Religious tolerance in Hollywood? What’s that?
Terrifically talented graphic novelist, video game designer, writer, and blogger Doug TenNapel has a must-read piece at Big Hollywood on his first-hand experience with Hollywood’s brand of “religious tolerance.”
Here’s the intro:
I once had a meeting with an executive regarding one of my graphic novels that had been optioned. This exec started the writer’s meeting with a few notes to change some rough spots in the story. This is normal procedure with my work. I have no problem with making these changes, since it’s part of the game given where I’m at in my career. They pay me lots of money so I like these execs when I’m sentenced to work with them. I was taken aback by the first round of notes that went something like this, “For starters, we’re gonna get rid of all this Christian shit from the story, right?”
The exec informed me that religious imagery didn’t sell to American audiences, that it was intolerant and it definitely didn’t export. This was before ‘The Passion of the Christ’ so I can forgive his ignorance of the world’s most popular religion, but it was the word intolerant that struck me. How was the inclusion of religion not tolerant while the removal of it was?
Doug’s website is here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Famous actor supporting higher taxes on the wealthy not a fan of new French President’s proposed tax rate
May 17, 2012 04:42 PM by Doug Powers
53 Comments
Team Obama wants to help make your dream(s) come true before it’s too late
April 23, 2012 04:34 PM by Doug Powers
82 Comments
Wow: Actor Don Cheadle slams NBC over Zimmerman tape-editing, engages conservatives
April 5, 2012 12:23 AM by Michelle Malkin
78 Comments
Bigot Bill Maher’s Southern-bashing hate tweet; Update: Another crude sexual tweet aimed at Newt, Santorum
March 14, 2012 12:26 AM by Michelle Malkin
74 Comments
Jason Mattera strikes again: Hollywood Hypocrites released; Update: Chris Rock unhinged; War on Women!
March 13, 2012 04:24 PM by Michelle Malkin
54 Comments
Trailer for Obama Campaign Film Narrated by Tom Hanks
March 10, 2012 05:15 AM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
New Government PSA Featuring Michael Douglas: Greed, is Bad
February 28, 2012 09:47 AM by Doug Powers
76 Comments
Categories: Hollyweird
No. I’m not ignorant enough to be a socialist; Like Barack Obama.
If you want to take this line of arguement in the hopes it adds something to your laughable “God” theory, then who/what created God?
That’s, um, not exactly true.
Challenging athiests (or any scientist) to give you the origin of life is disingenuous, a straw man. We don’t claim to know that yet. What we do claim is to be pursuing the answer to the question, rather than simply saying “god did it” and calling it a day.
Yes Omu, the gender of the participants of marriage is important. Are you arguing that there are no differences between genders at all?
Men and Women are meant for each other, that is the way biology is designed, that is the way society continues. To suggest there are no difference between genders is a ridiculous, but neccesary premise to support gay marriage. Two men have no sexual complimentarity. Yes, “it fits,” but so does a man and an unplated electrical socket.
Marriage is a restricted right. You must, at current, be over the age of consent and your partner cannot be immediate family or of the same gender.
I do not care where and what you say bro, I always appreciate your posts. If there is one person on this blog that smashes stereotypes, I have found it to be you. I am shocked that we are polar on our beliefs and yet, share many of the same views. It would be cool to be neighbors! I bet conservations would never be boring.
I just finished reading the book “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist wherein I discovered that Albert Einstein’s own theory of relativity forced him to acknowledge that God exists. Before that, he had assembled an ancillary “fudge factor” equation to apply to relativity so he wouldn’t have to believe in God… until he finally came to the realization that his fudge factor equation wasn’t cutting it.
In other words, science proved the existence of God.
I wish I could have explained that better, but it’s best to just read the book. It is amazingly convincing.
That statement is shocking.
Careful man, I need my head to be able to fit through the door later
Seriously though, thanks for the kind words.
That’s one, isolated case. You’re being moronic; I hope you are not genuinely stupid enough to miss my point and so I’ll assume you are deliberately avoiding it. Why?
You are shockingly ill-informed. If anyone believes that faux-history, presented with a blunt bias, then they are truly a lost cause.
On the evolution note: abiogenesis is as ridiculous, scientifically unsound, and unproven a theory as young earth.
Were abiogenesis possible, we would have discovered a multitude of new bacterial life in areas of ocean frequently wracked by thunderstorms.
Frankenstein isn’t scientifically accurate. You can’t shoot inanimate objects with electricity to create life. At least Frankenstein was organic.
I find atheism irrational. Here is why.
The existence of God can not be conclusively proven nor disproven. Therefore, belief and non-belief are simply opposite sides of the same coin. The cost of choosing a side is zero.
If you choose belief, then you risk nothing, with the possibility of gaining everything.
If you choose disbelief, you risk everything on the certainty of gaining nothing.
I’m just too rational, and risk-averse, to be an atheist.
Every scientific breakthrough in history has had to overcome an orthodoxy who said it was not true or couldn’t be done. People like OMU continue to be the orthodxy that supresses advancement. In the 1600′s he would have been a priest burning scientists and thier books.
It’s odd that pretty much all religions other than Christianity are “accpeptable” to bring up publicly. Once Christianity is mentioned, the howls of indignation arise from unbelievers.
Logic would dictate that since other religions are not based on truth, Satan’s influence would encourage an atmosphere of tolerance for those religions that are not a threat to him. He knows that Christianity is the truth and will do everything in his power to erradicate it in the world he feels he has dominion over. Those who are so intolerant of Christianity are Satan’s foot soldiers.
Christianity holds a mirror to each person’s life. Many see their sin and their insignificance in the overall scheme of things and realize their need for a Savior from their enslavement to that sin in order to be in fellowship with the one, true, God. And, there is only one way for that to happen – through Jesus.
Others cannot stand the fact that they themselves are not their own god, are not the center of the universe, and are not in control of their destiny and react accordingly when they are confronted with the truth. Hopefully, at some point before they die, they will see the light and come to a saving knowledge of Jesus.
Really? Is it not scientists who say birds are “living dinosaurs”? /sarc
How about:
Selacant?
Nautilus?
Aligator?
OR
Since they have been found living, are they no longer billions of years old?
Yeah what do the people who were there, witnessed it, and wrote the books know?
It’s also somewhat childish of you to cherry pick a quote that you think backs up your ignorance of Einstein’s beliefs yet proves you wrong. You said Einstein didn’t believe in God. He most certainly did, in fact if you had bothered to read his quotes you would have seen that he is sick of atheists miss quoting him for their own selfish beliefs.
Excuse me missy, but you’re the one that decided to rewrite history to fit your own personal view of the world, regardless of facts. And no, I’m not a socialist, I’m a patriot.
I mean, call me crazy, but I’m willing to bet that Rene Descartes was a deeper thinker than Bill Maher.
I think this is the best question asked of you Omu.
How can you justify opening up marriage to same-sex couples, then reason your way into saying that polygamous couples, child brides, incestuous couples, and all other manner of sexual orientation should be barred from marriage?
Maybe on this thread. I’ve never seen history so convoluted and mangled before in my life.
Public Education. Gotta love it.
No, I’m not. I’m not so arrogant as to suggest that love or a romantic and sexual kind can only be genuine and life affirming when it’s between a man and woman, though.
James Felix,
I like your posts. But, I disagree that challenging atheists for the origin of life is a straw man. For me, a belief in God came about because of the problem of life origins. I find it to be the least complex of two preposterous theories on how life may have begun (Occam’s Razor).
As I have stated before, even the simplest living organism is extremely complicated. I have a pencil that was made from a tree branch. I would never have presumed that its existence could have been brought about by anything other than an intelligent designer, and it is several orders of magnitude simpler than any living organism.
A leftist doesn’t require consistency. If polyamorists, pederasts, and zoophiles became politically organized and powerful enough to demand marriage rights, then there is no moral basis — in leftism — for denying them.
They just need Hollywood to produce a few (more) movies showing polygamists, child molesters, and horse-lovers as sympathetic, likable characters, so that society overcomes the “ick” factor.
Another red herring. Polygamy, incest and pederastic marriages all existed before gay marriage did. It’s ridiculous to blame those concepts of marriage on gay people.
In any case, gay couples merely want access to marriage AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS. The only, tiny change they want is to allow both partners to be of the same sex. That’s it. They don’t want to change anything else about marriage. Marriage will not be fundamentally change if gay couples are granted access to it.
Also, notice the sky is still blue in Holland, Spain, South Africa, Norway, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Canada and Belgium. Also, these countries haven’t legalised polygamy, incest or paedophilia or even come any closer to doing so since gay couples were given access to marriage. Imagine that?
See post #114 and I am NOT a product of public edumacation – thank you very much. I can (and do) think for myself and I am NOT pre-programed.
PKAmmoTroop,
I think the dinosaurs and human co-existence was more of a “gotcha” than re-writing history. several species exist today in the same form as their ancestors from millions of years ago:
Coelacanths, sharks, crocodiles, etc. Calling them dinosaurs is using a pretty wide brush, but a credible argument can be made for doing this.
Soap,
Coelecanth was forgotten.
I also had a brief news article with photo of a fisherman in some remote place who had landed a plesiosaur.
I will see if I can find it.
Nor am I naive enough to believe a union which produces only anal tears, alpha conquest/beta degradation, and disease can in any instance be genuine or life affirming. Those are the essential elements of a homosexual relationship (between males, in any event).
I do not know what causes homosexuals to fear serious relationships with the other gender, but it is a weakness that leads to pathology. Liberals often want to talk about the cold, brutal truth when they are boosting atheism, but they do not want to confront the cold, brutal truths about homosexuality.
yeah who cares what it does to the children…as long as the gays are happy, and get whatever they want!! thats all that matters…pedophiia anyone??
Omu
If you want to take this line of argument in the hopes it adds something to your laughable “no God” theory, then I’ll just sit back and watch you burn.
selacants=Coelacanths LOL (do I feel like an idiot)
See, no education at all. Phonics his ben vary good to me.
Thanks.
No, not a “gotcha” at all. Every time science says [this] is fact, in this case the definition of a dinosaur, and is later found out they are very wrong, we have to re-write history.
I digress, science is always perfect (universe revolves around the earth).
my fav is the tuatara, which is a ‘living dinosaur’ yet has the highest rate of molecular ‘evolution’ yet that ‘micro’ evolution has not manifested any changes in the ‘macro’
Omu,
Are all those gay marriages in Europe sanctioned by their respective churches, or are they civil ceremonies?
I attended a marriage between two women several years ago in a Unitarian church, where the ceremony included parts of an American Indian blessing. I think it was not a legal ceremony, that was done somewhere else. My understanding of what Gays are trying to achieve in America is to force churches to accept/perform their marriages.
Several years ago my brother attended his 10-year high school reunion. One of the attendees wrote a brief bio that contained the line “attending with his lover Allen”. My brother was one of the few people who talked to him, when asked why he thought nobody else would talk to him, my brother pointed out that he was attending with his live-in girlfriend, but did not throw his lifestyle choice into people’s faces. As he told his friend – you are trying to force people to accept something they are uncomfortable with. It is nobody’s business what I and my girlfriends living arrangement is, nor should it be theirs about yours – but you are trying to force them to get involved.
That seems to be to be what the real agenda is behind gay marriage.
With regards to homosexuality,
That says it all – listen to the language of creation.
I didn’t know what a selacant was, but no problem. I understood what you were saying.
The ONLY thing deep on Bill Maher is his head. It is deep up his rear.
It is very sad that people who think as you do still exist in this world.
If you are using susceptibility as a marker of moral wholesomeness, then I suppose you take it that lesbians are the most moral of us all? They are the least at risk from disease, are they not?
Your argument is frustratingly idiotic.
You’re just being absurd. Gay people have nothing against heterosexual relationships and the common friendships between gay men and straight women are well documented.
You’ve obviously lived a sheltered life. I suggest you actually meet a gay person.
I remember when I first heard about his show, Politically Incorrect. I eagerly looked forward to seeing it as it sounded like something I would enjoy.
When I watched it I was very disappointed as it was the biggest pile of politically correct horse dung I had ever seen to that point.
You, conversely, have been dragged into every gay establishment in New York and have your judgement clouded by emotion.
Tell me Omu, what do you think happens to the gay men in the dresses in the back room of those New York clubs?
On January 15th, 2009 at 1:59 pm, right4life said:
I also enjoy the arguments about how the rate of evolution has changed among species. Lets say, for example, that only one in six baby rabbits survives to sexual maturity. That means that every feature unique to rabbits had to occur at least six times (on average) before it “took”. Lets also assume that one in three baby coyotes survives to sexual maturity. That means that the rate of evolution in coyotes has to be at least twice as fast as rabbits, or after a while, rabbits would evolve so much that they could escape coyotes. yet both descended from a common ancestor. Think how many generations of mice lived during your lifetime, yet they and we are relatively unchanged from several thousand years ago.
Yes, and why don’t the fish in your aquarium crawl out. The evolutionary impulse to escape the confines would seem overwhelming.
You didn’t answer my question.
If you’re saying that it’s wrong to define marriage as between a man and a woman and that you’re not “arrogant” enough to assume love exists in its best, natural form between a man and woman, then who are you to say that love and marriage can only exist between two adults of either gender?
Marriage, as it currently exists, is between a man and a woman. You are in favor of altering that definition to include people of a different sexual orientation, and arguing that it’s wrong to discriminate on the basis of that orientation – you CANNOT say that marriage is for A & B but not F, T, and Y groups.
It’s just as discriminatory, if we apply your thinking, to bar polygamists or siblings from marrying because of their sexual orientation as it is for us to supposedly discriminate against gay couples.
Off to work now, see y’all!
Did Omu just make a pass at BKennedy? Even the gays are rejecting Omu?
Hide the sheep! Run BKennedy, run!
Haldane’s Dilemma…
Omu, I thought my point was obvious. You seem to say that “Christian bigotry” is why homosexuality is not accepted, while ignoring the fact that most other religions, including the left’s latest fad, Islam, are far more intolerant of people who practice homosexuality. Contrast this with the “hate the sin, love the sinner” theme of Christianity…bigotry is a term best reserved for those who want to hate the sinner, too.
are you actually serious? I mean, really? Polygamy is a sexual orientation? Paedophilia is a sexual orientation? Grow up.
Is it an issue of emotions. It’s the issue of the human heart.
What is your point? This kind of attitude is profoundly moronic. Grow up. Projecting this silly, flimsy caricature of gay people onto the entire community just so you feel better about your biogtry is absurd.
right4life,
Thanks for providing Haldane’s Dilemma. I had not heard of that term before. The rate of evolutionary change problem is one I have been thinking about on my own for some time now.
maybe you should grow up…why is homosexuality an ‘orientation’ and pedophilia not??
no reason other than political correctness…
yeah why don’t you try thinking for once??
Omu,
Calling people with legitimate points idiotic and immature is very idiotic and immature. I have several gay friends and acquaintances – but do not support the “right” to gay marriage. For reasons that you have not provided a response to:
What restrictions would you have on marriage and why?
So is polgymy, phedophilia, beastility and even cowboy – pickup truck love.
No apologies to cowbodys because I know too many of you.
cowbodys = cowboys…. he he
you’re welcome….its an interesting concept that of course evolutionists say is ‘solved’ but of course to them every problem is ‘solved’ and every answer is darwin!!!
one of my favorites is ‘convergent evolution’ like the similarity of squid eyes to human eyes…just happened…gosh that evolution is so clever to use ‘off the shelf’ components….
link
here’s the darwinist playbook:
(1) assume evolution,
(2) personify Nature,
(3) wave the magic wand of millions of years
and SHAZAM, miracles of DESIGN happen…
Omu,
Why do you think the rate of recidivism among pedophiles is so high (almost 100%)? That would indicate that it is “the way they are born” rather than a learned orientation. This is the same argument made about why homosexuality is a trait that people are born with and not learned – they keep doing it regardless of the punishment that awaits them if caught doing it (today for pedophiles – a few years back for homosexuals in Christian nations).
Pedophiles are born that way. Thats why I support executing them.
I guess I shut down man co-existing with dino’s on #114. Too bad. I guess nobody picked up my Job reference either. Job (a book of the Bible for those of you who criticize it but have never read it) describes a dino pretty well considering it was not written all that long ago (or, maybe it was actually written billions of years ago).
Oh and man, supposedly, lived 3 million years ago when there were no dino’s left. They fed solely on bison. Egad, Brain, should I go on? And are you all forgetting Jurassic Park?
The one religion on this thread that exists that is really bothersome is the “I’m right and you are wrong and there is no room for discussion even if you happen to prove me wrong” religion. Ranks right up there with evolution.
Fixed it for ya’…that’s a two-way street, you know.
Yes. Those can be sexual orientations, or, at the very least, they are based on sexual preferences. Polygamists PREFER more than one spouse. Pedophiles PREFER children rather than adults.
This from the people who are in a fit of perpetual adolescence, always seeking to impose PC tyranny on others, and always finding more ways to claim their rights are being denied when they understand neither rights nor Democracy.
If you weren’t serious, it’d be hilarious.
right4life,
The only argument about evolution being a fact is circular: God does not exist, life exists, therefore life just “happened”. As I have stated before to believe in life requires a belief in an unverifiable, preposterous miracle. Either you believe an intelligent designer designed life (on what may be the only spot in the universe that can support life), or you believe in an incredible string of coincidences that managed to conspire to create a complex organism out of nothing.
Pick your religion or your belief, but do not disparage mine.
Evolutionists have solved that problem with “Punctuated Equilibrium”. Of course you can’t prove it but it is fact – it has to be – problem solved!
What is ‘Christian bigotry’?
Sorry, I know I’m a little late to this one.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t know his (or her) history. If you’d look at it a little, you’ll see that the vast majority of scientific and economic development have come out of what once were Christian nations. That’s because they all worked on the foundation of reason and logic as they saw evidenced in the Bible, not religions such as Islam that have gods who act based on capricious whims, not logic. Why were so many of our great scientists (i.e. Isaac Nweton, Gregor Mendel, Galileo) Christians?
See a book called “The Victory of Reason” by Rodney Stark for a good detailed history on this.
Reminds me of watching ‘The Universe’ on the History Channel. These scientists and astronomers will start going on about dark matter, dark energy, multi-dimensional cosmic strings… and it always comes back to “we have no proof these things exist in our universe, but our models don’t work without them.”
You know, the liberal template for anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ. See below, for example:
There are so many things wrong with your thinking, it’s difficult to decide where to begin.
Evil people cause suffering around the world. If they didn’t have religion to exploit as a means for inflicting fear and pain, they’d find another means.
As for verifiable evidence… many scientific principles exist without verifiable evidence. Sub atomic physics has few if any real elements of “proof” of the nature of what exists at that level, yet scientists believe what they believe. Give me some proof of the root cause for the existence of gravity… or the strong force. Proof… not conjecture.
Frankly, I don’t need verifiable evidence for the basis of my religious beliefs. All I need is faith. And my faith does not include bigotry of any kind.
have you checked into the anthropic principle?? its rather interesting…
link
we’re down to either the ‘multiverse’ which is pure conjecture, or the anthropic principle…GOD…that the multiverse is even considered ‘science’ shows you that ‘science’ has become atheism…because the alternative GOD is unthinkable to them…
MtsEdge–oh, ok. I just wanted to make sure it was something Omu & his ilk made up & that I didn’t have it…
punctuated equilibrium = creation…
oh I know it ‘evolved very quickly’ too fast to leave fossil records….right…shows the desperation of ‘science’…just like the ‘multiverse’….
Did you ever see the “universe making machine”? It kept spitting out universes until it created one that could do all the things you see around you – like create everything from nothing. I laughed until I wet myself!
And my belief in a creator is foolish???
Science only seeks to explain creation. The closer they get to it, the more the sound like religon. The high priest are different, and the holy texts are different, but they all come to the same place.
Heh. Omu, et al., may not have invented the term, but sure like to use it! Problem is, it’s a non sequitur.
Oh, and bigotry may be contagious, so you may want to avoid certain liberals.
omu your argument that gays are just like everyone else positively ignors history and reality. if nature or god thought homosexuality was a good thing, we would all be self perpetuating hermaphrodites. whichever you want to argue, science or religion, you can’t mate 2 women or 2 men and create a child. so whoever supplied the blueprint, 1 way is normal, and the other way is abnormal by definition. there are plenty of organisms in science which self generate, just not the higher level animals. since i’m sure you would argue gays are created not made, why would any sane person even consider allowing a child to be raised by or even in contact with people who are so abnormal in their views. this to me is akin to allowing children to be raised by serial rapists, which behavioral scientists tell us are also created not made, and hence can’t change. and yes i have a gay relative, in fact two, but i would say the same thing to them if they sought to raise children. and your analysis that folsom ave is similar to spring break shows you have never seen the folsom ave web sight. i have never seen the level of debauchery in florida as seen in san fran, and i have been going to florida on spring break for over 45 years. drunk, yes, flashing yes, masturbating off a balcony NO!
Yes by “moral” you really mean “libertine attitudes toward sex and abortion” and by “scientific” you mean “doing anything even if it destroys lives.”
Christianity has been around for 2,000 years. Progress still happened. In a nation with predominantly Christian history, America and parts of Europe have been at the forefront of progress.
Christianity teaches that just because we can or want to do something, we shouldn’t necessarily do it.
Popular culture doesn’t like that, so Christianity is now the enemy. It has nothing to do with Christianity being anti-progress or anti-science (because, as someone else said, a great many scientific discoveries and advancements came from devoutly Christian nations and persons), but it has to do with a selfish culture that hates self-restraint and self-control.
My point, Omu, is exceedingly simple (the self-evident always is) but difficult for those invested in homosexual marriage to accept.
You and I both know what happens in the back rooms of those clubs, just as you and I both know what goes on when there is a single bathroom stall in a multi-stalled public restroom with men lining up outside its door.
Since you consider it “childish” and “moronic” to mention this reality, I will do it for you. Those gay men in dresses are raped and/or prostituting in those New York club back rooms. They are an outlet for sex for all the other gay attendees of those clubs.
To be certain, there are heterosexual houses of ill repute mired in the sex trafficking trade, but these places pale in comparison to the number of confused gay men who are abused by scum sex traffickers.
The point is there is a rot in the gay culture and refusing to address it is simply another moral weakness. Pretending the gay clubs are just like the straight clubs requires a willful suspension of critical thought.
I think OMU has left the building.
If part of the definition of ‘bigot’ is someone who believes their own religion is ‘unquestionably right’, then what kind of Christian would one be if one were not bigoted?!
Thanks for the link. It provides even more Rudyard Kiplingesque “just so” conditions which are necessary not just for life on this planet – but the abundance of life just about everywhere here.
I think the link provides more proof of God than I knew about before. You either have to believe in an incredible string of miraculous coincidences or, using Occam’s Razor, believe in the simplest miracle: God.
And, for the record, atheistic/irreligous governments – socialism, communism, nazism – killed 100,000,000 people in the 20th century alone. Throughout all of history, and even including radical Islamic terrorism, religion has not done nearly as much damage.
You’re claim of “suffering” is actually a whine that you feel religion stops you from doing whatever you want. Boo. Hoo.
Aside from the complete an utter ignorance of that comment, your asinine assertion that only religion is bigotry is, frankly a joke.
Religious expression is explicitly protected by the First Amendment and one of the fundamental human freedoms. Freedoms are not contingent on whether or not empirical evidence proves a belief is worthy of protection. If that were the case, you’re belief in “the heart” has anything to do with this argument has no proof either and is therefore invalid, too.
YOU are the bigot, Omu.
wighttrasch, I think the highlighted portion above is what libs mean when they use their term “Christian bigotry”. I would say that the first part of the definition would apply to anyone who has a strongly held belief about anything, and of course, that would include atheists and liberals.
And you know more about contemporary gay clubs than I do? I have a gay uncle, have lived in areas with large gay populations in both a red state and a blue state and in a European capital. My wife’s best friend is gay and many of our family friends are gay, and as such I’ve found myself in a gay club or gay bar on numerous occasions in all three cities. And none of the nonsense, 70′s stereotypes you present as being intrinsic to gay people, were there. Ever.
Like, I said, you should probably meet a few gay people before you judge them all and decide they are unworthy of the same rights as you and I.
I like:
Time plus dirt = man
OR
God plus dirt = man
One cell is so complicated I have to go with the latter.
Darwin called a single cell – simple. Science has proven otherwise. Darwin’s single cell is to a cell what a single cell is to an entire universe (in its complexity).
Englishquenn01,
I have three college degrees. The more educated I became, the stronger became my conviction in God. A good example of science providing evidence of God is the theories surrounding the moon. The first two theories were “mother-daughter” and “sister-sister” (the moon was somehow torn out of the earth, or was created at the same time). The latest prevailing theory (due to examination of rocks brought back from the moon) is, for lack of a better description, “strangers in the night”.
It is now theorized that a huge object came hurtling out of the cosmos, struck the earth, rebounded slightly, and was captured in orbit. Consider that the size, shape (sun & moon are less than 1% non-spherical), and distance from the earth all conspire to make the moon appear to be the same size as the sun – to an observer on earth.
Consider also that such a tremendous impact would surely have affected (effected? – I am never sure which is correct – english not one of my degrees) the orbit, rate of revolution, precession, etc. Now the moon acts just like the long poles tightrope walkers use – it stabilizes all those properties. It also acts as a “pump” when tidal surges bring nutrients into coastal areas – thus increasing the abundance of life.
When I look at the moon I think: nice shot, big guy.
MtsEdge–I agree the term sprung from, specifically, a religious intolerance.
But, since I consider myself Christian and pretty darn tolerant, I find it unusual that I could be lumped into the ‘bigot’ category too. I get enough trouble from other Christians for most of my ideas!
Oh come on OMU, you are just shy. (bats eye lids at OMU)
he he
Omu just dashed my Studio 54 memories to bits!
AHHHH! Damn you all bigots!!
Ditto. See post #145.
All of them.
Omu,
As much as I hate to admit it, I have to agree with you. Most of the gay people I have known are stable, do not go to the gay clubs described – anymore than I go to biker bars (where hetero sexual congress may be occurring).
I support their right to legally protected civil unions. But not to marriage. Marriage is based on religious teachings – as is morality. Like it or not, your view of right and wrong is based on religion. Without religion, civilization as we know it would not exist – we would all function as small tribes and clans.
They can be frustrating and annoying at times…oops, was that a bigoted remark???
BKennedy‘s egregiously false, vicious attacks on the gay community are offensive, bizarre and derserving of ridicule! It’s altogether frustrating that people as literally and overwhelmingly ignorant (in EVERY sense of the word) as BKennedy think they can speak with authority on the very subject they clearly know absolutely nothing about!
The sooner demagogues like BKennedy are called out for their bigotry, the better!
Simmer!
The thing, wighttrasch, “intolerance” to a liberal means merely disagreeing with them or daring to express your religious beliefs publicly without prior approval of the PC Police.
They have no grasp of the First Amendment, or what “rights” really are.
Omu,
How do you know that BKennedy does not know anything about the type of behavior he described? Such behavior does occur – albeit among a minority of gays, perhaps. But then, I have no idea how many gay people have gone to bars like that. I can only conjecture based on the gays I know – the same as you.
It seems like bigotry means disagreeing with OMU. That makes pretty much everyone on the planet except OMU a bigot because I am sure even his wife disagrees with him upon occasion. Making her a bigot.
Moon? How does something solid (in a vacuum) round off its edges? That has always stumped me (and I have zero degrees). I believe they proved the moon was NOT a molten mass – right? Simple minds ask simple questions!
englishqueen—I think you hit the nail on the head with your use of the phrase ‘daring to express your religious beliefs…’
We Christians ‘dare’? Do we have the audacity to express?!
BKennedy thinks that the majority of all gays are simply promiscuous, disease ridden degenerates. And because he dehumanises gay people in this way, it makes it easier for him to make the case against granting equality to his fellow human beings. If you think like BKennedy, I pity you, because you are therefore a pathetic, cowardly, deliberately ill-informed bigot and history will judge your kind of people very, very harshly.
Also, kindly stop comparing gay relationships to paedophilia and incest. Regardless of whether attraction to minors or relatives are chosen or not (I suspect they are not), they are nonetheless damaging and destructive. THAT’S why incestuous or pederasty marriages should not be recognised. Same sex couples harm no one. All they want is to be treated the same way as every one else, why is that such a problem for Michelle Malkin and her ilk? It might be easy to sit back and pretend this is just some clumsy cultural disagreement, but it isn’t. Every time you post something hateful about gay people, you are fueling bigotry and making life harder for gay people. Why do you want to do that?
Oh please. Stop pretending like it’s the Christians in America that are the victims. Honestly, that’s laughable. You’re trying to pretend like the crowd of people who dislike religion are the evil empire, when it’s you Christians who have all the power, who use it to limit women’s rights and destroy gay rights and impose Christianity on every single American, whether they’re Christian or not. YOU are the evil Empire!
You are basing your arguments off anecdotes and emotion. Everyone knows there are places you simply do not go in Castro (SF) at night because of what you will experience. Everyone knows that the Folsom Street Fair is a celebration of gay deviancy, not an aberration hosted by only the most debased elements of the gay community. You only see the peace and the love and the rainbows because guilt has been drilled into you by everyone you know.
You think that a law which defines marriage as between one man and one woman is capable of harming people. Harm. As in, physical pain.
No, such a law harms nothing but the overly sensitive and perpetually outraged. It harms only those who think they are entitled to recieve benefits for bucking moral order.
Such people only see the rot in everyone else, and never examine their own group’s problems. Just like the race hustlers who continue to blame the white man for the black man’s problem as they invite Ludacris for a fundraiser to rap about ho’s, b*^%$es, and baby momma’s/daddy’s.
You see what you want to see, not reality.
Hush, child. The adults are talking.
uh uh. O no you di-unt.
it sure harms the rest of society, and especially the children….marriage becomes meaningless…and children are less protected see kurtz’ research on the netherlands….not that data matters to people like you
but if homosexuality is just another ‘orientation’ then so is pedophilia…and if you don’t think the pedophilia movement…yes there is one…is saying the same things as the gay movement…you’re dreaming.