shame this bible is nothing more than a fictional story... that sounds like an epic party.

@Sarah

First, someone made the ridiculous argument of comparing homosexuality between two consenting adults with zoophilia and pedophilia.

That's inaccurate. The comparison is between the homosexual movement and other groups considered sexually deviant such as zoophiles and pedophiles. Argue all you like about informed consent, it's disingenuous to argue that the other groups won't use the same slogans.

Second, marriage is a contract. Meaning, in order to enter it, much like a mortgage or checking account, one must ALSO be granted informed consent.

Unless you're Kim Kardashian or Brittney Spears, then it goes out the window. If Marriage requires informed consent, how come the divorce rate is so high?

Why didn't straight marriage lead to legalization of pedophilia and zoophilia?

The concept of heterosexual marriage centers around the concept of the nuclear family, and provides stability in raising children. Zoophilia is LEGAL in at least 13 states, and pedophiles are working to change the laws as we speak

Gay marriage has nothing to do with animal rights or the age of consent, and the slippery slope isn't applicable to expanding rights.

Same sex marriage, in and of itself may not, but the plight of homosexuals, to attain their version of equality, definitely can be.

The concept of heterosexual marriage centers around the concept of the nuclear family, and provides stability in raising children

WRONG

The concept of heterosexual marriage ORIGINALLY centered around property and asset rights.

Despite what you might think, you do not need to be married to have children, and you do not need children to be married. Children is neither a prerequisite, nor a guarantee, of the government issued contract you call "marriage".

This just shows the organizational ability of the LGBT community. I never ever heard about this and I was in the Navy (25years ago). Why are civilians allowed to vote on this? I would like to see the vote totals of Ft Bragg. That is all that should matter. Not some LGBT sitting at his/hers B&B in Vermont, who hates every aspect of the military except to use it to promote their social agenda.

jamie t

Why are civilians allowed to vote on this?

They are not. They are the spouses of active military.

I don't think they came out with the story to promote any agenda, with the exception of equal rights under the law as a married couple.

CNORTON

At least I have no fear of showing myself, while you hide behind your flag and computer. No offense intended is a half ass way of saying watch out I'm going to try and slam you.....LOL

In reality, both are victims, living a lie and calling it Gay! No, you are so right, this is not the Land of the Christians, its a land of Liberals looking to destroy what so many have fought and died to preserve. GOD granted freedom. Blessed is the nation whose GOD is the Lord! Jesus Christ died to save "US" from our sin, of which includes homosexuality, lesbianism, adultery, murders, lies, and the list goes on. But, we must first acknowledge that we are at fault, which would mean admitting it is us/you/we who need correcting. This agenda is only for those that accept the "opinion", not truth, of same-sex anything is okay. If you disagree, the we are called haters, mad, mean, and the latest slang term, breeders. If it were not for The "Breeders", there would not be any more Homosexuals or Lesbians, so it is "US BREEDERS" who are to blame for bringing them into this world. No wonder Our President agrees with Abortion, might be the only way to stem the tide.Only about 55 Million lives aborted/murdered because of the Freedom of Choice! Now we're really moving this nation forward, aren't we? And yes I live in a trailer, go to work every day, pay my own way, live life with others in mind, hopefully not to selfish, and GO to church and read my Bible, Pray for my country and its leaders, our men and women who sacrifice everything to protect it and all of us who are afforded the FREEDOM to sit around and talk about what should be done. May we all be ashamed of what we have turned this once great nation into, land of choice, right or wrong, doesn't matter! May GOD truly BLESS AMERICA!!

JJ 101 - You think the BSA should lose it's Congressional Charter because of their beleifs?

Absolutely. The BSA no more deserves a Congressional charter than does the KKK. In fact the two groups aren't very different given that both historically are nominally Christian groups which hated gays, atheists and blacks. There's no reason either bigoted club deserves public support.

But in general the DoD shouldn't be granting the use of base facilities to any group which discriminates against some service members and their spouses. That's why there aren't any whites-only clubs allowed on base any more.

Steve, you picture looks like Brokeback Mountain, so you are an expert on this subject..........

IXLR8

Yes, as I am a LBGT activist, Civil Rights activist, Child Advocate. Thank You

Steve, I just visited their sight (militaryspouse.com). Their voting rules state that "all americans" have a vote. Like I said, this hightlights the ability of LGBT com. to get out the vote. Aren't you at least a bit curious to see how the military members at FT Bragg have voted?

"CNORTON

At least I have no fear of showing myself, while you hide behind your flag and computer. No offense intended is a half ass way of saying watch out I'm going to try and slam you.....LOL"

Not hiding Steve. Name's Chris Norton from McColl, South Carolina. But.... I was laughing as I typed that and really did not mean any offense. Being accepted equally in society means you guys get ribbed like the rest of us. With a photo like that, you need to admit you're gay like people with a Gadsen flag need to admit that they're Conservative. It's all in good fun.

Steve, I'm a straight guy, but these idiots attacking your photo are stupid. Don't let it bother you Bro.

Thanks jamie...I like ribbing back. If they take the time to know me for who I am they would have a hard time telling I am gay....My husband and myself are anything but "typical" or "stereotypically" gay.

BTW thanks jamie I was under the impression that only the spouses of those in the"club" could vote as per the article.

20 years ago, you'd still be in the closet! Today we are the closet! Shameful Nation we've become! I'm not your strereotypical Heterosexual either, just normal, somewhat!@

Steve

My husband and myself are anything but "typical" or "stereotypically" gay

That reminds me of the Republican Primary debate where every Republican "boo'ed" and mocked the soldier, AFTER he said he was gay. Everyone in the crowd was all respectful and had no idea until he said it.

Of course, no one in the crowd would have had the balls to treat a guy that huge... buff huge... in person.

Steve, the facts again seem to perplex you. The voting was opened to the entire public and you could vote once per 24 hour period. Go to the website and see the facts. The votes just for Ft. Bragg won't be released because I am sure she did not win in that area of "military" persons only vote. I have a friend stationed at Ft. Bragg and it is such a joke there that as one other said, she is seen as "the lesbian lady". The one everyone there feels sorry for is their son and now new child that will be going to school in that area and seen as "that kid". Now that it has gone global, it will affect the kids anywere they move.

And Skrekk, as always you show your true leftist colors. You put one sentence down and reference that, but forget to add the rest of the paragraph. Typical Liberal move, comment on one sentence and run with it, instead of looking at the entire facts. Please keep commenting because it really shows how ignorant you really are...:)

Skrekk wrote -

JJ 101 - You think the BSA should lose it's Congressional Charter because of their beleifs?

Absolutely. The BSA no more deserves a Congressional charter than does the KKK. In fact the two groups aren't very different given that both historically are nominally Christian groups which hated gays, atheists and blacks. There's no reason either bigoted club deserves public support.

But in general the DoD shouldn't be granting the use of base facilities to any group which discriminates against some service members and their spouses. That's why there aren't any whites-only clubs allowed on base any more.

But here is full paragraph,

You think the BSA should lose it's Congressional Charter because of their beleifs? Well maybe all those other "private clubs" should also lose their charters as well. You know the ones, The Black Congressman Club, The Female Congresswoman's Club, The Hispanic Congress Club, The Native American Congressman, The Freemasons, The Patriots Club, The Black Engineers Club and the list goes on and on. Even BET, Black Entertainment Television gets awarded government funding.

Again, no reference or comments on the half that states facts, only on the sentence that he wants to reply to...lol.

Like I said, I was Navy. There were LGB (not sure about the T) all over. This was in the 80's and nobody really cared about it. The only thing that should matter is "the mission". The military sons and daughters of freinds I talk now do not seemed bothered in least. You're either competent or your not. Incompentence gets you killed. That said, I still wonder why they let anybody vote and what the vote totals were at Bragg.

Molly-1582655---For all you boneheads she won because it was sponsored by the Gay and lesbian group that she is the director of, funny how that works. You liberals enjoy nothing more than a conversation with yourself while selecting yourself person of the year. It is a lie, a fabrication, and in the most meaningful words I can say, worthless.

JJ 101

The facts are not to complex asswipe....This arctile ran over last weekend, and in that article it said that only the spouses could vote. They had turned down the "Special Guest" entry into the club as it would not allow her to vote. Check the article from last weekend.

@ Sarah-3043284 - You write:

"There's a little something called legal capacity for informed consent. Animals, children, dead people and inanimate objects DON'T have that under the law."

According to your logic, I assume you support the legalization of prostitution? That also is a contract between two consenting adults with no victim.

Steve, like I said, you don't have to lower yourself by calling me an "asswipe". I have not refered to you in any way as anything other then Steve, but I guess that is how that works with you guys who don't agree with others opinions....attack with harsh words.

And if you would read my other posts that you already commented on, it said, "facts, not what you just read on MSNBC" This media has already tarnished it's journalistic reputation by reporting numerous non facts and even altering information to sell papers....and that is another proven fact.

Sarah-3043284

Sarah-3043284

It may be OK for many, but marriage is still between a man and a woman as plainly written in God's word.

Until June. And your God's word means jack @!$%# in this argument.

RHD,

No problem. I do what I can. Now can you actually make an argument against what I posted? Or did I just hurt your pride and you wanted to snipe back, but weren't able to on a substantive level?

Until June. And your God's word means jack @!$%# in this argument.

RHD,

No problem. I do what I can. Now can you actually make an argument against what I posted? Or did I just hurt your pride and you wanted to snipe back, but weren't able to on a substantive level?

Damn, looks like someone pissed they didn't get enough votes. Someone send it a flower or something.

JJ 101

And if you would read my other posts that you already commented on, it said, "facts, not what you just read on MSNBC" This media has already tarnished it's journalistic reputation by reporting numerous non facts and even altering information to sell papers....and that is another proven fact.

If that is the case from your view point then why bother coming into this forum.

Secondly....Treat me like a fool and you get harsh words in return. Don't insult my intelligence and I won't insult yours.

" Steve, the facts again seem to perplex you."

Getmadstaymad- (#1.5)

You are a disgrace to this nation and to Steve McQueen. The military doesn't 'represent your beliefs', they never did.

They serve, fight and die to preserve the constitution and by association- your freedom.

As a Christian myself reading your lack of tolerance is disgusting and fills me with the urge to vomit. You claim to be a CHRISTian but you seem to be dwelling on the old testament which pre-dates Christ. Maybe you spend a little more time reading the new testament since that is the focus of the CHRISTian faith.

And for the love of all that is holy remove Steve McQueen's photo as your avatar or he'll come back and kick your ass himself. Your attitude exposes you as a pale impostor of that great american.

C'mon Steve... stay above the "asswipe" stuff. You make good points and I enjoy reading your viewpoint. I hate to see good points such as yours carry less weight because you fell victim to name calling.

While I didn't read every word JJ101 wrote, I scanned most of it and couldn't find any name calling on his end. He challenged you for sure (dis-informed, perplexed by facts), but he didn't go where you did.

You seem like someone too smart to fall into the Newsvine mudpit. I disagree with many of JJ's points, but I sure am glad people like him are here to express viewpoints that I don't agree - and do so with both passion and respect.

ITIS,

Of course you didn't provide a source. And they're being under a guardian, means they DON'T HAVE informed consent.

Jesus. You've even driven ME to prayer. You really never get tired of embarrassing yourself.

Careful Sarah. That's already a "So help me God" and a "Jesus" out of you in less than a day.... and in the same thread, no less. Someone might confuse you for one of us Conservatives. I'll get you a John Deere hat and a beer ready just in case....

Steve, the reason I come here is to usually just read the blogs to see just what Liberals try to call facts nowadays. Lately it has gotten worse and worse with people trying to make statements based on BS or MSNBC unsubstantiated journalism. That is what is wrong with our country today, to many people talking out the southern end of their mouths and not knowing anything about the truth.

Secondly, I said you seemed perplexed about the facts. You were making comments about something that was not true or what you assumed to be true.

per·plexed (pr-plkst)

adj.
1. Filled with confusion or bewilderment; puzzled.
2. Full of complications or difficulty; involved.

It was not that I stated you were an "idiot" or "asswipe", it appeared you were just confused as to what the facts were. Your own admittanced showed that:

BTW thanks jamie I was under the impression that only the spouses of those in the"club" could vote as per the article.

• #1.100 - Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:26 PM EST

CNORTON,

I'll definitely take the beer. And if the hat comes with the Deere, bring it on.

JJ 101 - That is what is wrong with our country today, to many people talking out the southern end of their mouths and not knowing anything about the truth.

You definitely seem to have your own private definition of "truth".

Cracked Faces all around... as the small and feeble minds go wild!

Oh good God......... I mean Jesus.........OH Lord.......ok dang it guys now wait a minute why so upset over this lady getting votes for this? No one is hurt it isn't an attack on anyone's religion.

spouse

/spous/

Noun

A husband or wife, considered in relation to their partner.

Synonyms

consort - husband - wife - mate - partner - helpmate

And if she is doing good for people I think that's great. The only thing I could possibly find wrong with this is if she wins simply because of her sexual preference since that would demean her win. She should be judged (hate using that word) just like everyone else since she is the same as everyone else..........a spouse.

Gtouch,

Well said, that is exactly what I was thinking!!

Same question.... How much emphasis was placed on her "Spousing" and how much on her "partner choice"?

In her own words.... "“A lot of people who voted never me met or talked to me or knew me from Adam. I know it was a statement to the Obama Administration..."

Sure, that makes her a great spouse.... cause BARRY SAID SO...........

And yes, I have a close friend that I find to be an amazing woman. The fact she prefers women has never made any difference in our relationship.

I find it hypocritical of the liberal left to applaud but ONLY if when it champions their causes.

Skrekk, what part of the truth that I have said is so hard for you to understand?

1. This woman is not a "legal" spouse in the eyes of the Federal Government, yet?

2. That the United States is full of "private clubs" that discriminate against all people, white, black, hispanic, gay/lesbian........?

or the fact that MSNBC has fabricated / altered stories to better sell their own "personal views" of the writers?

If any of these are my own private truths, then I guess I would ask you the same question.

What is "your" definition of the "truth"?

Getmadstaymad - Steve McQueen was gay. You know how those actors were back then - closeted like Rock Hudson. He would be really mad at you so you might want to consider changing your avatar. I heard he also wore girls underwear.

JJ 101 - Skrekk, what part of the truth that I have said is so hard for you to understand?

1. This woman is not a "legal" spouse in the eyes of the Federal Government, yet?

Which has what, exactly, to do with a private club's decision to be bigoted? A private club doesn't provide federal benefits, nor is it their job to enforce DOMA.

DOMA is just a convenient excuse for bigotry, just like the club's sudden change in the membership rules to require a military spouse's ID.

Where are the important stories? Why isn't the story about Obama violating the Constitution front page news? The ruling came down today.

can hardly wait till msnbc gives us...kim kornholian's....take on the subject...i'm all getty with excitement...in other news the boy of the year is a girl...and the girl of the year is actually a girl...dam she knocked some guy out of being a....this is screwed up story...on msnbc...

I knew that it would only be a matter of time before public pressure caused these homophobes at ABOS to cave.

@ Sarah,

It's always nice to see your well informed and highly articulate posts. Also, as an aside, I was highly impressed with "For Charlie". That post was very moving and demonstrates the extent of your compassion. I think your family and friends are lucky to have you in their lives.

JJ 101

See what you posted is the reason you get attacked. Again trying to provoke by posting the meaning of the word....I think I understood what you meant. That in and of itself suggests that your trying to degrade my intelligence and frame my stand as that of a simpleton.

You hair splitting only serves the purpose of deflecting the conversation, but then again why should I expect more. I could have said butt-head.....maybe that would have been seen as less offensive.

BTW did you look at the story from last weekend?(to get back on point)

JJ101, I have read your posts, very cool, thoughtfully mastered. I for one, don't think this "spouse" will have much fun in a "club" where she wasn't wanted in the first place. I do not blame the ladies one iota and I am sorry they were forced to go below their standards. In no way should this person be a "person of the year".

JJ 101

FYI just the start of the story is the reason that I wrote what I have:

The decision comes one week after the Association of Bragg Officers' Spouses (ABOS) extended Broadway — who is married to Army Lt. Col. Heather Mack — a "special guest membership," an invitation she declined and called "extremely demeaning."

"After further reviewing the (club's) constitution, by-laws and internal procedures, the ABOS Board felt that in order to immediately support all military Officer spouses who are eligible for ABOS membership a more inclusive definition of spouse was needed. Therefore, any Spouse of an active duty commissioned or warrant Officer with a valid marriage certificate from any state or district in the United States is eligible for ABOS membership," the club's board said in a statement.

The fact is that as of the posting of the article over last weekend the ruling had not been revised. As mentioned in the beginning of this article.

Fact: the last sentance of the second paragraph says it all:

Therefore, any Spouse of an active duty commissioned or warrant Officer with a valid marriage certificate from any state or district in the United States is eligible for ABOS membership," the club's board said in a statement.

Are you getting it? They have a valid marriage certificate from any state or district in the United States.

Steve

Congratulations! You are the recipient of my first ever comment. Unfortunately, I think you owe JJ an apology for the namecalling.

You sound like a proud gay man. With all the homophobic comments you have probably received, did his little comment reallybother you so much? It may have been inaprropriate but so was your response.

Since JJ and you seem to be bantering about facts, I just thought I would point out a couple of non-facts about your points.

#1 The first paragraph of this article says that the voting was opened up nationally and was notjust by the Spouse's Club or even just military connected people.

#2 The previous article you referred to and this article are apples and oranges. The previous article was about the Spouse's Club offering her a non-voting club membership in the club. The voting for spouse of the year has nothing to do with theSpouse's Club, two completely different organizations. She had every right to cast her vote for herself as Spouse of the Year. You too can vote for her to win National Spouse of the Year if you want as that voting is available to everyone.

My big concern is that people simply voted for her based on the controversy. Having been both a military member and spouse for the last 25 years, I am not overly impressed with her list of accomplishments listed in the article. She may have did more that is not listed but, just by what is shown, I have known many military spouses who did a lot more in their community. Gay rights supporters are always saying that gays don't want special treatment, they want equal treatment. The award is to recognize those who contribute most to their respective military community. If people voted for her simply because she is a lesbian and the center of this controversy and not because she was the most deserving of the Fort Bragg nominees, does that mean she received special treatment because of her sexual orientation? Discrimination is wrong but, trying to gain equal treatment by not treating others equal is not the way to help end it.

I would not label myself as a Democrat or Republican. On some issues my personal beliefs are conservative and some issues I am more liberal. I admit this is one I am slightly conservative on. That doesn't mean I am going to try and force your beliefs to be the same as mine. One thing I definitely support is the First Amendment. I just think the namecalling is a little harsh in this situation and believe an apology would show great character on your behalf.

By the way, my own son is gay and although my wife and I are dissappointed in this, he is still our son and we still love him and understand his right to the pursuit of happiness in his life.

I wish you and your partner many years of happiness just as my wife and I have been lucky enough to have.

i believe in marriage between...a man and a woman...anything else is perverse...sorry but that's my way of thinking...the politicians can pander all they want for votes...just my opinion...don't mean to offend any body...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlwA5GLBmJM

Thank You Joe for your input & support.

Spouse's Club offering her a non-voting club membership in the club was my point as I made it early on and was the bases of my statements. It was pointed out to me that these are different organizations by Jamie. I thanked him for that information and pointing that out.

You sound like a proud gay man. With all the homophobic comments you have probably received, did his little comment reallybother you so much? It may have been inaprropriate but so was your response.

So true. At times it does get under my skin, I know as a rational person it shouldn't. I don't think people that do this(minimize) understand that in our time we have seen people beat to death over this (sexual orientation), discriminated and marginalized.

You are a true parent in the support of your son....I wish you and yours only the best.

Hey getmadstaymad...What if I was to say this?

"We are done with Christianity. They no longer represent our beliefs. I will not counsel my sons or anyone else to be batized. We are Americans. This is a American Country. Created by Americans for Americnas. Any form of Christianity is totally unacceptable"

Now I don't believe that, but its not so much fun to be on the other side of the "tolerance" fence?

No Skrekk it's your type of people is what is wrong with this country

The smart thing for these people to do would be to dissolve the club and then form a new one that meets off base. With this arrangement, you can dictate who you would prefer to be in the club. I feel sorry for the son though. Gays will soon have the right to marry across the U.S. imo. However, they should have never been allowed to raise children. Even some gays have the opinion that a child deserves both a mom and a dad.

Don Giacomo

Hay GetmadStaymad, Big news now this isn’t a Christian country, it’s a country with freedom of religion that accepts all religions. You must have missed that part of the constitution when you were trying to defend the second amendment. You are a sad – sad person who wants’ to twist any reality to fit your own sick paranoid and frightened view of what is actually a beautiful world. Unfortunately freedom of speech (another part of the constitution you would probably like to ignore when you aren’t talking) means we have to hear the poison and hate you like to spread. I really do hope you crawl back into your diseased hole and don’t come back out again.

Then you must not know much about our early fathers of this country. If anyone reads books on their lives can see that it was enriched with God being the authority. Most of our fathers were Christians, not deists as many try to slip in with no evidence to make their claim. Also whwn you say ALL religions, this also is not quite true. Our fathers didnt have issues back then with all these other religions smothering america. To even have leadership in the early states you had to actually profess your faith and acceptence of God, Jesus. Even if you look back at early court decisions and or Justices of that time, who say that this is a Christian nation.

People dont understand the difference between saying this is a Christian Nation and this country has declared Christianity as some state religion. There is a BIG difference and this is the real intention of church and state, that no religion will be made a state religion but that also doesnt mean that people of Christian should not be able to show their faith in public or public office. Our fathers didnt have any problems with showing their faith and beliefs, and it should be the same today. There is no law saying that religion can not influence state or we should seek people of Christian faith to lead this country. Once again this was mentioned by one of our early fathers that we should seek Christians for office. Unfortunately like anything else, Christianity has become tainted by some wicked people giving it a bad name but if anyone knew how good it can be, positive things can be done. There are plenty of people out there, liberal revisionists who try so hard to make people believe that it says freedom from religion, and not freedom of religion. BIG difference, and two different meanings.

mike-464493

GetMadStayMad,

The most compelling evidence that America is NOT and was NOT founded as a Christian country is to look up the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796. It clearly states that the United States supports no religion over any other and was ratified by the Congress at that time. Being the same time frame as the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, there's no doubt that America was never founded as a Christian nation and never intended to be one that catered to it or any other religion.

If you have time to read this in its full detail it will explain the issues with the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796 . I have quite a few links that explain in great detail and different aspects, but this one is good enough for now.

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/tripoli.html

also

http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/Treaty-of-Tripoli--Not-the-Fraud--but-the-TRUE-CHRISTIAN-Treaty-Story--COURSE-AMER-HIS-160.html

Well, here's the thing. I don't think anyone really cares if you're gay or otherwise, it's just, there are certain sacred institutions left in our society and their members are trying to protect from becoming corrupted. I do not care what you do in your bedroom, but two guys and girls getting together is not a marriage. Don't know what you might call that, but it's not a marriage :D

Now, this is my OPINION. It's what I think. The thing is... I'm not trying to FORCE myself on anyone ok? You LGTB people are FORCING your lifestyle on this country. And you know you are :) again, FORCING your way, your opinion(s) on everyone, the majority, who follow tradition. Somtimes tradition is indeed, a GOOD thing.

This does not mean that LGTB people are not decent folk, it doesn't mean that you should be treated any differently necessarily, however, why are we FORCED to change our perceptions for you? What you're doing is still un-natural. Why must everyone roll over and give up our clubs and let our children have knowledge of what you do?

This is what I don't understand. So I'm supposed to be ok with you guys FORCING your lifestyle change on my country and like, what if I still went to church? So my church has to accomodate you f*ckers now? Even though we don't share your beliefs? How is that right again?

F*ck u people. Stop trying to change everything, we need to get things back on track not go further into the red. Why do you think AIDS was such an epdimec? Hmmm? Who spread that sh*t around? And I'll stop here.

Still, I believe that officer should be dishonerably discharged from the Army.

She CHOSE to disobey regulations by being in a same sex relationship during a period that her orders we not to engage in such behavior. Like it or not, she chose that existance and, therefore, should be held accountable.

You cannot pick and chose which regs to follow... and she chose to be a criminal in the eyes of the UCMJ.

I love the dude who claims this is a country founded BY Christians FOR Christians. Here's a quick tip, if Christ actually exists, I bet he thinks you're an Assh*le. Let me guess, you'd die protecting your freedom to own a gun, but you can't name any of the other freedoms protected under the Constitution. Christ probably got more upset about you making out with your cousin than he did over a couple of gals falling in love. Now take your shoes off so you can get back to playing the banjo with your toes, Cletus. HOO-RAH!!!

I have some shocking news for the bigoted so called 'christians' on here.

There are many many many GAY CHRISTIANS, tons of them, millions of them.

I know, I am one of them. And my God and Jesus are loving caring and inclusive, they love me and they made me....and they made me the way I am. My God does not like haters, bigots etc. THe worst sin there is

The saddest outcome of all will come when Christ returns and you are not going with him. We are taught as Christians to love one another "unceasingly." I will do that to my fellow man no matter his/her inclination but am very concerned for your eternal futures.

Of course he loves you . He loves everyone just the same. But he also is a righteous God, and detests sin. So regardless if its the act of homosexuality or , lying murder, rape, slander, ect ect its still all sin, and needs to be abstained from, and try to not sin in those ways. No one is telling you that you cant be gay, but when a person engages freely in the big long list of sins, then you are defying God. Anyone who declares that God is ok with the act of homosexuality is not talking about the God of the bible or any sin for that nature. I have had people say they talked to God and asked him if it was ok to do things that are considered sin, and they were told by God that it was ok.. This is outrageous, because I can just say I asked God if its ok if i rob a bank or kill someone because I dont like them, and if God says its ok, then im clear.. This kind of thinking is a false teaching. If your doing something sinful , then it is a sin, regardless of what it is, and you should avoid doing it and ask for forgiveness./

As the march for equality processes unstoppably forward, all homophobic bigots will have no choice but to relent. It doesn't matter if they believe the ficitional god they appease doesn't like it. They can either fully accommodate gay and lesbian citizens, or else they can face fines and even prison sentences. America the Great does not cater to bigots. It prosecutes them.

Kind of curious about wether or not those who support gay marriage also support polygamy between consenting adults. Serious question.

It just amazes me the intolerance to religious believers in the name of TOLERANCE! What the "tolerant" crowd wants is tolerance of THEIR beliefs alone. It doesn't work that way. What you, the INTOLERANT Left seem to forget is that not everyone is going to be protected perfectly. It can't happen!!! And the reality is, the majority of states have decided, based on their Constitutional right to do so, that gay marriage is against their community morals. A minority have decided, based on their Constitutional right to do so, that gay marriage is absolutely okay with them. That is the Constitution working the way it should.

So get a grip and come to terms with the way the Constitution is really supposed to work. Just because you think I should have to tolerate your immorality doesn't make it so!

Getmadstaymad, Sorry to break it to you but some of them are in uniform right now, protecting your right to be a uneducated bigot.

If it turns out that nobody wants to associate with her at the club, she'll just start her whining again. I just don't believe anyone has the right to force themselves on anybody, and you can be certain that pressure was exerted to offer membership.

frankly true...i' not a gay hater...just have a different point of view...think that some people try to play the system with the gay marriage thing...to get the people to vote for them...a club that was set up for oppsite sex married couples...should be awarding things to those who meet those requirements...if it was a same sex based club...i would agree she was worthy of the award...

I'm glad I was honorably discharged 35 years ago...this crap wasn't even an issue what so ever then...in fact I never even gave it a thought during my years of active duty..didn't know of & never heard of anyone that was gay and didn't care....the big thing was near the end of my time the female recruits were showing up in larger numbers...but that wasn't all bad...some of them were pretty cute ...but overseas at the NATO bases they were the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches at a steak dinner...LOL..opposite of a CONUS base , which were in the middle of bumphuck nowhere usually like Cannon AFB NM..where the WAFS were few and the locals were cows and the fights for their attention in the NCO club were many...then their were the # girls of Korat , Thailand...boom boom honeymoon all night..it was fun down time even tho it was war time(Nam)..I can't comprehend how life in todays military is like...definitely not the same as back then...too bad...seems to uptight with all this PC garbage and social engineering taking place bet it is making for low morale...don't get me wrong it wasn't all rosy then either especially night strikes or ops , the mission was the important thing not who's doin' what to whom or who's feelings are being hurt , the biggest problem at times being boredom and later in the Carter years good reliable equipment...

Women in general have been accepting to various ethical, religious, ethnic, gender, social, controversial and other beliefs. What makes you people think that this spouses club (majority female) would not eventually conform to the standards of gays? Especially when the media is involved. That is like having an argument in public that women want to keep to a whisper.

And the reality is, the majority of states have decided, based on their Constitutional right to do so, that gay marriage is against their community morals. A minority have decided, based on their Constitutional right to do so, that gay marriage is absolutely okay with them. That is the Constitution working the way it should.

WRONG, Carla. I hope you're not still claiming to be a lawyer, because you prove your lack of knowledge of the law with every post.

The Constitution trumps ALL state laws, and the Supreme Court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right" under the 14th Amendment. Furthermore, we are not a country of majority rule, and civil rights cannot be voted on, because the tyranny of the majority will always deny rights to the minority. So your example is the Constitution NOT working the way it should -- in fact, your example is one of the states IGNORING the Constitution completely.

Good luck with that law degree, but perhaps you should go to high school first.

BTW, morality is subjective, and WE are forced to tolerate YOUR immorality every day.

I do not see a problem with them recognizing her for the honor. The decision has been made to allow same sex partners to be recognized by the Federal Government and Armed Forces of the United States. I have no idea how this will all work out in the long run, but try not to be a spoil sport and wish them ill-will. They look happy together so leave it at that.

@Sarah,

Of course you didn't provide a source.

Assuming I didn't have a source, which I do, how does that invalidate my statement? Can you show that bestiality isn't legal in the thirteen aforementioned states?

@Erin

The Constitution trumps ALL state laws, and the Supreme Court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right" under the 14th Amendment.

You skipped the ninth and tenth amendment, but you also forgot about the "rational test basis" for the equal protection clause.

That is why as a soldier I had no use for brass or generally officers. They will do everything to be PC and make sure that they tow the official party line. But to say this is a christian country is not true. Our founding fathers had faith in God but did not beleive that we should have a religion based on government decree.That certain inailable rights came from God and not from man. Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

@ getmadstaymad..."We are done with the U.S. Military. They no longer represent our beliefs. I will not counsel my sons or anyone else to join the US military. We are Christians. This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians. Any form of homosexuality is totally unacceptable."

This is directed at getmadstaymad and any other self professed Christian who is judging these two ladies. I am also a Christian. I am a heterosexual and believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. However it is NOT our place to judge them or anyone else who is practicing a lifestyle outside of our beliefs. I don't support laws being created or special privileges being given to them. At the same time they are human and we are told not to judge. Why not live and let live and if you don't agree with them that is fine, but to judge and treat them so harshly is not Christian and all you are doing is making the Christian community look like a bunch of hypocrits.

This USA is so divided right now. And yes I do believe this country was founded on Christian beliefs. But we have to come together as a people and stop all the infighting. It's exactly what our enemies want. The Devil loves to see it and so do our enemies over seas. We are just too blind to see it.

@Jack

Hey... you are a nice guy! :) Congratulations!

I ain't judging nobody - However - Yur candid little Christian community thar is 'bout to be overrun. U want to be Christian right? So thar may very well soon come a day when u cannot call yurself a Christian openly because that will go against society.

So, while I really don't like people who judge, thar's a fine line in the sand. There comes a point when you have to just say, enough is enough! Because they don't care. Right? They don't give too sh*ts about what you think and YOUR RIGHTS.

Then it will all be too late. And you, and your beliefs will be sacrificed to the GOD OF FAIRNESS. And you will worship that God, yes you will! And you had better do EXACTLY what he @!$%#ing tells you to do Mr Big Christian.

Erin: I realize that this may be above your head because you clearly don't understand that one must graduate from high school and college before going to law school, but try to follow along.

Amendment X, United States Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

On that basis, SCOTUS has found that the Constitution leaves to the states the right to define for themselves what is and is not marriage. Thus, a state law or constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is not repugnant to the Constitution but is precisely what is called for by the Constitution just as are laws that support gay marriage in states where the people wish to support the institution.

Thank God you don't have a seat on the high court as you clearly don't understand our form of government or the purpose and application of our Constitution.

Carla-445698 - It just amazes me the intolerance to religious believers in the name of TOLERANCE!

The problem isn't religion per se, it's that you think your cult belongs in other people's lives and think that your sharia laws should be enforced by the state. Maybe you should read the 1st Amendment and the Lemon Test to see why the state can't impose the rules of your odd little cult on everyone?

On that basis, SCOTUS has found that the Constitution leaves to the states the right to define for themselves what is and is not marriage. Thus, a state law or constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is not repugnant to the Constitution but is precisely what is called for by the Constitution just as are laws that support gay marriage in states where the people wish to support the institution.

Unfortunately for bigots like you, the government has no more legitimate interest in the relative race of your spouse than it does the relative gender of your spouse. There's a reason you bigots are consistently losing in court on this issue, and it appears to be because you don't understand the 14th Amendment.

Uh, ItIS, I posted a source to show you that. Try clicking on it

Ron,

Thank you!

You skipped the ninth and tenth amendment, but you also forgot about the "rational test basis" for the equal protection clause.

Amendment X, United States Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Apparently neither one of you is a lawyer (most especially you, Carla, since you are the one who claims that's what you are), since neither of you is familiar with incorporation doctrine. Furthermore, while the states can regulate marriage, they cannot violate the Constitution by denying the right to marry to consenting adults based on the relative genders of the parties -- that is discrimination, and it is unconstitutional.

BTW, It!s, bestiality is illegal in 37 states, making it legal in the other 13, as you mentioned -- but that does not mean that animals can legally consent to contracts, which is what marriage is. And you (and Carla, for that matter) are using the same dumb arguments the dumb bigots tried to use against interracial marriage in the 1960s, and they are still just as dumb. No wonder you dumb bigots keep LOSING in the courts.

Man......this thread went off-track.

Man have we gotten so far off subject. But since we are. I see it like this, Religious people tend to judge people and do not realize the bible says not to. Atheist have no clue about the bible and post rhetoric that the bible has answer for. Both religious and atheist do not know enough about science or the bible to post an opinion on either subject. Atheist claim that religious are closed minded yet they cannot read the bible and understand it. Religious people tend to think they should can change the sinner when they need to focus on themselves.

The media is full of gays. Strict heteros are not going to win this argument, because you are at a technological disadvantage and it is written.... like I said the bible has already written about it.

America moves forward.

G

Hey Getmadstaymad

You said, "We are done with the U.S. Military. They no longer represent our beliefs. I will not counsel my sons or anyone else to join the US military. We are Christians. This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians. Any form of homosexuality is totally unacceptable."

I hope your glass house is safe from any stones you are casting at your fellow man. Your post brings up one questions... Is a priest abusing a young boy homosexuality, or is that some how "the Lord's work"? You sound like a hypocrite to me. The Army thanks you for keeping your boys safe from the real world.

Is it just me or do these women look like twins. Actually, I've notice alot of lesbian hookups looking like their missing twin. So lesbians aren't looking for men, they're looking for love from other women that looks like them. Is that a personification of narcissism?

@ The Dark One - I ain't judging nobody - However - Yur candid little Christian community thar is 'bout to be overrun. U want to be Christian right? So thar may very well soon come a day when u cannot call yurself a Christian openly because that will go against society.

I do not believe your drivel... however should the society I live in ever make it illegal to call myself a Christian I am not afraid to die for my beliefs. I will lay my life down for my Savior...The same as I am not afraid to stand up for my rights to bear arms and protect myself from a tyrannical government.

With that said, I am also not going to judge these two ladies. I don't agree with their way of life, but it is not for me to judge them here on Earth. That will happen later by someone with far greater judgement than any of us.

TheDarkOne

Your misinformed. The majority of the worlds HIV/AIDS population always has been the heterosexual community. Besides hiding your head in the sand and being very judgemental. Might I suggest that you look in your own glass house before casting dispersions on others.

News Flash!

As soon as we get equal rights under the law then the sooner you will quit hearing about things like this. THAT'S THE AGENDA....EQUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW.

This is a civil rights issue, and a civil rights issue only.....not special rights.

I don't know where people get off being the morality police.....You'd better be careful in what your promoting, you never know when the morality police might put you and your life under the microscope, and start denying your civil rights telling you you can marry someone because of the color of their skin...religion....country of birth. Oh wait...They can't because that is illegal!

Question:

How does a person being gay personally have any bearing on your personal life?

How does a married gay couple personally have any bearing on your personal life?

Remember this is not a trick question. I ask about you....not society.

For all those that are worried about our souls.

Remember the bible says that those that are lost to the eternal bowels of hell shall not be remembered by those that have ascended to the gates of heaven.

You won't even realize we where here. You wouldn't miss us, because you wouldn't have any memory of us. Nothing to mourn.

NoCommi's

misinformation

derailing

Wow! I guess I shouldn't be, but I am surprised with how bitter and split this country has become. I remember a time (up until the last two years of Bush II) when people could disagree about just about everything, but they could still voice their stance w/o getting attacked. Now everything has to be stated "just right" as not to offend anyone.

I personally believe that this woman is getting this award primarily because she is gay. Because every military officers spouse is expected to do the following things: "Broadway has volunteered to tutor solders’ children in reading, briefed inbound Army families on local school districts, and helped transferring soldiers with housing-location decisions." So what has she done that was above and beyond the usual scope of being a high ranking officers spouse?

I believe that gay people should have the right to get married. However, I don't think that the government should have it's fingers in the marriage process at all. Why should the government have anything to do with marriage? I know, for taxation and property rights. But if we threw out the entire tax-code and went to a flat 10% for everyone, that would fix that problem. And if Bill and Bob get married, their property would get taken care of, just like if Sue and Tom were married.

I don't think that gay couples should be considered "special" or should garner any special treatment or reward. I think that they should be considered what they are, no more, no less than a straight couple, two people who share a bond (hopefully of love and respect). And I don't care to hear about it; I don't go around stating that "I am a hetrosexual and that you have to deal with it". And regardless if you are gay or straight, I don't like seeing two folks rummaging around in each others pants, or tongue wrestling in public.

I also agree that our founders did not deem the US to be a "Christian country", but it was founded on religious virtues and standards:

Then I conclude, that believing a Providence (active God) we have the Foundation of all true Religion; for we should love and revere that Deity for his Goodness and thank him for his Benefits; we should adore him for his Wisdom, fear him for his Power, and pray to him for his Favour and Protection; and this Religion will be a Powerful Regulater of our Actions, give us Peace and Tranquility within our own Minds, and render us Benevolent, Useful and Beneficial to others.--Ben Franklin.

At the same time they were not intolerant against other religions, or the non-believers:

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.-- Thomas Jefferson

This so-called 'Spouse of the Year Award' is a complete and utter FRAUD!!

As has been noted, it is a open vote so that all of the activists in the country can participate. But, even so, they feel compelled to HIDE the results. Why do you suppose that is?

Additionally, the 'Military Spouse Magazine', that ran this phony 'poll' is owned by Victory Media, Inc. Victory Media is supported by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT through the GSA (General Services Administration).

Even so, out of the 2,300,000+ active and reserve military members in the US (most of whom are married) this phony rag only has a distribution of 73,000. No REAL periodical could survive with such a pathetic following. The REAL military families KNOW that this is just a propaganda rag.

Being a veteran, myself, and the son of a career military member and having lived much of my life on military bases, I know how these things work.

I have no doubt that the REAL REASON that this woman was allowed to join the Fort Bragg spouses' club was because POLITICAL PRESSURE was brought to bear on the husbands and wives of the club's membership through the base chain of command.

This whole episode carries the foul stench of Obama and the Democrats. Political blackmail against the Fort Bragg commanders is the only reason that they would violate Federal Law.

It is ironic that in trying to secure your rights you always have to trample on someone elses!

NoCommi's

Stuping to your level of insults I will not.

When in the military the honor code has nothing to do with your husband or wife. It has to do with your personal commitment.

We are no longer in the stone age where women are expected to be the little woman and remain at home to raise kids and cook, clean and put out for the big macho man that brings home the bacon. fortunately for society we have advanced where each person should be looked upon based on who they are and their achievements, not what they are. I would hope anyone would support that.

I'm sure if the role was reversed your thoughts would run in another direction and you would see what the problem is here. Try being discriminated against....Then get back to me on how it feels.

P.S. You didn't answer the question I posed.

niece1964

It is ironic that in trying to secure your rights you always have to trample on someone elses!

How so? How does people having equal rights equate to someone loosing rights?

Did we as a society loose any rights when women where allowed to vote, or African Americans got civil rights? No, I don't think so.

We only gain in a society where everyone is treated with respect, dignity and EQUALLY.

foolishness abounds

Had they moved the "club" off base it wouldn't have been an issue, but because they are on base it is an issue and they have to abide by federal law, one that I might add was passed way before our current President.

For those of you that think Gay marriage will be the break down of society, try and focus your efforts on the things in our society that are broken, like homelessness, battered Women & Children, foster children and the elderly to name a few.

We need to take care of other issues that have far reaching impacts on our society to make it better for all.

@ Thedarkone ...

First off your thinly disguised profanity has no place here. Thus reported.

Now, this is my OPINION. It's what I think. The thing is... I'm not trying to FORCE myself on anyone ok? You LGTB people are FORCING your lifestyle on this country. And you know you are :) again, FORCING your way, your opinion(s) on everyone, the majority, who follow tradition. Somtimes tradition is indeed, a GOOD thing.

You are entitled to think that. No one is trying to stop you from THINKING. But no one is FORCING anything on you either. You could claim that if someone was holding a gun to your head and saying YOU WILL MARRY SOMEONE OF YOUR OWN SEX. Or perhaps, if they said TO GET ANY LEGAL STANDING OR FEDERAL BENEFITS YOU MUST MARRY SOMEONE OF YOUR OWN SEX. If either one of those things was happening to you, I would agree. That "lifestyle" is being forced upon you. But since it's not ... then if you don't like it, don't do it. Pretty simple concept.

This is what I don't understand. So I'm supposed to be ok with you guys FORCING your lifestyle change on my country and like, what if I still went to church? So my church has to accomodate you (profanity deleted) now? Even though we don't share your beliefs? How is that right again?

No, your church doesn't have to do a darn thing. Every gay marriage law on the books has EXEMPTED any religious institution from holding marriage rites that disagree with its tenets. And, btw, you are hardly an example for an "upright Christian" with your language ... speaking of "offensive" (and which I removed from my copy of your post).

(Profanity deleted) you people. Stop trying to change everything, we need to get things back on track not go further into the red. Why do you think AIDS was such an epdimec? Hmmm? Who spread that (profanity deleted) around? And I'll stop here.

Hmmm... and what do gay people have to do with "being in the red"? And you do realize that AIDS is STILL an epidemic ... and the majority of victims are heterosexual?

You really SHOULD stop. You are giving decent church going folks a bad name.

plain bob

frankly true...i' not a gay hater...just have a different point of view...think that some people try to play the system with the gay marriage thing...to get the people to vote for them...a club that was set up for oppsite sex married couples...should be awarding things to those who meet those requirements...if it was a same sex based club...i would agree she was worthy of the award...

And if that club, or any club, was set up only for white married couples, or only couples that marry within their race, would it be okay for it (or them) to have use of military base facilities, and maybe even get some money from us taxpayers? No, it wouldn't. It would be fine if such a spouse's club formed with discriminatory practices existed and met only off base and funded by its own money (and be subjected to ridicule). But on base? Nosiree. That couple was legally married. The wife of the soldier has a right to belong to the spouse's club if it meets on military property. If it would've continued to refuse her membership, then - by law - it must be expelled from the base and denied official recognition.

Steve, you are full of crap!!

'Don't Ask/Don't Tell' was a POLICY, but the Defense of Marriage Act is a FEDERAL LAW!!

Despite his delusions of dictatorship, Obama doesn't have the power to repeal Federal law upon his whim.

The military DOES NOT recognize gay marriage nor does the state of North Carolina. Thus, on ANY military base AND in North Carolina, these women's marriage DOES NOT EXIST.

In fact, the citizens of North Carolina voted overwhelmingly to BANN gay marriage through an Amendment to the State Constitution.

but the Defense of Marriage Act is a FEDERAL LAW!!

And an unconstitutional one, which the courts are beginning to realize.

Obama doesn't have the power to repeal Federal law upon his whim.

No, but he does have the power to not support or enforce DOMA. The SCOTUS will repeal it.

The military DOES NOT recognize gay marriage nor does the state of North Carolina.

And once DOMA is repealed and/or gay marriage is legalized by the SCOTUS, they'll have no choice.

the citizens of North Carolina voted overwhelmingly to BANN gay marriage through an Amendment to the State Constitution.

And such bans is frequently challenged in the courts.

It is ironic that in trying to secure your rights you always have to trample on someone elses!

How is your or anyone else's rights being trampled on?

This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians.

Demonstratably false! I defy you to prove otherwise!

foolishness abounds - 'Don't Ask/Don't Tell' was a POLICY, but the Defense of Marriage Act is a FEDERAL LAW!!

Wrong. DADT was a federal law, part of the 1994 National Defense Authorization Act. Prior to DADT the ban on gays was simply Executive policy which any President could have reversed. And prior to 1942 there was no ban on gays per se.

Despite his delusions of dictatorship, Obama doesn't have the power to repeal Federal law upon his whim.

That's why Obama couldn't repeal DADT on his own, because it was a federal law. It took an act of Congress to repeal the law, although the courts were ready to do it for them if Congress had failed to act.

This is a Christian Country. Created by Christians for Christians.

Demonstratably false! I defy you to prove otherwise!

History Books, and diaries , journals of our founding fathers, court justices.

No one is saying that the government made this a Christian nation, just that this nation was founded by and built upon christians and their values .

I understand that people today are trying to make people believe in a different history, but thank God you cant change the words of what has been written by people of the past. History is your proof, escpecially anything pre 40's before this whole Liberalism movement is washing over america and changing everything.

History Books, and diaries , journals of our founding fathers, court justices.

They all point to a secular country, which is what the US is. it just happens to have many christians in it. but that doesn't mean it's a christian country or built on christian values. The Constitution alone is proof of that!

just that this nation was founded by and built upon christians and their values .

Still false!

I understand that people today are trying to make people believe in a different history, but thank God you cant change the words of what has been written by people of the past.

I understand you're still trying to pass off your usual brand of misinformation. You were called out for your BS before and I'll call you out on it again!

Not false Gordy.. Perhaps in todays society , than has went so radically left and is trying to turn away from our founding fathers and their ideas of this nation. As i said I only need to pick up a book of them to see how they felt about this country.. Not one liners.

As i also said, no where did I say Christian to be the religion of america, I said people in office who are Christian, and that is how it was back then. All our documents point toward God.

Not false Gordy

Yes, false Marmaduke! We've been over this before many times too.

As i said I only need to pick up a book of them to see how they felt about this country

I am well versed in such matters, far more than you realize!

, I said people in office who are Christian, and that is how it was back then.

That' s how it is now too. People, even those in any ofice, are free to have or follow any religion they wish. But that is an individual preference and does not translate to others or to society and pblic policy as a whole.

. All our documents point toward God.

Explain the Constutution then! No god there or any religious ideology referenced. As the most important document in our country's history, you would think those "christian" minded Founding fathers would reference something pertaining to god or christianity? Butm they didn't, and for good reason too!

It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#god

Unfortunately for accommodationists and others opposed to a strict separation of church and state, the case here is not as clear as they believe. Indeed, the fact that so few reputable scholars even give this clause a second glance when discussing the separation of church and state should be a strong clue that this passage cannot be used in the way that amateurs would like.

For one thing, there is no evidence in the records of any intention on the part of the authors to establish a particular Sabbath day by the government. Instead, all of the commentaries on and records of debate make it clear that the concern was over the exact number of days which a president would have to consider a bill and decide whether to sign it, veto it or just leave it alone. At first, the Constitutional Convention was going to give presidents just seven days, but shortly after that decision they lengthened it to ten days — perhaps in an effort to better balance the power of the President against that of the Congress.

If this clause had been inserted for specifically religious reasons, it would be the only clause in the entire Constitution which existed for such reasons. If this were the case, wouldn't some mention of this unique situation have been included in the records? The fact that no such record exists does not prove the clause was not inserted for the sake of supporting particular religious beliefs, but it is very suggestive and makes the case for those opposed to the separation of church and state much more difficult.

Isn't it also reasonable to think that the authors would have specifically referred to this day as the Sabbath rather than simply as Sunday? If Sunday is exempted because the authors of the Constitution thought it should be a day of rest, why not refer to it as a day of rest? Moreover, why is Sunday exempted only in this one situation — why not in other legislative and governmental matters?

Even in this context, the President is neither prevented nor even discouraged from vetoing or signing legislation on Sundays. Such facts also eliminate as a plausible explanation the idea that the authors wanted to ensure that a president who was strict about keeping the Sabbath would not be compelled to break that rule by considering bills on Sundays.

The only thing exempted for Sunday is counting it as one of the ten days during which the President has to consider the bill. As a result, this clause actually fails to establish Sunday as a Sabbath because it fails to establish Sunday as a day of rest during which people are expected to leave aside their normal work and focus instead on God and religious worship.

So why was the clause inserted? The simplest reason is that the authors wanted to make sure that the President would have a reasonable amount of time to consider bills passed by Congress.

With Sundays excepted, a president can have up to nearly two full working weeks before he has to make a decision. This would have been important at the time the Constitution was written is because there were still so many places where Sabbath Laws were strictly enforced. One of the restricted activities was travel — so, if a president were outside the Capitol when Congress passed a bill, he could require at least an extra day just to get back. Because Sundays are exempted from the time allotted, Congress wasn't able to pull and fast one and get a law though without allowing the president enough time to consider it.

In effect, then, the Sundays Excepted Clause was actually an attempt by the Constitution's authors to prevent politicians from using religion and religious practice in an underhanded way.

http://atheism.about.com/od/churchstatemyths/a/SundaysExceptedClause.htm

Perhaps you should stop getting your "facts" from Wallbuilders.

There are four references to a deity found in the Declaration of Independence, which was primarily co-authored by Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, both friends of Thomas Paine. Those phrases are: "Nature's God,""Creator,""Supreme Judge," and "Divine Providence." Specifically, the Declaration starts out:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The Declaration of Independence clearly asserts earthly authority, the words "Laws of Nature" are even capitalized. In addition to reading the usage of the word God in context, it is also important to understand the Declaration in its own historical context. Furthermore, Benjamin Franklin was a self-declared Deist and it was he who made the final edits to the document.

The Declaration of Independence would have been clearly recognizable as deistic at the time it was written. The Declaration did not, for example, state: "In the name of The Lord God Jesus Christ," as would have been a much more traditional reference to the Christian God in a manner that was used by Europeans at the time. The Declaration was written during the height of the Enlightenment when Deism was popular and widely known. Deistic language was easy to recognize by people of the time because Deists avoided all of the traditional references to the Christian God. When Deists referred to "God" they used terms like "Supreme Being", "Almighty Judge", "Creator", "God of Nature", "Nature's God", etc. On the other hand Christians typically used terms like "the Lord", "Jesus Christ", "God", "Savior", etc.

The reference to "Laws of Nature" is an even more direct reference to Deism, because the deistic belief was that some supreme being created the universe and the laws of nature and the rest of what progressed from that point on followed the laws of nature. Most Deists did not believe in divine intervention or supernatural occurrences, and they definitely did not believe that Jesus was the son of God. Mention of the Laws of Nature would have been an extremely obvious reference to Deism in 1776.

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/history_of_the_separation_of_chu.htm

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,

John Adams, Treaty of Tripoli, 1797

Looks like the Treaty of Tripoli trumps your Treaty of Paris.

Actually, Marmaduke, I just found the website from which you plagiarized your whole post.

Reported.

3And we will keep going over it.

Go right ahead, you'll just keep looking like a liar and foolish at the same time!

Actually, Marmaduke, I just found the website from which you plagiarized your whole post.

Well, THERE's a surprise! LOL

I dont care Gordy. Why do i need to repeat in my own words what someone else has already said.

I understand that liberal revisionists want to try to change our history and make it look like our fathers wanted nothing to do with religion.

I just got the famous one liner that someone used from John adams..

This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”

I mean are you kidding me ? This is what you all do best, yank one liners out of context and make it look like a person believes and is saying something completely different than what he feels or means.

Too bad they probably dont know all of that line in context with the rest of what John Adams said.

I dont need to debate with you all about history, its black and white, and what they felt, they said, and recorded it in history. I will never let you vipers sway me one bit from the truth of our fathers and what religion meant to them when they founded this america.

If you have any points to make Gordy, im happy to hear them. As for whats her face, I have her on ignore, and plan to keep it like that. If I see anyone quoting something she says so i see it, they go on ignore too. I dont have time to deal with extremists who are too hard headed and blind to see or hear truth.

I dont care Gordy.

I know you don't. that's the problem. People like you don't care if they have to lie to promote a lie or agenda. David Barton and the Wallbuilders operate along the same lines!

Why do i need to repeat in my own words what someone else has already said.

You don't. It would still be a lie!

I understand that liberal revisionists want to try to change our history and make it look like our fathers wanted nothing to do with religion

repeating your same rhetoric doesn't lend you or your claims any credibility!

This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”

Mr. Adams was a wise man, far more than you. It's small wonder why he's regarded as the father of the US Constitution.

I dont need to debate with you all about history, its black and white, and what they felt, they said, and recorded it in history

You don't need to because you can't! I've pointed out exactly what the Founding fathers said and felt regarding the foundation from this country straight from primary, original sources, in many discussions such as this. All you do is imply their beliefs translated to the rest of the country, but cntinuously fail to prove it using original sources. And the Wallbuilders is NOT a credible source!

I will never let you vipers sway me one bit from the truth of our fathers and what religion meant to them when they founded this america.

Of course you won't be swayyed: you've already made up your mind to lie and distrot information and facts about the Founding Fathers and the foundation of this country. You've done it many times already and get called out on it many imes too!

If you have any points to make Gordy, im happy to hear them.

I already made them. you obviously didn't pay attention!

As for whats her face, I have her on ignore, and plan to keep it like that.

Of course you do, as she appens to be exactly right and you can't refurte anything she says. So, better to just ignore it than fess up and admit you're wrong? I've many others like you do that many times before. It only further shows your lack of credibility and intelletual honesty!

If I see anyone quoting something she says so i see it, they go on ignore too. I dont have time to deal with extremists who are too hard headed and blind to see or hear truth.

Then you're going to have a lot of peaople on your ignore list, and you'll still be wrong and a liar regardless!

As for whats her face, I have her on ignore, and plan to keep it like that. If I see anyone quoting something she says so i see it, they go on ignore too. I dont have time to deal with extremists who are too hard headed and blind to see or hear truth.

Right, you're too busy plagiarizing in your efforts to spread misinformation and lies.

All of which makes you a LIAR, Marmaduke.

gordy327

I dont care Gordy.

I know you don't. that's the problem. People like you don't care if they have to lie to promote a lie or agenda. David Barton and the Wallbuilders operate along the same lines!

Look Barton made a few bad choice of words, but over all his history is still sound and it still doesnt change the history of our fathers. When i say I dont care, I no longer care about what you have to say because you are a revisionist. You so badly want to blot out anything that ties religion and our government, and society. Why would I have or need an agenda. To have an agenda, I would need to try to change something for my benefit. I am not trying to change anything. I let history speak for itself, and what our founding fathers have said, and wrote about in their lives. As one guy told me on the History forums when i went there to discuss founding fathers, they said if any person where to actually pick up a book and read the personal lives of the founding fathers, they would clearly see how much religion meant to them and part of this America we live, and how much society needs it. Once again no one is forcing religion on anyone, but a person can say that america would be a better place if we looked toward God. No where can you say that means we are forcing religion on anyone.

You don't. It would still be a lie!

Says you.

repeating your same rhetoric doesn't lend you or your claims any credibility!

WHat you see as rhetoric I see as hitting the nail on the head. My credibility lies with in my founding fathers and what the believed.

This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”

Mr. Adams was a wise man, far more than you. It's small wonder why he's regarded as the father of the US Constitution

I am well aware he is a wise man, and his role and assumed title. Which is why he said A LOT more than the one liner I gave you. I used that one liner to prove a point. The point was is the revisionists try to show their side by ripping one liners out of context to prove their point. Now if you know anything about that line he said, then you should know the entire paragraph it was in, why it was written and to whom.
That is people trying to make their agendas, not me Gordy. I leave it all in context along with every thing else.

Just like the bible, people rip out one liners.. Let me give you an example. If your familiar with the bible, then you know about Jesus and the woman at the well.

A person with an agenda would use this argument. From a biblical view for those who actually believe in it, there is such a thing called sin. We all sin, even people who are saved , sin. The pope sins, billy graham sins, kids sin, adults sin. No one is free from it. Now , I view, just as the bible does, people who are engaging in homosexuality are people who are sinning. Now sin is just like any other sin, lying , cheating stealing, murdering, coveting, slander, sleeping around with all kinds of partners.. ect ect ..Its all sin.

Now with all that being said, here is the famous one liner when a debate starts with a person who engages in sin. Hey , Jesus said let he who is with out sin cast the first stone. So you know that line im sure. Everyone slowly walks away, and jesus said to her where are your accusers now.. BUT here is the rest of it, Jesus told her that he doesnt condemn her, he forgives her, BUT he tells her to go and SIN NO MORE.. As in stop sleeping around with men out of wedlock.

So as you can see when a person tosses that in my face, hey jesus said let he who is with out sin cast the first stone... I always tell them, why dont you finish it.. You knwo why they dont > because one liners taken out of context can make any topic, any idea, a persons thoughts.. anything mean something else.

This is what you all history revisionists are so guilty of doing. If you left the entire history of our founding fathers, and the entire things that they said, and how God was a part of their lives and was part of politics, then we wouldnt be having this debate today. But since you insist on making the gullible believe in your false views, there needs to be people like me to shut you down.

You don't need to because you can't! I've pointed out exactly what the Founding fathers said and felt regarding the foundation from this country straight from primary, original sources, in many discussions such as this. All you do is imply their beliefs translated to the rest of the country, but cntinuously fail to prove it using original sources. And the Wallbuilders is NOT a credible source!

Yes you do gordy, your very proficient at one liner and context ripping. Wall builders IS a credible source, because they use the words of our founding fathers. I am well aware of what they did to hurt their credibility, but once again I say just because they may have some what distorted one thing does not change the entire picture of our history and founding fathers. The entire context of history is unchanged. Also on a side note I do not need to use their site, I have many others.

Of course you won't be swayyed: you've already made up your mind to lie and distrot information and facts about the Founding Fathers and the foundation of this country. You've done it many times already and get called out on it many imes too!

You havent called me out on anything. The reason why you cant is because you cant bring down history that is already written down. I am here to uphold it and defend it.

Of course you do, as she appens to be exactly right and you can't refurte anything she says. So, better to just ignore it than fess up and admit you're wrong? I've many others like you do that many times before. It only further shows your lack of credibility and intelletual honesty!

She is far from exactly right. I have seen her proven wrong by many people on many topics, she is good at being crazy and fanatical and those people recognize that and have mentioned it many times. I can no longer tolerate her myself because of her wild views and thick mind. I ignore her not because you all think she is right, I ignore her because she is a waste of my time, and my time is far more important than to talk to a wall. Eventually you will be there too, im sure I will have you in ignore soon. Which is fine with me, because I will still be on newsvine defending history, the bible, God, ect ect ..

The good news is, is that even thought you all are too far gone to listen to reason, there are people on these forums who actually want to hear the truth and will see I am right. They can go look for themselves and make their own decisions. It doesnt take much of a rocket scientists to see people who try to use one liners out of context to support their views, and people like me who show the over all entire picture.

Then you're going to have a lot of peaople on your ignore list, and you'll still be wrong and a liar

regardless!

Hey thats fine too. I could care less, because the people who get on my ignore list are too far gone for me to waste my time with anyway. There are those who will see what I say, and they may see what you say, but I wont be replying to it, because I will no longer be seeing it. Your not there yet but your getting close.

There are those who will see what I say, and they may see what you say, but I wont be replying to it, because I will no longer be seeing it. Your not there yet but your getting close.

You act like we care. We don't.

That you stubbornly refuse to see reality is to no one's detriment but your own.

Look Barton made a few bad choice of words, but over all his history is still sound and it still doesnt change the history of our fathers

Barton's "history" is anything but sound, or factual. He's a well known christian history revisionist and liar. His claims regarding history and the Founding Fathers have all been debunked by accredited scholars and historians. The fact that you accept his claims makes you non-credible and just as bad as he is!

I no longer care about what you have to say because you are a revisionist.

That's hilarious coming from you. you look up to the king of revisionists, Mr. Barton himself.

To have an agenda, I would need to try to change something for my benefit

What can be more to your benefit than spreading lies that the US is or is founded on christianity. That would make your religion seem the prime religion and all others less equal or second rate in the eyes of the government and law. It's also a big ego trip for you if that were the case!

they would clearly see how much religion meant to them and part of this America we live, and how much society needs it.

And then they, and you, make the mistake of assuming their religion and beliefs automatically translate to the establishment of this country or to the rest of us by proxy!

but a person can say that america would be a better place if we looked toward God.

I wouldn't say that! Speak for yourself!

Says you.

Says me! Says Erin! Says allswell! Even says Proud Pagan in other threads! I could probably name a few more people to say so too!

My credibility lies with in my founding fathers and what the believed.

You have no credibility to begin with, especially when you cite David barton or the Wallbuilders as a reference or reliable source. That alone completely trashes your so-called credibility!

The point was is the revisionists try to show their side by ripping one liners out of context to prove their point. Now if you know anything about that line he said, then you should know the entire paragraph it was in, why it was written and to whom.

That's why i have referenced Mr. Adams, and other founding Fathers, from primary sources stating their thoughts as they directly related to the actual founding of this country and/or drafting of the Constitution! You have not, nor have you produced ANY valid source to support your BS!

, then we wouldnt be having this debate today.

If theistic dominists and revisionists wouldn't keep trying to reqwrite history to suit their needs or establish a christian theocracy, then we wouldn't be having this debate!

there needs to be people like me to shut you down.

And so far, people like you have failed miserably! Especially when so many others can see right through your BS!

Wall builders IS a credible source, because they use the words of our founding fathers.

No, they're not! Not even a little! They been thoroulg debunked. Only ignorant or guillable minded individuals, or those with a shared agenda, will cite the Wallbuilders as valid. But no one with any intellectual honesty will!

The reason why you cant is because you cant bring down history that is already written down.

Funny how I and others have repeatedly referenced actual history that is written down, while people like you use the edited or outright made up versions, such as the Wallbuilders!

I have seen her proven wrong by many people on many topics

Not even a little. And so far, you haven't proven her wrong here!

I ignore her not because you all think she is right

She IS right, and you have yet to prove otherwise!

Eventually you will be there too, im sure I will have you in ignore soon.

Wouldn't surprise me nor would I even care a little. It changes nothing, much less my repeatedly pointing out your BS for all to see!

, there are people on these forums who actually want to hear the truth and will see I am right.

Delusion must be a wonderful thing. Or willful ignorance!

because I will no longer be seeing it.

That's a typical tactic: when you can't refute an argument, you ignore it. I've seen that response many times.

Your not there yet but your getting close.

Why waste time then, as you seem to think your time is sooo precious? i couldn't care less if you ignore me or not. Go ahead. you just end up proving my point and demonstrating your lack of credibility and honesty for everyone to see! You'll end up destroying your own credibility far more effectively than I.

The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles?
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 20, 1815

The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.
-- John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" (1787-88), from Adrienne Koch, ed, The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society (1965) p. 258, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.
-- John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" (1787-88), from Adrienne Koch, ed, The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society (1965) p. 258, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

The frightful engines of ecclesiastical councils, of diabolical malice, and Calvinistical good-nature never failed to terrify me exceedingly whenever I thought of preaching.
-- John Adams, letter to his brother-in-law, Richard Cranch, October 18, 1756, explaining why he rejected the ministry

I shall have liberty to think for myself without molesting others or being molested myself.
-- John Adams, letter to his brother-in-law, Richard Cranch, August 29, 1756, explaining how his independent opinions would create much difficulty in the ministry, in Edwin S Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation (1987) p. 88, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

When philosophic reason is clear and certain by intuition or necessary induction, no subsequent revelation supported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it.
-- John Adams, from Rufus K Noyes, Views of Religion, quoted from from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

Indeed, Mr. Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism which Greeks, Romans, Hebrews and Christian factions, above all the Catholics, have not fraudulently imposed upon the public? Miracles after miracles have rolled down in torrents.
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, December 3, 1813, quoted from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and dogmatism cannot confine it.
-- John Adams, letter to his son, John Quincy Adams, November 13, 1816, from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, May 19, 1821, from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because of suspected heresy? Remember the Index Expurgato-rius, the Inquisition, the stake, the axe, the halter, and the guillotine; and, oh! horrible, the rack! This is as bad, if not worse, than a slow fire. Nor should the Lion's Mouth be forgotten. Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years.
-- John Adams, letter to John Taylor, 1814, quoted by Norman Cousins in In God We Trust: The Religious Beliefs and Ideas of the American Founding Fathers (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958), p. 106-7, from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.
-- John Adams, "this awful blashpemy" that he refers to is the myth of the Incarnation of Christ, from Ira D Cardiff, What Great Men Think of Religion, quoted from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

Numberless have been the systems of iniquity The most refined, sublime, extensive, and astonishing constitution of policy that ever was conceived by the mind of man was framed by the Romish clergy for the aggrandizement of their own Order They even persuaded mankind to believe, faithfully and undoubtingly, that God Almighty had entrusted them with the keys of heaven, whose gates they might open and close at pleasure ... with authority to license all sorts of sins and Crimes ... or withholding the rain of heaven and the beams of the sun; with the management of earthquakes, pestilence, and famine; nay, with the mysterious, awful, incomprehensible power of creating out of bread and wine the flesh and blood of God himself. All these opinions they were enabled to spread and rivet among the people by reducing their minds to a state of sordid ignorance and staring timidity, and by infusing into them a religious horror of letters and knowledge. Thus was human nature chained fast for ages in a cruel, shameful, and deplorable servitude....
Of all the nonsense and delusion which had ever passed through the mind of man, none had ever been more extravagant than the notions of absolutions, indelible characters, uninterrupted successions, and the rest of those fantastical ideas, derived from the canon law, which had thrown such a glare of mystery, sanctity, reverence, and right reverend eminence and holiness around the idea of a priest as no mortal could deserve ... the ridiculous fancies of sanctified effluvia from episcopal fingers.
-- John Adams, "A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law," printed in the Boston Gazette, August 1765

We think ourselves possessed, or, at least, we boast that we are so, of liberty of conscience on all subjects, and of the right of free inquiry and private judgment in all cases, and yet how far are we from these exalted privileges in fact! There exists, I believe, throughout the whole Christian world, a law which makes it blasphemy to deny or doubt the divine inspiration of all the books of the Old and New Testaments, from Genesis to Revelations. In most countries of Europe it is punished by fire at the stake, or the rack, or the wheel. In England itself it is punished by boring through the tongue with a red-hot poker. In America it is not better; even in our own Massachusetts, which I believe, upon the whole, is as temperate and moderate in religious zeal as most of the States, a law was made in the latter end of the last century, repealing the cruel punishments of the former laws, but substituting fine and imprisonment upon all those blasphemers upon any book of the Old Testament or New. Now, what free inquiry, when a writer must surely encounter the risk of fine or imprisonment for adducing any argument for investigating into the divine authority of those books? Who would run the risk of translating Dupuis? But I cannot enlarge upon this subject, though I have it much at heart. I think such laws a great embarrassment, great obstructions to the improvement of the human mind. Books that cannot bear examination, certainly ought not to be established as divine inspiration by penal laws. It is true, few persons appear desirous to put such laws in execution, and it is also true that some few persons are hardy enough to venture to depart from them. But as long as they continue in force as laws, the human mind must make an awkward and clumsy progress in its investigations. I wish they were repealed. The substance and essence of Christianity, as I understand it, is eternal and unchangeable, and will bear examination forever, but it has been mixed with extraneous ingredients, which I think will not bear examination, and they ought to be separated. Adieu.
-- John Adams, one of his last letters to Thomas Jefferson, January 23, 1825. Adams was 90, Jefferson 81 at the time; both died on July 4th of the following year, on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. From Adrienne Koch, ed, The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society (1965) p. 234. Quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church."

I'm sure Marmaduke won't read these quotes, because he is apparently a master at selective research (you know, only consulting sources that confirm his lies).

He is also a master at ignoring the fact that, whatever their personal religious beliefs, the Founding Fathers explicitly and deliberately created the US as a secular nation, not a "Christian nation," or any other type of theocracy. And that is how we remain to this day.

I'm sure Marmaduke won't read these quotes, because he is apparently a master at selective research (you know, only consulting sources that confirm his lies).

You mean "sources" like David Barton and the Wallbuilders? i tend to agree.

He is also a master at ignoring the fact that, whatever their personal religious beliefs, the Founding Fathers explicitly and deliberately created the US as a secular nation, not a "Christian nation," or any other type of theocracy.

He's also a master of twisting facts to suit his lies.

And that is how we remain to this day.

Indeed, no matter what people (liars) like Marmaduke, or David Barton, and the like, say!

I didnt need to name wall builders, there are plenty of website that are not Wallbuilders.

As i said before you cant change history and what our fathers have said. I will not twist their words, or make them out to be men who wanted nothing to do with their Christian faith. Stop going to these liberal main stream schools and letting them brain wash you. Pick up a book that goes into detail of our founding fathers lives and look at all the words in context, just dont rip one liners.

I love John Adams too, he did a great job at molding our country but he is one of many. The many realized that having religion part of society is crucial for its survival. If they didnt feel that way then they would have never mentioned anything about God, EVER.. also it would be excluded from all our historic documents.

Yes your all good at ripping a few little line out of context to make history look like something different. Good for you all, but I rest easy knowing there are people like you all, as you mentioned, aswell, erin that all agree together. You all surely are birds of a feather, who flock together, but you all are wrong.

SO with that Gordy, I bid you fare well also. I will continue on proving the religious lives our our fathers, and its influence today.

I guess I must be the dumb one to see that our country has been slowly degrading since the early 1900's when the attacks from atheists and liberal agenda has swept over america.

I wish it would happen in my life time so I can say, I told you so, but it wont, and that is when america finally collapses. Its only a matter of time.

Now off to other threads to let people who want to know truth about our founding fathers.. You all can wallow here and make all the fun you all want. I wont be here in this thread, and Gordy found a special place on ignore also.

I no longer have time to hear such rubbish and lies from people like you . Your as bad as erin in your wild thinking, and putting words in our fathers mouth , ripping out one liners, or not finding out all the true meanings of why some of the fathers said what they did and see if that truly reflects their life.

Farewell. there are people who do want to listen. Im better off helping them than lost causes.

there are plenty of website that are not Wallbuilders.

None credible though!

As i said before you cant change history and what our fathers have said.

Erin and I have provided direct quotes from the Founding fathers themselves, using primary,original sources, which you have YET to refute!

. If they didnt feel that way then they would have never mentioned anything about God, EVER.. also it would be excluded from all our historic documents.

"God" is not mentioned in either the Declaration of Independence, or especially the Constitution! You continuously ignore that fact when it's been pointed out to you!

but you all are wrong.

Only in your mind!

I will continue on proving the religious lives our our fathers, and its influence today.

And I will continues to expose your lies, BS, and lack of credibility whenever I come accross them!

and Gordy found a special place on ignore also.

In my best Homer Simpson voice: "WOO HOO!"

I guess I must be the dumb one to see that our country has been slowly degrading since the early 1900's when the attacks from atheists and liberal agenda has swept over america.

Yes, I guess you are. And paranoid too!

Its only a matter of time.

Yup, paranoid!

I no longer have time to hear such rubbish and lies from people like you

Typical: you get thoroughly refuted and so you run. I've seen you do that before too, especially when others blow your arguments out of the water.

Your as bad as erin in your wild thinking,

I'll take that as a compliment!

and putting words in our fathers mouth , ripping out one liners, or not finding out all the true meanings of why some of the fathers said what they did and see if that truly reflects their life.

By all means, point out specifically where I did any such thing! Oh yeah, you can't! So you run! Duly noted!

better off helping them than lost causes.

Your cause has been lost the moment you referenced David Barton and the Wallbuilders! Or when you simply spewed your usual lies and BS!

Farewell. there are people who do want to listen. Im better off helping them than lost causes.

Do they happen to make bleating noises?

Seriously. Erin quoted one of this "many" you're so enamored of, when there are hundreds of quotes by all the Founding Fathers extolling the United States as secular.

Too bad, sad really, they caved !

you just answered your own question

ArmyWife,

It sounds like she does a great deal for the community - press coverage aside. (Although, I'd never heard of her before today. It sounds like a lovely human interest story.)

The latter , Army wife. @ #2.

Neither. The people who serve in our armed forces saw an opportunity to make a statement, one that reflects the immense decency and honor of our soldiers, sailors and airmen. Their vote was for honor.

Some more political corretness from our liberal friends. What a quaint story, bet her folks are so proud!

Robert: Beautifully stated....... I love our armed forces!

Please explain to me how this is taking anybody's rights away. Are you bitter because your wife left you for a woman?

"Neither. The people who serve in our armed forces saw an opportunity to make a statement, one that reflects the immense decency and honor of our soldiers, sailors and airmen. Their vote was for honor."

Complete falsehood. See post 1.18

Rockyroad-531554

Please explain the rights you are losing and the special privileges gay men and woman are receiving?

I think the line here is "Put up, or shut up."

@Armywife....the wife won the award...the "husband" is Lt. Col. Heather Mack.......

this is why same sex marriages are so confusing...who is the wife and who is the hubby....

Spike, your attitude is the reason people hate the TeaParty and a big reson America voted against them. We are tired of your hate.

sandy, they're only confusing to the simple minded.

Sandy1989

I hope you are just trying to be funny, two woman married together usually identify themselves as wives, two men as husbands. Now that was not too confusing was it?

"Spike, your attitude is the reason people hate the TeaParty and a big reson America voted against them. We are tired of your hate."

Robert Warner,

Please explain any "hate". I posted the truth. The election was open to ANYONE, not just the military! Where, oh where, did I make any political statement? There are treatments for your OCD.

Here is the direct link: http://msoy.militaryspouse.com/Page/Rules

People keep saying how much she has and does for the community.. I would not allow her to teach my children, they teach more than enough in public school This has gone too far and needs to be stopped. This is why millions of children are being home/schooled.

I don't think any of you understand what CHOICE means...Its your way or the highway.. We will continue to teach our children in our homes.

@Molly

It sounds like she does a great deal for the community - press coverage aside. (Although, I'd never heard of her before today. It sounds like a lovely human interest story.)

And the other 154 candidates do nothing?

try as you might jean but every new generation becomes smarter than the last so no matter how much you try to stop it and teach hate to your kids, they will learn to love everyone and everyone will have equal rights. Just like women and african americans.

@ Jean, that's great that you want to teach your children at home, to make sure that everything they learn has been sanitized and approved by you. It'll do wonders for their creativity and curiosity.

Jean-982597: If you raise your children to afraid, they will fear. If you raise them to think, they will be thoughtful.

Jean-982597: If you raise your children to afraid, they will fear. If you raise them to think, they will be thoughtful.

Girls you both ROCK!!!! SOOOOO proud of both of you!! Many people are going to leave negative comments about you both; ignore them!! You should both be proud of vvhat you have accomplished for your country, its military, and for hovv it is evolving into the 21st century! Les mando mil besos y abrazos!!!!!

The officer is a discrace to her uniform. I believe that officer should be dishonerably discharged from the Army.

She CHOSE to disobey regulations by being in a same sex relationship during a period that her orders we not to engage in such behavior. Like it or not, she chose that existance and, therefore, should be held acountable.

You cannot pick and chose which regs to follow... and she chose to be a criminal in the eyes of the UCMJ.

Actually, Sadden, you're wrong. It is the sworn duty of all military personel to obey LAWFUL orders. The prohibition against homosexuals was always unlawful, and it was losing in court before Obama ended it. Furthermore, all thinking people realize that your hiding behind "regulations" is simply cover for your bigotry.

Holy cripes, Jean is pro choice?! And she's teaching it in her home?!

Jean, they teach that in public school too. Just the other day my daughters came home from public school arguing about who would get to turn gay and get an abortion first. Don't you worry, it's getting covered in public schools just as you suspect. And paid for by your tax dollars! And yes, you pay more than the rest of us.

Everyone has rights though and that includes the right to have your own rights! Sooooo.....what now?

She CHOSE to disobey regulations by being in a same sex relationship during a period that her orders we not to engage in such behavior.

Actually, all the regulation said was that she wasn't allowed to tell anyone that she was in a same-sex relationship. It didn't bar her from being in one.

Bring it haters.

Yep thats anyone with a different opinion. You have learned the teachings well brooke....

Tell people you are always open to their opinion...then become shocked when they actually have them.( lib logic 101 handbook)

No Scooter...

I just wanted to see how long it would take for the nasty to start. It started right away. Why can't they just let it go? From a Military person no less.. Come on Scooter. You can disagree all you want but do you have to be so VILE? No, you don't.

"Disgusting..disfunctional..Obamas new America." Really Scooter?

No one is shocked you have an opinion. More likely they are shocked that anything can actually move through a mind so narrow.

Amused

Ah yes...name calling and insults the sign of a post and poster truly worthy of reading.

Brooke

Actually i don't much care about the subject one way or the other.And being a vet, am happy her spouse serves. I just wanted to point out the obvious flaw to that train of thought. I tends to stick out ...kind of like the whole "freedom of choice ...but Ban guns" hypocrisy. And "vile" ? i find double standards as such, ( but i pointed in jest BTW, unlike some people who obviously weren't "amused"...)

But don't we both agree that is is very nice to be able to disagree and to be able to say whatever it is we want to say? Even though half of what is said shouldn't be said? Thats' what America is ALL about. We might not like it, but it is our right. God bless America. Have a great weekend

Maybe you don't "hate" scooter...she was referring to people who literally hate guys and consider them second class citizens. You don't consider your fellow american who is serving a "second class citizen" do you?

Mike

If you are speaking to me. No, I don't think that at all.

exactly Brooke Have a nice day been fun , but i just got company.

Tolerance is a two way street. There seems to be very little on either side. There are pleanty of nasty borish people in each camp. I try to avoid both. I am straight and fabulous! Take care of your selves and do what is right for you.

Come on Scooter. You can disagree all you want but do you have to be so VILE? No, you don't.

Come on Brooke. You espouse people being able to have their opinions and get along yet you attack Scooter and call him vile? He was just expressing his opinion. He is allowed to have one, as are you. I personally found nothing vile in his comment. This is why I hesitate to post in these forums as even the simplest statement quickly devolves into a party-line hatefest. Can't we all just get along? Have a great day!

Exactly. Been that way for a couple weeks.

Proves that sometimes you can fix stupid.

Shining a light on injustice and bigotry is always the right thing to do - for all, even the unjust and bigots.

She wasn't considered a spouse by the club. Obviously, those eligible to vote in the election, however, considered her to be a spouse, as does the state in which she was married.

Barry,

What does that have to do with armywifes post?

Frankly i agree with armywifes05'....Best point made so far.

well, apparently army wife didn't even agree with army wife since she deleted her post.

HATR_HURTER

well, apparently army wife didn't even agree with army wife since she deleted her post.

obvious double post ( from seed 1 i believe) as for my comment ...well...

I find myself ALWAYS in agreement with women who speak in such a manner ....as well as appreciate it..

What does that have to do with armywifes post?

Her (now deleted) post was how this woman could be a considered a "spouse." My point was that despited the spouse's club's best efforts, the people who really count (and voted) DO consider her to be a spouse.

Your right my Dad was told he was over weight and had to lose weight to remain in! He told them he was just too short!

That fat I would have been out on my rear! She has to be recieving "special" treatment!!

It appears the dullards here are unaware that the woman was 8-1/2 months pregnant at the time of the photo.

are you surprised that they let their outright hate flow before getting informed of her situation skrekk? hell, if you hadn't posted they'd still be ignorant cause they don't bother looking up info on their own which is why fox news does such a good job brainwashing them.

Jay, she gave birth TUESDAY...

Apparently reading skills arent high on the list of priorities for the narrow minded bigots here on Newsvine...

is anyone surprised at the outright stupiditiy of those who hate this person???

I know! I was just thinking that! It's kinda creepy how much they look alike.

Yes- I was thinking that they were sisters. Now THAT would make it a really good story!

Every service member had a chance to vote any way they wanted, and they chose to send a statement. How is that knuckling under?

because anything against what he wants has to be knuckling under or giving in instead of people choosing to be for something he despises.

Yes, lets move on and away from this.. They have had their fifteen minutes of fame.

You would think they would shut up, but no they continue to shove their life/style down

our throats.. We don't want it, will never accept it, so just do your thing and leave us alone.

Leave our Children alone.

What about when Christianity is shoved down the throats of those that don't believe? It's the same thing. I don't want to hear about Christianity, yet I can't count how many times Christians feel the need to talk about it. The difference between homosexuality and Christianity is that gay people don't make you feel bad for not being gay. Christians do, and they don't want to hear your reasons of not being Christian, because apparently, they know all, and nothing that happened in your life to make you believe something else matters to them.

all they want is to live a life that isn't dictated by outdated beliefs of an old book. It is in fact YOUR BELIEFS being shoved down THEIR THROAT. They are asking you to change anything about your lifestyle because of what they believe but it is people like you that are telling them they can't be equal because of YOUR beliefs. It is you that is in their business.

Gays male and female should be treated as they are, sick. Two women or men getting married. If that isn't sick I don't what is. And if anybody can't see the wrong in it then they are sick as well. Seems to be an awful lot of sick people in this country.

@Tarzan7

I know a lot of men that are secure enough in their sexuality that they don't get scared and verbally bash gays.

If that isn't sick I don't what is.

your posts and homophobia for starters!

And if anybody can't see the wrong in it then they are sick as well.

i rest my case!

We don't want it, will never accept it,

Your acceptance is neither required or necessary. Only the government under the law is!

Laughing at the left so much makes my sides hurt. Idiocy of the highest level.

Yes, you laugh at Democrats, then America votes for them. A rational person would look at the fact that most people disagree with them and try to figure out what is valid in others viewpoint. This is the kind of intelligence that moved the Democratic Party from the far-left positions it held in the 1970s to their current centrist philosophy. But you go ahead, laugh yourself and your party into complete irrelevancy.

Wait? Who lost? Who is irrelevant? Oh that's right, Mitt and the rest of his teabaggers are.

I'd rather be on the wrong side of history than on the wrong side of God.

not as much as it would hurt to be on the wrong side of eternity...