War, poverty, kids
The OpEd by Katrina Bisheimer on June 6 titled “A war on poverty, not a war on the poor” outlines the impact that DHHS supplemental budget cuts have on poverty in our State. Most disturbing to us, pediatricians are reductions that target effective services for children. Ms. Bisheimer eloquently outlines how these Draconian cuts are irresponsible and unfair.
Because one child out of every five in America now live in poverty, these small children represent the largest segment of our destitute population. Reducing programs that help economically disadvantaged children is shortsighted.
Eliminating funding for Head Start, the Child Care Subsidy, MaineCare health coverage for working families, health services for adolescents and young adults, and public health and preventive services is also counterproductive. Such eliminations negatively affect nutrition, health, development and education of kids. This further disadvantages children by extending hardship to families and communities, affecting our work forces and limiting our innovative spirit.
Investing in children has a profound payoff in their expected 80 years of life. This sound strategy is especially important during times of national economic challenge. These DHHS cuts do not help children survive and thrive. Programs that lift kids and families out of poverty are important to keep. Programs designed to support and elevate kids in poverty are rich investments.
Janice Pelletier, MD
Orono
Coach kudos
I have known Roger Reed since the late 1950s, when Newport High School and Carmel High School competed regularly in basketball and baseball, and I have known Sawin Millett since 1975, when we worked together in the early days of the Longley Administration.
In my opinion, if Roger Reed and his close friend and longtime Augusta figure, and former legislator, Sawin Millett, both felt he could handle legislative duties and Bangor High School coaching duties simultaneously, I would easily accept that view. Bangor High School is losing the greatest basketball coach it has ever had in its long and storied history, and that statement includes the legendary Coach Red Barry of the 1950s and 1960s.
Charles G. Roundy
Palmyra
Anti-Christian sentiment
David Del Camp’s June 15 letter in which he decries what he labels as “anti-Christian sentiment being propagated by the gay community in Maine” itself reveals the very narrow-mindedness and ignorance which thoughtful Christians, gay and straight, deplore and which rightly needs to be challenged by thoughtful Christians, gay and straight.
Del Camp’s assertion that “Christians believe that God meant what he said … that a marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman” assumes that the Christian community is of one mind in this matter.
Nothing is further from the truth. I, for one, who served as minister of American Baptist and United Church of Christ churches in Maine over a span of 39 years, and millions of other Christians, long have supported same-sex marriage precisely because it is the right and loving Christian position.
Lifting a few Bible phrases out of context and asserting therein is found God’s truth, is the classic Christian fundamentalist tactic, and has been used to justify slavery, oppression of women and several other scourges in the history of civilization.
Del Camp asserts that the gay community is characterized by “childlike whining about being ‘victimized.’” How ironic. Seems to me that Del Camp is doing the childlike whining in this case.
Rev. John Holt
Lamoine
Win-win
So many opinions have been published about Cianbro chairman and CEO Peter Vigue’s proposal for this highway, both pro and con, that we have gotten away from the core things that should be mentioned. This proposal is huge.
We have spent mega-bucks on rural routes 9 and 6 from the border to Interstate 95 in recent years, and we have a pretty good safe highway there. There also are plans underway to extend I-395 to Route 9.
Build a similar highway west from I-95, easily accessible from routes 9 and 6 for example, continue on Route 6 and continue on existing roads to the Quebec border, with interchanges-intersections with Maine areas along that route, to help those communities.
I have not followed this proposal closely, but all I am hearing is there will only be one intersection with Maine roads: Interstate 95. How does that help Maine? I have not seen it mentioned that Irving was awarded a $24 billion dollar contract to build Canadian ships. That is awesome news for the maritimes, and I am glad for them, but this looks like a “win-win” for Irving.
Use existing rail lines and improve the existing highways. Help Maine a lot, and Irving a little at the same time. Make it a toll road if needed for funding with interchanges along the way.
Jack Gray
Ellsworth
Helping families
It’s a very good thing that elder abuse is being recognized as such. Fragile senior citizens deserve protection. However, an approach that focuses on righteous indignation and punitive action is, in my mind, short sighted.
This is the road our society took when child abuse was first recognized as a problem. Gradually awareness grew that many abusive parents were overwhelmed, not evil. Isolation, poverty, postpartum depression, unexpected needs of a baby with disabilities and even lack of knowledge of normal child development proved to be factors that could be dealt with proactively with solutions such as visiting home nurses. Many families can be held together, not torn apart.
In a similar vein, I believe many elder abusers are overwhelmed, exhausted and isolated folks confronted with unpredictable behavior on the part of mobile people close to their size and-or medical fragility requiring constant attention. When she cared for her aunt toward the end, my mother’s need to be always vigilant kept her from going as far as the corner store.
I believe that any realistic and compassionate solution to the problem of elder abuse must be proactive, recognizing the needs of the caretaker as well as the cared for. Measures such as respite care could go far toward relieving the pressure on the former and helping assure better care for the latter, again helping families, rather than tearing them apart.
Julia Emily Hathaway
Veazie
Questions about coaching
In regard to the Bangor school system’s asking Roger Reed to choose between coaching the Bangor High School boys basketball team and being, possibly, a part-time Maine legislator, I am wondering how it is that full-time teachers are able to coach sports teams.
For that matter, if Roger Reed’s coaching position has been this demanding, was he ever asked over the years to choose between coaching and devoting his full time to his teaching? I am just trying to understand the logic of the educational leadership in Bangor.
Jan Rideout
Holden
Dr. Pelletier, thank you. I fondly remember the times when Republicans and Democrats alike supported investment in our children, our roads, our bridges, our schools, our ecosystem and our health. Ike pushed for the interstate highway system and Nixon backed the EPA and a host of environmental reforms. Driven by a rigid ideology, Republicans now believe in starving the government in pursuit of endless tax cuts for the wealthy.
They remain oblivious to the evidence all around us that austerity in times of economic crisis is a dead end road to a renewed recession. The UK has shown us that and enforced austerity has destroyed the Greek economy. Borrow when the times are tough and interest rates low and save during the times of plenty. Any farmer knows this. When his crops fail he can feed his livestock from grain stored in his silos in the good times.
Is it austerity that is destroying the economies of Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Spain and Greece or was it Obamalike out of control spending? Did those countries believe in austerity when they ran up the debt?
“…destroying the economies of Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Spain and Greece …”
Actually, it was a lot of very-well-to-do people finding every possible way to avoid paying their fair share of taxes! Sounds familiar….
I’ve seen this kind of thing before.
Greece: Dad, I can’t pay the rent on my expensive apartment and new sports car.
Germany: UGH…okay, but this is the last time.
Greece: Thanks, Dad.
Germany: But you need to stop spending more than you make, get a smaller apartment, trade that car for something else.
Greece: I know, I know…I’ll change.
Germany: Your mother wants to know if you’re coming over for Sunday dinner.
Greece: Oh, I can’t…me and the boys are going to Cancun.
Yes. It is austerity that is destroying Europe. You do not know what you are talking about.
The problem in Europe is that these countries have so much debt no one will loan them money even for normal operating expenses.
Put that together with a common currency but individual national agendas and you get an “austerity” that looks different in each country.
Plainly the Europe that has little debt is doing better than the Europe that has more so why is loading those countries with the debt of others a help?
A revealing look at the dynamics of the situation was revealed in the taunting chants at a Germany-Greece Soccer match the other day.
The Germans were chanting that they paid for their opponents entrance tickets to the match. The Greeks chanted, they were never going to pay Germany back.
This has to be a first… quoting soccer fans to prove a point. LOL :)
Could well be. :) But it gives a bit of context. PM Merkel attended the match and when the camera panned her and set her picture to the big board the Germans cheered and the Greeks booed. Not the smartest thing to do in my opinion is to bite the hand that feeds you.
This has been Greeces’ official attitude also.
What austerity in Europe are you talking about? Certainly not in Greece. The outbreak of riots and pandemonium in that country prompted by the mere mention of implementing austerity programs has largely prevented Greece from taking action. In fact Greece has largely renege on its many of its promises to investors to implement austerity measures. For that reason investors are reluctant to buy bonds, the means by which the Greek government continues to borrow money to pay off its debts and obligations. Like other countries, Italy and Portugal for example, the politicians promised too much, and the country is now saddled with entitlement programs it cannot afford. When the money has run dry and investors refuse to lend, countries are left with no option but to scale back domestic spending.
You need to read up on what is happening in Europe and how it it adversely affecting Wall Street and people’s retirements here in the US.
You need to expand your reading. What you think you know is quite simplistic, self serving and completely wrong.
I recommend this;http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-policy-has-contributed-to-the-great-economic-divide/2012/06/22/gJQAXTX2vV_story.html
“Is it austerity … or … out of control spending?”
It’s been a combination of things. Yes, like the Americans under Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, and Obama, the European nations that are in hot water spent a great deal. Of course, in the U.S., Obama is hardly to blame — he didn’t start the two wars that were off the budget and ran up so much debt, nor did he cause the economic meltdown and the Republican tax cuts that reduced government revenues so drastically. He did spend quite a bit, but probably not enough, to stimulate the economy to get us back on track. You are blaming Obama for the mess caused by previous Republican “borrow-and-spend” policies (and yes, many Democrats are to blame as well).
But back to the Europeans. the biggest problem in Greece is that so many people don’t pay taxes. They scoff at the tax laws, and find a way to not pay what they ought to pay. Combine that with past spending, and hiding the truth of the budget problems, and runaway borrowing — and then throw severe austerity on top — and now Greece is in an economic depression. Greece, like Bush 43, was putting everything on the credit card. Now the bill is overdue.
In Britain, with more responsible policies, the Conservative-led government took the beginning of a recovery and added austerity, and put that nation back into recession.
Severe austerity? You’re making things up. Greece never implemented the austerity programs it had promised investors. That’s why it is now having trouble borrowing money and why it is paying higher and higher interests rates. Investors no longer trusts the Greeks. Please check out your facts.
Never implemented the austerity programs? You’re making things up. They’ve implemented five austerity packages beginning in 2010. On May 5, 2010, Citibank called the austerity measures “unexpectedly tough.” The first three austerity packages amounted to 12.5% of the 2009 Greek GDP.
The third austerity package cut 8% on public sector allowances (in addition to the two previous cuts) and a 3% pay cut for public utility workers; abolished public sector bonuses; abolished all public worker salaries that were over 3,000 Euros per month; abolished pensions over 2,500 Euros per month; put an additional 10% tax on imported cars; imposed a 10% luxury tax increase (including on tobacco, alcohol and fuel); and cut the number of municipal employees by 60%.
The Fourth austerity package reduced pensions again, and increased a number of taxes.
The fifth austerity package cut the minimum wage by 22% to 750 Euros per month ($942); cut 15,000 public sector jobs in 2012, cut pensions again; cut government health and defense spending; and made various other cut.
As a result of these austerity packages, Greece now finds itself in a depression, further reducing government revenues.
Yes, the Greek people have protested. And their borrowing rate on government bonds has gone way up because rating agencies aren’t sure the Greek government won’t default on its obligations. But the only reason the Germans continue to bail out the Greeks is the fact that the Greeks are implementing the austerity measures.
Whawell is correct. The Greeks never fully embraced the requirements set upon them by their potential creditors. They came close a few times then backed away which caused a new crisis. A new potential resolution which created a need for new elections and so on.
They’ve implemented five austerity packages beginning in 2010. On May 5, 2010, Citibank called the austerity measures “unexpectedly tough.”
The first three austerity packages amounted to 12.5% of the 2009 Greek
GDP. The third austerity package cut 8% on public sector allowances (in
addition to the two previous cuts) and a 3% pay cut for public utility
workers; abolished public sector bonuses; abolished all public worker
salaries that were over 3,000 Euros per month; abolished pensions over
2,500 Euros per month; put an additional 10% tax on imported cars;
imposed a 10% luxury tax increase (including on tobacco, alcohol and
fuel); and cut the number of municipal employees by 60%.
The Fourth austerity package reduced pensions again, and increased a number of taxes.
The fifth austerity package cut the minimum wage by 22% to 750 Euros per month ($942); cut 15,000 public sector jobs in 2012, cut pensions
again; cut government health and defense spending; and made various other cut.
As a result of these austerity packages, Greece now finds itself in a depression, further reducing government revenues.
The Germans, who aren’t nuts, wouldn’t keep bailing out the Greeks if the Greeks weren’t implementing the austerity measures.
There are very few “poor” people in US, you have to look overseas for that. The poverty line is merely a random income conceived by “government officials.” 99% of US citizens can have place to live, plumbing, clothes, cell phones, cigarettes, booze, car, and plenty of food, with EBT cards to get steaks and lobsters plus free school meals. Our welfare society has created a culture that wants for a lot but needs nothing.
LOL at Bonny sitting comfortably in an electronically controlled environment, sipping a cooling drink, retirement money safely increasing in a rising stock market , typing away on a state of the art computer and lecturing the poor that they don’t need anything.
She is essentially correct. Being “poor” is a relative thing. There really is no comparison between the “poor” being defined by having a government care for your every need and “poor” children picking through garbage heaps in a third world country in order to find something to sell or eat.
But each country has to define poor and deal with their own poor. So comparing one countries poor with another while it is interesting doesn’t really define the poor that each country has to address separately.
The poor in the US are not relatively poor they are poor by any US standards. They have almost no personal wealth, many of their jobs have been sent over seas, most of them work, but at jobs that don’t pay a living wage. For many the educational system has deteriorated so badly that it no longer offers a way out of poverty. The complications of moving to where the jobs are has to be balanced against leaving a friends and family support system, selling a home in an economically depressed area.
And yes it is possible, with intelligence, optimism and a herculean effort to get out of the poverty cycle. If you have lost your job, can’t support you family, are depressed, living in a shelter, accepting food stamps optimism and effort are really, really hard to generate.
What we need to do is bring jobs home, pay decent wages and there will be fewer people needing assistance.
Yes, on the one hand we all need to take responsibility for our own actions, and some people are worse off than they need to be because of their own poor choices.
On the other hand there is a disturbing trend among Americans, especially those who identify themselves as conservative Republicans and conservative Christians — a nasty self-righteous impulse to blame the victim. How quickly we forget the words of the Galilean who said “blessed are the merciful” (Matthew 5:7) and urged us to “be compassionate, just as your Father is compassionate” (Luke 6:36).
But what do you do when no one will loan you the money to spend such as in the case of Greece?
The problem with your farm analogy is that instead of saving during the good times we spend and borrow more in anticipation of things being even better.
Cheesecake and I agree. Wonders never cease!!!! LOL Germany got it right. When things were going well instead of borrowing they paid down debt, poured money into technical education and emerged as the premier country for high end manufacturing. They planned ahead. Something we in the US seem to have a hard time accepting.
Holy Cr*p!!
LOL
Yes, when Germany was doing well they invested in their country. When we had a surplus
George W. Bush frittered it away. When the great recession hit the world, Germany instead of firing everyone cut back hours and did many other smart financial things to protect their people and their economy.
However much of the reason for their economic success comes from purchasing by the other Euro countries done with monies lent to them from German as well as Spain’s banks. Without that purchasing power as is happening now because of the disaster caused by the austerity measures, Germany is seeing their profits decline. This will only continue.
I recommend Joe Stiglitz and Paul Krugman, who write clearly and knowledgeably on this.
Everything that each has described and predicted has happened.
Normal Krugman crap. Blame the people doing well for those that aren’t and have them adopt the policies of the failed countries.
You do understand that the poor countries are asking Germany to put their national assets up as collateral in order to borrow money to give to a country like Greece that will not make the sacrifices necessary to save themselves? Last fall Germany mentioned war as a possibility.
http://euobserver.com/19/114075
This is not someone who failed to make a credit card payment these are national governments unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions in an attempt to placate their citizenry who want to continue to spend. There are major national and international issues at hand… not unlike the the debt parts of Europe were in prior to to WW2.
Austerity destroyed the Greek economy??? When I was in Greece in the mid 70’s the economy was a shambles and only got worse under their socialist government.
You are so right, thank you for this sensible comment.
Thank you Rev. Holt for standing up for doing the Christian thing and supporting the rights of all God’s children. I believe your response answers the question, WWJD?
These churches Holt refers to represent a very small minority of Christians. Truth be told the so-called reverends of these churches are primarily motivated by a political agenda, not by the gospel.
That would be sad, if it were true. No wonder people are turning away from the church, if it’s standing against the happiness of neighbors who wish no harm.
The United Church of Christ is one of those “small minority of Christians” which boasts 5,287 Congregations and 1,080,199 members.
Yes, and the Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and Presbyterian Church USA (along with the smaller Unitarian Universalists) have also adopted equality policies that include ordaining otherwise qualified clergy who happen to be gay or lesbian. The Friends (Quakers) don’t generally ordain clergy, but they are also gay/lesbian-friendly, as are many individual congregations within the American Baptist and United Methodist denominations.
That many members in the U.S.! Not in Maine.
You didn’t specify “Maine” in your post.
Yes I did: I wrote, “These churches Holt refers to…”
Holt was referring to churches in Maine. See his letter to the editor.
Anti-gays always split hairs in the hope they will sell homophobia to just ONE other person. A majority of Americans already support marriage equality for their fellow Americans who are LGBT. Nonsense from the anti-gays like this is what causes 5% MORE Americans to support marriage equality every year.
Here we go again! I can’t interpret your comment about splitting hairs as anything other than a stab at me. But you picked on the wrong person. I was not the one splitting hairs. The poster just before me did that, as I merely pointed out his error for the sake of clarity lest some other reader misunderstood me.
Did you really just jump this far down the page without seeing the list of major Christian denominations that have married loving, committed same gender American couples, whawell? I’m really sorry to learn that YOU have posted this political ATTACK on their Constitutionally guaranteed Freedom Of Religion. I’m sorry you choose to ignore the hard evidence that the Bible was messed with, and that modern Biblical scholars are correcting the fake anti-gay passages inserted into the Bible relatively recently. However, we all know there is NOTHING you can do to fool Christians into accepting the fake Bible passages or stop them from marrying same gender couples in more US States every year.
You certainly can’t be talking about the traditional bible. Yes, there are other gospels. Those are not part of the cannon of Scripture. Many parts of the New Testament are quite clear about the sin of homosexuality. Check them out for yourself and note that in at least two passages homosexuality is specifically mentioned in a list of sins among other sins. The Christian Church throughout the entire world is very much in agreement with this assessment of homosexuality. Early church documents too speak against homosexuality.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/early-teachings-on-homosexuality
You mean “check them out” in your hate-based mistranslation presented by a denomination that is 100% a Republican political ally today? No, thanks, I know what they find convenient for their GOP politics. We all know, for example, the kerfuffle the GOP Catholic bishops pulled about contraception is a GOP Dirty Trick®.
You and I obviously disagree on the gospel message concerning homosexuality. That said, I have no doubt the Obama health care mandate concerning contraceptives is unconstitutional. It would force churches deemed “insufficiently religious” (whatever that means), religious institutions, and self-insurers to pay for abortion-inducing contraceptive converge despite their religious principles and consciences. If the government – the Obama Administration in this case – gets away with this plan, it will set the stage for further erosion of religious freedom guaranteed as a first Right under the Constitution. That’s totally unacceptable to anyone who takes religious life seriously and to those whose blood has been shed for the cause of our freedoms.
PS: Catholic bishops are no more GOP than Democrat. As a policy they remain non-partisan while leaning towards some conservative principles, such as, respect for all human life, traditional marriage, and religious freedom. Painting the bishops with a wide brush as you attempted to do is patently unfair and misleading.
Wonderful letter, Rev. Holt. Conservative Christians, whether Catholics or Protestants, demand others’ obedience to their particular values yet simultaneously cry foul when everyone else doesn’t agree with them, as with same sex marriage. They always want everything their way and condemn all dissenters as somehow “anti-Christian.” Thankfully many of us recognize this as the travesty it is.
Thank you for the letter, Rev. Holt.
Janice Pelletier, MD, at what point in time are the parents going to be held responsible for the care and feeding of “Their” children? As it stands now we have pre-school, which IMO is nothing more than free baby sitting. When the children of the poor go to school they are given free breakfast, lunch and after school snacks. Aren’t their parents already getting food vouchers to feed their families? Is it neccessary for the tax payers to pay for 10 to 15 more meals that their parents should be providing with money they get for not working?
What these recipients seem to be learing is that when they grow up they won’t have to provide for their offspring.
I agree 100%. We ought to let poor children starve to death. That would teach their stupid, lazy, mooching parents not to have children they couldn’t provide for! *
* (sarcasm)
In what society is 31 to 36 meals the norm? I grew up on 21 meals a week. Do the math. My parents both worked and still managed to insure that us kids ate breakfast BEFORE we left the house for school. They insured that we had a lunch packed or the money to buy a school lunch.
Since I have nothing to do with the conception of all these starving children, how does it become my or your responsibility to feed them? If they were in a state run orphanage I could understand it but these children have parents (sarcasm). Have they done something noteworthy to allow them to send their children out of the house on an empty stomach? Can they not teach their children how to pour a bowl of cereal or make a sandwich? Are they all that handicpped? They are getting TANF, EBT cards, subsidized housing, ‘FREE’ cell phones, etc. etc. etc. Are they that busy that they can’t squeeze a few minutes to feed THEIR children??
If a parent is given aid to feed and care for their children and still doesn’t seem to be able to perform such onorous tasks. They should have their children taken from them.
For some children the meals they receive at school are the only meals they get all day. It would be great if this was not the case but it is.
Refer to my last paragraph. If a parent seems incapable or refuses to care for the basic needs of life for their children they should be charged criminally and their children taken from them.
With a $120 million deficit and LePage wanting to cut DHS even more, how do you suggest we pay for the extra children going into the system?
If we stop feeding them in the schools for free, I think we could come up witht he funds to put them in foster care. The present system isn’t working worth a damn.
You have no idea how it bugs me to agree with the conservative side on this issue. But when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, etc. It’s a duck.
Unfortunately there are too many people who would not want to find a way to fund the necessary amount to properly take care of needy children because it would put an undo burden on them tax wise.
It takes less than $10 a day to provide free or low cost meals to students whereas it costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000 – 2,000 a month per foster child or more if the child has special needs. That is if we could find enough good foster parents, those that care about the child not the paycheck and could keep siblings together which is not the norm.
The only source I could find for actual dollar amount was from 2005 in Kentucky which had a base per Diem of $30 a day for food but had other money for things such as haircuts, clothing, allowance etc.
Last year, I believe, Dover Foxcroft started a program to seend children home with backpacks of food to carry them over the weekend. Recently some where else in Maine they want to set up food pantries or soup kitchens to feed needy children.
In the Dover Foxcroft story that was in the BDN I believe that they said close to 70% of the children going to that school qualified for free breakfast and lunch plus the back pack program.
I wonder if they have 70% unemployment there. According to Wikipedia the per capita income is $30,164, per family $36,287.
I don’t know what the poverty level is at the moment. My feeling is that there is no excuse for these people NOT being able to muster the effort of feeding THEIR own children. If they are unemployed there should be no problem time wise. They could even plant a small garden to insure their children have fresh vegetables to eat. They have the time.
Getting back to the claims of 70% qualified for the back pack program. If that is true, how many of those families are already being paid via TANF, EBT program cards, etc. that are supposed to be paying to feed THEIR children???
If they accept the free meals provided by the schools, should not DHHS or whoever is providing the EBT, TANF funds deduct the costs of the meals that the children are getting in the schools system?
$10 dollars a day sounds reasonable to feed these children in school. That’s $1,800 per year per child multiply that by how ever many children who are getting free meals and subsidized meals in the schools state wide and nationally and pretty soon it adds up to some serious money. Money that is already being given to the parents through various programs to do this. This in my mind is defrauding the tax payers. Takes money away from educating these children that could be used to help them become better prepared to meet the needs of business and industry in the future.
The state has been the problem all along. It has taught people it will care of them and their children at will. This situation of neglect has never been as bad as it is. Pumping more money to remedy neglect as some people would have it will only make a very bad situation even worse.
You can look at 3rd world countries and our own history to see how children’s lifes are better now then they were or would be if the people stopped taking care of children who need help.
Or would you rather see street urchins begging, stealing or worse to survive because that is what would happen without the State helping out.
We’ve become a welfare state. Over half of the U.S. population, not counting pensioners, receive some form of welfare benefit. And you propose more welfare! Come on and get real! People who work for a living are getting tired of supporting those who claim the government owes them a living.
Although I certainly don’t propose to end aid to the needy cold turkey, I do certainly agree that we desperately need to find ways to reduce dependence on the govt for subsistence. Welfare was originally designed to help those in need while they work to get back on their feet. Somewhere along the line it became a lifestyle instead of life help. This should not be.
What exactly we should do, I have no idea. This is a very complex issue. We can’t just kick the poor to the curb, but we can’t keep supporting those who refuse to help themselves either. America is broke and on the verge of bankruptcy folks. If we don’t find some answers soon, VERY soon, the poor really will be left without help.
How is it “kicking the poor to the curb”? I don’t propose the cold turkey method either, but that’s not what it is. It’s not like they had days, weeks, or even months notice. They have had 2 years notice that this is no longer going to be a lifetime service because we have our own families to care for too. If that’s not enough time to find a job, or 2 jobs if that’s what it takes, then they have no interest in helping themselves. And yes there are jobs out there. We don’t all get up in the morning and can’t wait to get to work because we love our job, but we do it because we have personal responsibilities. Some of us are working below our education level because we had to start over and work our way up again.
How much sympathy can we have for someone who had 1 child that they couldn’t afford, and then decided to have a couple more for us to feed, clothe, shelter, and educate, when we are struggling to care for the people that we do care about?
Rev. Holt does not take the Word of God seriously, evidently. Wolves in sheep’s clothing abound in the churches, also.
Thanks to those who also commented positively about Roger Reed. Those who know him realize that he is capable of doing both. Perhaps there is someone waiting in the wings, just biting his nails until he is proclaimed the BHS coach! Or, perhaps the superintendent is placing age discrimination on this situation? Mr. Reed has more energy than all of his players combined, I would say.
I know Rev. Holt, a fine Christian who takes the Bible seriously. If we take the Bible seriously, we cannot take it literally. That said, I’m tired of those right-wing fundamentalists who bring their prejudice to the Bible in order to look for that handful of verses that they can use as a cudgel to beat gays over the head with. The right-wing churches are infested with bigots who look for poison in the Bible, and cherry pick it in order to bolster their own ignorant self-righteousness.
You have a lot of good company in your distress about right-wingers and their cherry-picking and misinterpretation of the Bible, penzance. The many Christian, Jewish and other denominations that are marrying same gender couples now are being denied their right to practice their religion freely in 44 US States. These denominations have married same gender couples in 7 US States and the District of Columbia:
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Metropolitan Community Church
Reform Judaism
Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Unitarian Universalist Church
United Church of Christ
These and many other denominations reject the hate speech inserted in the bible to hurt LGBT people. Modern Biblical scholars have proven the Bible was intentionally mistranslated relatively recently in order to provide “Biblical cover” for then-rising levels of homophobia. For example, the word “homosexual” didn’t even exist until 1850.
Yes — I agree.
The Bible does not address the issue of same-sex marriage, and it really does not address the issue of mutual, committed, adult, same-sex relationships. And the word “homosexual” shouldn’t appear in any properly translated
Bible, because there is no equivalent word in biblical Hebrew or Greek.
You’re right, the word “homosexual” didn’t even exist until 1850. Many major Christian and Jewish denominations condemn misusing the hate-based mistranslations to attack their fellow Americans and are marrying same gender American couples now. About 400-years ago, a group of religious authorities (sanctioned by King James I of England), secretly manipulated the English version of the Bible to reflect their own heterosexual attitude; they opposed the king kissing other men in public. But in revised versions, religious authorities re-defined the Greek word “arsenokoites” of 1Corinthians 6:9! The most accurate translation, abusers of themselves with mankind [KJV], was pretty vague. Nevertheless, they replaced this vague 5-worded text with the not so vague and purposely targeted 1-word text, “homosexual(s).” Either way you cut it, this text does not describe homosexuals. This campaign gave those who were looking for a reason to justify their own homophobia a license to openly express their bigotry.
No Penzance. When it comes to the sin of homosexuality, the bible is quite clear. In at least two places I know of in the New Testament is it listed as a sin among a list of other sins. Now how can you dispute it was not considered a sin? Some people will say Christ did not make any reference to it in the gospels. Well, maybe so, but he did not specifically mention other sins that happen to be mentioned in the epistles. Besides, Christ told his disciples He would send the Holy Spirit who would guide them unto all truth.
Before the last century (the 20th century) you would be hard put to find any Christian denomination that denied homosexuality was a sin. Furthermore, had Christ intended marriage as a union of two men or two women, He would have mentioned this. Yet he refers to marriage as a union of a man and a woman when he speaks about divorce. In Genesis, God created Adam. Because he did not want man to be alone he created a woman, not another man. Then He ordered them to be fruitful and multiply. This is the first allusion we find in the Scripture about marriage. Marriage between same-sexed couples is never mentioned.
“Before the last century (the 20th century) you would be hard put to find
any Christian denomination that denied homosexuality was a sin.”
But since then they prayed and studied the Bible, and learned the error of their ways. Before 1800, very few denominations rejected the slavery in the US South. Does that mean we should make Americans slaves today?
It’s always easy to poke holes in the “logic” of the few remaining anti-gays, since that “logic” is built on a mental disorder, homophobia.
You missed my point. The gospel over the centuries has been watered down. In order to determine the original and truer meaning of the gospel one needs to examine the early Christian church for its stated beliefs and practices. Slavery existed then, and persecution of Christians was very severe under the rule of the very cruel Roman Empire. Slavery and homosexuality – both of which were very widespread practices then – were widely condemned by the Church.
As you your allusion to homophobia, I’m not swayed by name-calling. People who resort to name-calling and ridicule often do so because of lack a real argument.
Finally, for your information, most Americans including myself are opposed to illicit drug use. I presume in your book that makes us all “drug-phobics” suffering from a mental disorder called “drug-phobia”.
You’re denying people equal rights, you don’t get to complain about name-calling because what you’re doing is about infinitely worse.
Rev. Holt – You, just like so many in this country, have been blinded by Satan, and he is using you as a false prophet. Jesus never once condoned sin, but repeatedly told people to go and sin no more. And the Bible, contrary to your selective reading, does clearly condemn any physical relationship outside of marriage, including homosexuality, as a sin against the body and a sin against God. God made woman for man, and man for woman. No other combination is acceptable in His eyes.
More like a false teacher, EJ.
Read 2 Peter 2:1-3 and it describes the good Rev very well. He’s trying to soothe itching ears to justify what God clearly calls a sin.
somainecoast, one of your own (several actually) has opened the “God door” and you can’t close it again or shuffle the “God says its ok” argument off to the side now. You believe whatever you want, but the Bible is very clear in God’s description of sin.
My post is about (what I consider to be) the silliness of religious arguments. It’s even more amusing when someone like you tries to make a point with someone like me by using the bible. You may as well use a book of fairy tales.
The Bible also says it is ok to own slaves as long as they are not of your own people. It also says you should stone to death unruly children for not obaying their parents or others for wearing clothes made from different fibers, or for eating sea food and many other things Christians no longer believe in.
I even believe theat God rewarded multiple men with children from their barren wives after impregnating their servants.
Oath-keeper: see Ann Lamott’s wise observation above.
Complete nonsense, rejected by many major Christian and Jewish denominations–and MORE join them every year in stating plainly the Bible and Christ DO NOT condone homophobia.
Here it comes EJ. Are you ready?
“You can safely assume that you’ve
created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same
people you do.”
Anne Lamott
So true!
EJ, you have been blinded by your own self-righteousness (another term for “Satan”), and your words on these pages are constantly words of false prophecy. You go to the Bible armed with your prejudice, and you read it selectively, picking out a few verses and interpreting them in the most hateful way, blinded by prejudice. Take the log out of your own eye before you attempt to take the speck out of Rev. Holt’s eye.
We all know the devil made him (EJ) do it.
Perhaps then those who have participated in physical relationships outside of marriage should be denied the ability to enter into it after the fact ….. or are they righting a wrong they committed and therefore welcomed? Do state civil marriage license applications address this?
I’m afraid we know the answer to your excellent question, jacknlyn. Statistics show that evangelical Christians, what we call the “religious wrong,” have the highest divorce rate in America. This proves further that “sanctity of marriage” is a lie, since the anti-gays using that line clearly consider their own marriages a matter of convenience and change them frequently.
On the other hand, Massachusetts, the US State with marriage equality the longest, has the lowest divorce rate of any US State.
It’s really sad that moderators here allowed Mr. Parsons’ shameful personal attack against Rev. Holt to remain here. While Mr. Parsons is entitled by his right to Free Speech to tell all readers here he opposes the United States Constitution’s guarantee of Freedom Of Religion and would prefer to force his own nasty opinions onto all other Americans, the terms of service here forbid personal attacks, which is just what the shameful and immoral words above are.
I think quite a few would consider you the false prophet.
Yes, quite a few would. That’s because they are afraid of the Truth.
They’re probably afraid of those things you keep making up. Like the other day about those people who took a photo and flipped the bird to a painting of Reagan. You either lied or were misinformed — probably because you only read/listen to fringe-right sources — the White House had already issued a statement denouncing the photos.
That is your baloney.
Every right-wing nut who wants to force us into his peculiar, minority nonsense beliefs shrieks he has the “Truth.” Mr. Parsons knows he’s the one who’s afraid of the facts. That’s why psychologists have called the mental disorder “homoPHOBIA” since 1953.
There is nothing sinful about the life I share with my partner. We have been in a supportive, monogamous relationship for decades. We volunteer, give to charity, help our neighbors, and are valued by our community. To judge us by one aspect of our lives surely isn’t in the spirit of the gospel.
Extending civil marriage does not affect your religious views whatsoever; your church is already free to accept or deny anyone in their congregation, let alone conducting their weddings. The first amendment guarantees that.
God condemns rape, not love. Jesus blesses the poor and needy, not the judgmental and self-righteous.
God established marriage in the Garden of Eden between one man and one woman. Man messed it up from there.
And God abhors any sexual conduct outside of marriage as a sin against the body and a sin against God.
By the way, sin is defined in the Bible as willful disobedience. Unfortunately, man has redefined it to mean only what each person considers sin. You can’t change what God as already defined.
Finally, I have no problem with civil unions. Just leave marriage as God intended it to be.
It seems Mr. Parsons has never read the Bible. Betty Bowers, America’s BEST Christian® can explain it all to Mr. Parsons, and it’s a video and easy to follow and understand, complete with the Bible verses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw
Now, let’s examine Mr.Parsons’ deceptions above.
“God established marriage in the Garden of Eden […]” Nope, nothing in the Bible about marriage in the Garden of Eden, nor about marriage shortly thereafter. So just WHO did Cain and Abel marry, Mr. Parsons?
“You can’t change what God as already defined.” How you doing with the Betty Bowers video, Mr. Parsons? By now, have you seen how many ways God changed marriage? And how about how many times the United States has “changed the definition of marriage.” Once upon a time, not only could whites not marry African Americans, but African Americans before the Civil War couldn’t even marry each other. Another recent change in “the definition of marriage” is that close relatives are not allowed to marry in most US States.
“I have no problem with civil unions.” Yes, anti-gays frequently make that false claim, but most of their anti-gay Hate Votes they cooked up in so many US States state that loving, committed same gender American couples may NOT have a civil union or ANY legal recognition, even a simple contract, a health care directive, and same gender couples in those states are even BARRED FROM VISITING EACH OTHER IN HOSPITALS.
Spare us your deceptions, Mr. Parsons. Please stop trying to subvert the United States Constitution and its guarantee of “Equal Protection Under The Law.”
You ever heard of fool’s gold? That’s what Betty Bowers is.
Just more insults, huh? And you had to sneak way down the page to make that insult instead of answering my question above? I take it your insult proves you know Betty Bowers is 100% CORRECT and that David and Jonathan were married.
God and Buddha are having a coffee and chatting
God: There isn’t anything very exciting going on. I think I’ll make something to keep busy.
Buddha: Well fergodsake, what ever you do don’t make anything that has the capacity to think. It will just cause trouble later on, you do know that.
God: Well, of course. I’m off to create the earth and all that dwells therein, catch you later
God: (humming happily) Now, lets see something to live in this nice garden I just planted. Oh, riiiiiight. I’ll make someone that looks like Buddha when he was young and slim. What a hoot; and a young slim woman to keep him company so he won’t get bored. Kazam!!! and It’s done. (God goes off to find Buddha and show off his handiwork)
God and Buddha watching Man and Woman.
Buddha: Oh they are cute and he does look a lot like me before I got so ummm plump.
God and Buddha together: OMG WHAT are they doing???????
God: Well , we can’t have THAT going on in my garden. I’m just going to have to invent marriage and put a stop to THAT.
And there you have it folks: why and how God established marriage in the garden. And for ever after men and women have been thinking up alternate arrangements because, in spite of Buddha’s warning, God forgot and gave men AND women the capacity to think and we keep thinking up new an innovative ways to live interesting lives.
So, EJ, you’re saying that the problems with marriage should be blamed on us straight folks!
In fact, the story of the Garden of Eden says nothing, either negative or positive, about same sex relationships. Genesis 1-3 does not claim to be a complete study of all human possibilities. It does not mention friendship, for instance, yet that doesn’t mean that Genesis 1-3 condemns friendship. It doesn’t mention celibacy, yet some churches promote celibacy. It doesn’t mention polygamy, and yet later in Genesis we find Jacob having twelve sons by his two wives and two concubines, and God being so happy with Jacob that he renames him Israel and makes him (literally) the father of his country.
Just because same-sex relationships are not mentioned in Genesis 1-3 doesn’t mean they are condemned there. You’re reading your own prejudice into the text, but it isn’t there, EJ.
Ahh, Christians from the left and right arguing over ancient texts written by men. Guess I’ll wait for this god that they espouse to chime in and give us his/her/its opinion on SSM. Not centuries-old books. A god of the here and now.
I’m still waiting…
Yep, still waiting…
I understand and appreciate your sarcasm.
As a Christian myself, I am constantly frustrated by those fundamentalists of the right who make the Bible into an infallible “paper Pope” and then quote it selectively (like EJ Parsons) — and I’m equally frustrated by the fundamentalists of the left (atheists) who also think that the Bible must be interpreted literally, and because they find a literal interpretation to be unsustainable, they reject it all.
If we are to take the Bible seriously we cannot take it literally. Both the fundamentalists of the right and the fundamentalists of the left make the same mistake — they interpret a book of stories literally. Neither understand the religious uses of myth: a myth is not a lie, it is a classic story that tells us truths about the human condition. The Bible is full of stories, and only a very few should be taken literally. The Gospel of Mark tells us that Jesus taught only in parables. The point of a parable is not found in its “facts” because parables are stories, not factual history. The parable of the good shepherd and the lost sheep is a case in point — no competent shepherd would leave 99 sheep unguarded to go looking for one lost sheep. But the factuality of the story is not the point. A parable doesn’t have to be factual in order to be true.
For far too long the fundamentalists of the right have told us to believe the parable of Adam and Eve as fact, and the atheist fundamentalists of the left have rejected it is factually false, and neither group understands that it is a teaching story, a parable, that is designed to make us think and cause us to discuss and ponder the sacredness of existence.
Although fundamentalists of the right think the Bible is a cudgel to beat people with, and fundamentalists of the left think it is a useless anti-science fairy tale, it is neither. It is a religious classic, and no American who is ignorant of it is an educated person.
Jesus affirmed a gay couple. Read Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. In the original Greek, the word that the Roman centurion uses in this passage to describe the sick man – pais – is the same word used in ancient Greek to refer to a same-gender partner.
I find it unfortunate that the extreme right has seized a monopoly on religion and Christianity — at least in terms of political discourse. Their actions and behavior always seems so far from the true sentiment of Christianity and that’s likely why so many are moving away from it.
While I’m not religious myself, and I agree about how the extreme right has TRIED to monopolize religion, it has failed. I’ve posted a partial list of the denominations below that reject the hate-based mistranslations of the Bible to which the “religious wrong” cling desperately as their “excuse” for violating “Thou Shalt Not Lie” and the Golden Rule.
Not quite a monopoly. Check out the policies of some pretty good sized groups like the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, the Presbyterian Church USA, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and smaller groups like the Unitarian Universalists, Quakers, and Metropolitan Community Churches — and some individual congregations in the United Methodist and American Baptist denominations — and Reform Judaism.
It’s sad that so many churches have abandoned the truth of the Bible for their own weak and misguided interpretations. The more I learn, the more I’m convinced that Billy Graham was correct when he said that he felt that about 70 percent of so-called Christians are going to be turned away on Judgment Day. You’re a very intelligent man; but by your writings, I would say you lack the wisdom to see the Truth. Maybe one day your eyes will open.
No, Mr. Parsons, what is REALLY sad is that you would attack the Freedom Of Religion of the many Christian, Jewish and other denominations that reject your deception about the Bible!
Please tell us, Mr. Parsons. You’ve made it clear you oppose Freedom Of Religion for others. Could you please tell us which others freedoms that the US Constitution guarantees ALL Americans that you would like to take away from everyone else? Or do you simply want to TRASH our Constitution, as “dominion Christians” say they want to do?
Another one of your made up statistics. 70%? Like how 99% of the country has a photo id?
It’s sad that you are so prejudiced, and that you express that prejudice so often. You lack the wisdom of compassion. Too bad. See Matthew 25: 31-46. Maybe one day your eyes will open.
The Old Testament is filled with stories: gloomy, punitive, vindictive, self-serving and selfishly aggressive stories. I’m not sure the philosophy they are promoting is terribly valuable. I;m with Moses, I wouldn’t have wanted to bring God’s commandments down from the mountain either. The New Testament seems a bit kinder, gentler and more humane.
I guess you’re not familiar with large sections of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. But then, neither are most of the people who call themselves Christians.
Some of my favorite passages come from the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, such as Leviticus 19:18 “Love your neighbor as yourself ” — and Micah 6:8 “What does the Lord require of you? To act justly, to show mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.”
Of course, yes, both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are filled with stories. The Bible is, more than anything else, a story book, although it does contain several distinct genres of literature. The problem the fundamentalists of the right and the fundamentalists of the left (the atheists) make is that they want to take all of the stories literally. One group accepts them literally, and the other group rejects them literally.
And I might add, the Bible (really a collection of ancient books) is not a perfect book — we call it “the good book,” not the perfect book. It’s wrong about slavery and some other things.
You have an odd conception of atheists. Tests show that in general atheists have a greater knowledge and understanding of religion than those that call themselves “christian”.
msally, I agree with you that atheists often have a better understanding of the Bible than evangelical and fundamentalists Christians have, and I’m familiar with the studies you cite. I agree with you there.
My point is that both the fundamentalists of the right (fundamentalist Christians) and the fundamentalists of the left (hardcore atheists) tend to make the same mistake — they think the stories of the Bible have to be taken literally. We wouldn’t make that mistake with “Oedipus Rex” or with “Macbeth,” but both left and right tend to make that mistake with “The Garden of Eden” and “the Nativity.”
Both true believer and hardcore atheist test the Bible for facts. To the former they are absolutely convincing. The skeptic finds the stories to be incredible and dismisses them. Both forget that the Bible is a religious storybook, not a historical record that stands or falls on its facts. It is a storybook rich in mythic overtones and parabolic undertones, helping to set humanity in divine, and divinity in humane, perspective.
As for its stories, like every story, their truth depends entirely upon their listeners. They will prove as true as hope and love are true, but only if they awaken us to possibilities for love and hope within our lives.
Beautifully and as always sensibly said.
I’m a pretty hard core atheist, penzance, and I’m fully aware of the symbolic nature of the bible stories, both new and old testament. Some of them I reject as self serving others are stating universal lessons in humanity. I also know that many of the stories of the old testament have their origin in much older religions. Do you know many atheists?
One in five children live in poverty because one in five jobs have been shipped out of the country by corporation and politicians who considered profits more important than consequences. So now one in five parents no longer have jobs to provide children with the support they need to grow up strong, healthy, educated and able to hold jobs.
One in five children live in poverty because someone is busting unions and passing legislation that transfers wealth from the parents in the working and middle class to corporations and the very wealthy. So now, one in five children lives in poverty because parents have lost take home pay and in some cases lost homes.
One in five children live in poverty because someone has taken the education funding for the children in poor districts and transferred it to more worth while projects like flags and flowers and clean, safe streets in the nicer sections of town.
One in five children live in poverty because someone thinks education, jobs, health services, safe streets are just frills that the poor should provide for themselves.
Remember Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn rule: “You break it, you own it”?. Well, you created this mess. Now, you own it. You know who you are.
Excellent column in today’s WPost by Joeseph Stiglitz for anyone who is interested.
‘How policy has contributed to the great economic divide .’
Jan Rideout said: “I am just trying to understand the logic of the educational leadership in Bangor.”
No you’re not, Jan. Your real agenda is so transparent it’s ridiculous.
Woodsway, your comment intrigues me because I don’t see her “agenda” as clearly as you. Would you enlighten me and explain what you think it is .
Ms. Rideout probably believes too much emphasis is placed on high school sports and would like them eliminated.
I partly agree with you. I did get the sense that she thinks there is a strong emphasis on sports but I didn’t interpret it to mean she would like the athletic programs eliminated. It seems to me that she is saying that she hoped that administrators would expect the same 100% effort and commitment of their teachers as they expect of their coaches. But then again, that is my interpretation of what she wrote.
Rev. John Holt, thank you for your support!
It is so encouraging to see people across the US waking up to this injustice and standing in favor of same-sex civil marriage. One just has to look at the many pictures of same sex partners getting their civil marriage licenses– these are happy, normal couples just as heterosexual newlyweds.
The biggest difference is the number of elderly couples you see getting wed— for they have already spent a lifetime together, only now being able to enter into the great institution of civil marriage.
Best of all, it has become so obvious that the more we discuss this issue, the more support we see. Allowing all Maine families to protect their lives and loved ones with civil marriage is the right thing to do.
Dorothy Louise Taliaferro “Del” Martin and Phyllis Ann Lyon had been together 56 years before they were married in June of 2008.
I’m looking forward to Mr. Parsons returning after he has viewed Betty Bowers, America’s Best Christian®, explain that the Bible DOES NOT say marriage is “one man, one woman.” If Mr. Parsons looks up the Bible quotes Betty Bowers illustrates, Mr. Parsons will also learn of the marriage between David and Jonathan.
In reading John Holt’s letter, it’s important to put his criticism of Del Camp in perspective. John Holt was a minister at the American Baptist and United Church of Christ. Both churches are among a small minority that supports gay marriage. The latter church is the one over which the very hateful Jeremiah Wright, the President’s former pastor, presides in Chicago.
So it comes as no surprise that John Holt, rather than Del Camp, is taking the Bible out of context, in claiming that it offers any support for gay marriage. The reason is because with respect to what lies at its core – same -sex behavior – the Bible is quite explicit in both the Old and New Testaments:
Leviticus 18:22:
“‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”
Romans 1:24-26:
“Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
I suspect that John Holt’s reply might be that such admonitions do not condemn same-sex behavior but only its use in idolatry. However, the verses, themselves, and other Biblical text leave such interpretations without merit. For example, the verses preceding Romans 1:24-26 refer to man’s rejection of God in favor of idolatry. So the idolatry occurs first, and the sexual impurity occurs second. In other words, the second is a result of the first. Next, the words “detestable, unnatural, indecent, and perversion” pertain to the sexual act and not the idolatry that proceeded it. Last, unlike heterosexual behavior, which is permitted in marriage, the Bible contains no language that permits homosexual behavior under any circumstance.
It’s well that it didn’t. For what the people of that day couldn’t know, the scientists of today do. First it’s the origin of homosexuality. It results from a complex interplay of genetic, biologic, and social factors, which do not guarantee a homosexual outcome but pre-dispose one to it, more so than others. Gay marriage and mischaracterizing same-sex behavior as normal and healthy are very powerful influences, which make those predisposed to homosexuality more likely to become so and/or engage in the behavior. Second, same-sex behavior is profoundly unhealthy. Among the maladies to which homosexuals are far more susceptible than heterosexuals are HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, certain cancers and STDs, and ailments originating from the intestinal tract. They also include bodily damage and an elevated risk of emotional and mental illness, which is consistent, even in countries, like the Netherlands, where same-sex behavior enjoys far more acceptance than here or in other countries. In committed relationships, males remain non-monogamous, and both sexes are more likely to divorce in jurisdictions that recognize gay marriage.
For these reasons, it’s important not to be misled into thinking that homosexual behavior is either Biblical or healthy. Rather, it’s far better to rely on an accurate interpretation of the Bible and peer-reviewed research performed by apolitical, mainstream, and reputable sources. A listing of these sources and a summary of them is in the essay entitled, “The Case For Government Recognition of Traditional Relationships.” It can be found at
marriage-onemanandonewoman.blogspot
I urge those viewing this comment string to please read it and pass it on to others. In this way, we can work together to educate the public on the need to keep marriage as it should be: between one man and one woman.
To hold up any old testament rules against homosexuality is the mark of a hypocrite. Why? Because you hold as valid an admonishment against behavior you have no problem avoiding, while ignoring the many, many other behaviors that are equally condemned… Eating pork, shellfhish, food over 3 days old, and wearing mixed fabrics as just some of the examples.
Besides, the bible says far, far more in support of slavery than it says against homosexuality, yet I don’t see you using its texts to argue for allowing it.
Most importantly, though, is the fact that civil marriage for same sex couples in Maine is the moral and right thing to do. For we are building lives together anyway; we are raising children anyway; to stand in our way of equal protection under our laws is simply wrong.
Jesus preached love, not hate. In fact, he specifically told his followers not to judge each other in this life. The bible condemns rape, not love.
The website listed above is known to be that of a vicious anti-gay website, and this poster above is probably paid to post these lies. Why else would that poster waste his time these same old lies most Americans reject?
These denominations have married same gender couples in 7 US States and the District of Columbia:
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Metropolitan Community Church
Reform Judaism
Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Unitarian Universalist Church
United Church of Christ
These and many other denominations reject the hate speech inserted in the bible to hurt LGBT people. Modern Biblical scholars have proven the Bible was intentionally mistranslated relatively recently in order to provide “Biblical cover” for then-rising levels of homophobia. For example, the word “homosexual” didn’t even exist until 1850.
Despite the claims of the few remaining anti-gays, like this poster below who posts this NONSENSE all over the US, more US major denominations EVERY YEAR join them. Only a few “cheater churches” closely affiliated with the Republican Party and that operate more like political parties themselves still push the nonsense that God wants to hurt His LGBT children and cause His churches to poison our political process.
Ah carrotcakeman we have our work cut out for us. I just read that the Vatican has hired the head of Fox PR in Rome to do their messaging !!! I guess that E.J. was too busy.
Actually, our work is already done, most Americans have a family member, good friend, neighbor 0r coworker who is LGBT and they will NEVER help the anti-gays poison our political process and hurt us. That’s what makes anti-gays so shrill and shrieking–they know they have already lost.
However, in places like this it is important to answer the anti-gays LIES with facts, complete with documentation. There is NO BETTER documentation that the anti-gays are LYING about the Bible than to list the many major Christian and Jewish denominations that are marrying loving, committed same gender American couples now.
Completely agree.
Reverend Holt is correct that Christians may not be of one mind on the subject of “gay marriage.” However, God IS of one mind on the subject. I need not repeat the oft-quoted references to Genesis or the Gospels or the Epistles, but marriage is consistently between a man and a woman in the scriptures. As a sinner myself, I can not judge the behavior of others, but I can not champion the sin found in them either. Carrying a banner of sexual deviancy is not something Jesus would encourage, but has condemned by the suggestion of tying “…a millstone around around his neck and throw him into the sea.” Contrary to popular belief, Jesus did judge us for our sin. But he paid the penalty for that sin himself.
Do you hold slaves, or do you defer to what our laws say instead of what your bible says?
Civil marriage is not religious marriage. We allow people of different faiths marry, even if their churches would forbid it. We even allow atheists to marry!
The truth is that civil marriage conveys over 1,100 benefits and privileges in federal laws, and there is no justifiable reason to discriminate against same-sex couples. We need those same protections for the life we are building together and the children we raise together, for we are living our lives with the same commitment and love as any heterosexual couple.
Convivial is right. This discussion is really about CIVIL marriage, LEGAL marriage. While it’s true there are still a few religious sects that cling to hate-based mistranslations to give “Biblical cover” to their unAmerican desire to hurt LGBT Americans, the simple fact is anti-gays’ weird, antisocial and Biblically unfounded beliefs are simply irrelevant in the eyes of the Constitution and our laws.
One thing upon which all Christians and Jews agree is the Ten Commandments, one of which is “Thou Shalt Not Lie.” You posted a lie here, bruceapilot. You also posted hate speech:
“Carrying a banner of sexual deviancy”
Please show us in the Bible where Jesus said you should attack your fellow Americans who are LGBT. Hint: nowhere.
Sad to say, it’s easy to prove bruceapilot is LYING about Jesus. Jesus affirmed a gay couple.
The Greek word that the Roman centurion uses in this passage to describe the sick man – pais – is the same word used in ancient Greek to refer to a same-gender partner.
From our days in Sunday school, many of us are familiar with the Gospel story where Jesus healed the servant of a Roman centurion. This story is recorded in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. In Matthew, we are told that the centurion came to Jesus to plead for the healing of his servant. Jesus said he was willing to come to the centurion’s house, but the centurion said there was no need for Jesus to do so — he believed that if Jesus simply spoke the word, his servant would be healed. Marveling at the man’s faith, Jesus pronounced the servant healed. Luke tells a similar story.
http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/gay_couple.html
The reason anti-gays have become so very shrill and shrieking nowadays, trying to force their homophobia onto all normal Americans with these anti-gay Hate Votes, is they know they have already LOST. Even right-wing publications recognize this:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/07/27/new-study-support-for-gay-marriage-grew-faster-in-past-two-years
“According to the report, polling data from sources including Gallup, CNN/ORC, ABC/Washington Post, and Pew Research Center indicate that average support for legalizing gay marriage grew at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year between 1996 and 2009, but the rate increased to 5 percent growth per year from 2009 to 2011. “That’s actually a 500 percent increase in the rate of change,” Benenson said at a press conference. “We rarely see that kind of upward spike in support around an issue.”
Because of that growth, several national polls show a majority of Americans now support legalizing gay marriage, including Gallup (53 percent), Public Religion Research Institute (51 percent), CNN/ORC (51 percent), and ABC/Washington Post (53 percent).”
carrotcakeman’s post, below, is more theological snake oil from websites dedicated to distorting the Bible to achieve a political agenda: fabricating biblical approval for same-sex behavior. To put the record straight, the word “pais” clearly referred to a male child in the context of this Biblical passage, according to this dictionary on ancient Greek words:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0073%3Aentry%3Dpai%3Ds
It did not refer to a homosexual partner. Even if the word meant what carrotcakeman falsely says it does, there’s still no Biblical text that countermands the passages in Leviticus or Romans prohibiting same-sex behavior or the lack of Biblical text allowing homosexual behavior under any circumstances, as heterosexual behavior is allowed in marriage.
Yes, I’m sure you prefer your hate-based mistranslations and misinterpretations. Tough luck selling that nonsense here or anywhere. Every year, more major Christian denominations reject those lies.
The Apostle Paul dealt with Jewish dietary and other laws with respect to Gentiles, who had become Christians, saying that they did not have to adhere to such laws, which invalidates one of your arguments, above.
Second, with respect to slavery, keep in mind that approximately 50% of the Roman world was comprised of slaves. Also, they were of every color and ethnic background and were mostly bond servants, working off a debt owed to the master of the house.
As for Biblical admonitions with respect to slaves, it provided a very strict code on how they were to be treated – humanely – and eventually made it so difficult to own slaves that it caused the practice to die off among believers. So, again, this leaves your argument without merit.
Concerning your statement that recognizing gay marriage is the “right” thing to do, that argument is invalidated by the serious medical, psychological, and sociological problems of same-sex behavior, which I summarized in my first post on this comment string.
It’s sad to see this out-of-state anti-gay poster is here trying to push his anti-gay propaganda. We know the Maine Ethics Commission caught the out-of-state anti-gay Hate Cult “NOM” red-handed poisoning our political process. This poster GGG is just trying to do the same thing. No one will be fooled by his/her anti-gay propaganda and hate speech.
These denominations have married same gender couples in 7 US States and the District of Columbia:
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Metropolitan Community Church
Reform Judaism
Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Unitarian Universalist Church
United Church of Christ
Other individual churches, even Baptist churches, have happily married loving, committed same gender American couples.
There is no better proof that anti-gays are lying about Christ and the Bible than this list of welcoming and affirming denominations. Shame on anyone who attacks the Freedom Of Religion of the welcoming and affirming churches!
There is no shame in speaking the truth. These churches, however, do not. Their shame on Judgment Day will be great.
And you being judgmental again.
When they say ” he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.” I thought they were referring to Jesus not you, EJ LOL
You don’t have a monopoly on the truth. You actually don’t have any hold on the truth at all. Most of what you do on here is spread misinformation and hatred. Somehow you think that puts you in great standing with God? What a joke.