SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
August 4, 2010· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

Raise the Rainbow Flag!

By Timothy Myers SR. — Tim Myers

A federal judge in San Francisco has struck down Proposition 8 as violative of the Federal Constitution.   Petz, if your head is going to explode our daughter is working the ICU at Henry Mayo tonight so she will make certain it gets glued back together real nice!

Comments (123)

  1. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 1:17 pm
    Another sad day in history for California; but, as a famous ballplayer once said “it ain’t over till it’s over”.
  2. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 1:18 pm
    Petz, you may want to call ahead or wear your special cap.
  3. Tim MyersAugust 4, 2010 at 1:29 pm
    Super glue!!!!! Breaking News: COC will celebrate decision with a Cher concert at the PAC. Canyon Theatre Guild joins celebration with revival of “Carousel” begining tonight! (….and you’ll never walk alone!!!)
  4. CCAugust 4, 2010 at 1:34 pm
    LOL! Rainbow flags for everyone!
  5. ThomasAugust 4, 2010 at 1:43 pm
    Why bother to go vote anymore when the courts just overturn everything. The people spoke and it was approved.
  6. Tim MyersAugust 4, 2010 at 1:44 pm
    We have an independent federal judiciary to knock down law enacted when the people act like bigoted fools!
  7. SusanAugust 4, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    yep
  8. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 1:54 pm
    You are the fool here Timmy.
  9. Tim MyersAugust 4, 2010 at 1:57 pm
    Cash: Oh!!! I beg to differ!
  10. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 2:02 pm
    I would expect you to differ! You generally fall outside the norms. Have you started to fly your gay flag, or are you looking for one that is a little more off color?
  11. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 2:10 pm
    File:Bi-flag new.gif … 1396 x 1040 | 265KB commons.wikimedia.org
  12. Tim MyersAugust 4, 2010 at 2:52 pm
    Oh Cash! I am the most heterosexual man on the planet (I can objectively prove it too!) but I loves me the gays!
  13. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 3:09 pm
    LOL
  14. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 1:59 pm
    “independent federal judiciary “….. What a bleep bleep joke!
  15. JeffAugust 4, 2010 at 2:34 pm
    Yeah it’s only a joke when your side loses. I didn’t see you protesting the Citizens United case
  16. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 3:12 pm
    The Joke is that courts are not biases or influenced. The Constitution has little to do with their decisions. Those that oppose gay marriage win in the end, that’s all that matters.
  17. DamageincAugust 4, 2010 at 3:59 pm
    Do you have a constitutional reason to exclude gays from getting married?
  18. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 4:09 pm
    No.
  19. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 7:26 pm
    Then what are you complaining about?
  20. NateAugust 4, 2010 at 3:01 pm
    When the vote is unconstitutional it won’t stand… that is why we have a constitution to protect groups of people from getting their rights infringed on.
  21. SCVSuckzAugust 4, 2010 at 1:57 pm
    snicker…snicker…ok morms…break open your big fat wallets…again! luv it!!!!!!
  22. NateAugust 4, 2010 at 2:55 pm
    This is pretty much a nail in the coffin on the issue… I figured this would be decided in court. Conservatives are not going to be able to counter with a constitutional reason why it is ok to exclude one group of people… If they sat down and read that little book they were waving around at the town hall meetings last summer they might learn something. 99% of the population can not infringe on 1% of the population’s constitutionally protected rights! If the majority of the people wanted to bring back slavery… does that mean it should? What if the Majority wanted to ban firearms of all types or ban all religion? Would conservatives be whining about how the majority has spoken? Nope… Religion and Firearms are protected under the constitution, and slavery is banned so even if the vote went through it would be overturned very quickly. Conservatives if you love freedom… then you must love freedom for all. Otherwise you might just find yourself in the minority some day having the majority pulling away your freedoms away. Madison in the Federalist papers coined the phrase the Tyranny of the Majority. http://www.the-signal.com/archives/23461/
  23. Fred ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 6:07 pm
    Otherwise you might just find yourself in the minority some day having the majority pulling away your freedoms away. We’re already there. Been there for a while now. Uber-rights to a small, small, fraction of society is not a good thing. So I take it now we are all ready to strike down laws prohibiting Muslims and Mormons practicing polygamy? And don’t be naive and say it’s unrelated. It most certainly is not.
  24. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 7:25 pm
    Uber-right and Uber-left in a small fraction is a GREAT thing. Extremism is killing all common sense! You really think the Republicans following the extremists in their party is going to win over the moderates who put Obama in the White House?
  25. Fred ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 8:12 pm
    You really think the Republicans following the extremists in their party is going to win over the moderates who put Obama in the White House? Your question assumes that it is extremist to be against gay marriage. You’re basically loading the terminology, which is a typical ploy among the younger liberal crowd.
  26. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 10:17 pm
    Plus God told Fred it’s so.
  27. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 9:48 am
    Fred, every statement I read from you is a walking contradiction as you consistently do that which you claim your opponent is doing… ie “loading the terminology” in your favor. Do you even read what you write?
  28. Mike MAugust 5, 2010 at 8:11 am
    Marriage is an uber-right? Granting gays the right to marry somehow impinges on your rights? EXPLAIN THAT TO ME WITHOUT RESORTING TO STUPID.
  29. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 9:35 am
    Impossible for them.
  30. Friend of PetzAugust 4, 2010 at 2:04 pm
    Maybe the court can get CA a budget now that they have taken care of the marriage issue.
  31. SCVSuckzAugust 4, 2010 at 2:06 pm
    “come out”…”come out” where ever you are SCV haters….Cash has already come out to play today….always does when it comes to gays, latinos, african americans…you know…anyone who isn’t like him…come on SCV….bring it on!
  32. OccassionalPosterAugust 4, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    Sadder day, when those activist judges, Warren and Black, forced integrated schools down our throats too.
  33. NateAugust 4, 2010 at 2:43 pm
    This has been a rough couple weeks in the courts for the “we love our freedom, just not your freedom” conservatives.
  34. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 2:51 pm
    Gays, Illegals yes, alway! Blacks only when they think I owe them something!
  35. Tim MyersAugust 5, 2010 at 8:08 am
    Haven’t my mixed race grandchildren run you out of town yet?
  36. just a guyAugust 4, 2010 at 3:00 pm
    Does this mean we can’t vote to extradite Mormons to Utah? I think 52% would vote for that… Shucks.. Damn Constitution – Why do you have to be so… FREEING?
  37. SCVSuckzAugust 4, 2010 at 3:04 pm
    you never disappoint Cash.
  38. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm
    I am to please!
  39. OccassionalPosterAugust 4, 2010 at 3:22 pm
    cash says: August 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm I am to please! I bet you “refudiate” this decision.
  40. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 3:28 pm
    Not a Palin fan. But yes, the decision was wrong.
  41. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 7:38 pm
    It was wrong? Yet you can’t give a constitutional reason why? I think the real reason is.. Cash’s boytoy Pablo was buggin’ him about getting married, but Cash’s thirst for muy caliente latino pool boys was just too much. The pressure continued until Prop 8 passed and cash thought to himself, “Gay Bathhouse here I come!” Now that Prop 8 has been overturned… Pablo is going to expect Cash to man up and stop getting the milk for free. Gravy train is over Cash, the Courts have decided, it is time bust out that bolo tie and buy that cow.
  42. Timothy MyersAugust 4, 2010 at 9:45 pm
    Damageinc: Are you going to pay the cost of dry cleaning the pants I just wet because I lost control of my bladder from laughing?
  43. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 10:58 pm
    HAHA Cost of Admission.
  44. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 3:31 pm
    Suckz understood.
  45. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 3:59 pm
    Overturned! What a great day for the United States Of America. And a HUGE middle finger to those who campaigned in favor of Prop. 8 (including making donations, raising the issue in church, and those who didn’t vote either way). Don’t trample on other’s rights, bigoted fools! I will celebrate by shagging my neighbor while she wears a Rush Limbaugh mask while listening to Slayer. It’s the only way to fly.
  46. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 4:13 pm
    You are the loser! You can any sex partner you like, just keep it to your sick self.
  47. Your Web GuruAugust 4, 2010 at 4:53 pm
    Oh lighten up, Mary!
  48. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 5:22 pm
    Thanks, Cash. I’ll be sure to make her call me “Mr. Cash” as we sweat away in victorious and sick copulation.
  49. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 7:51 pm
    Oink Oink!
  50. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 12:53 pm
    I told you your posts always reveal you are a “guy” with “confidence” issues who hates women… So you see the only response you are capable of, calling me a b…. anonymously yet again little misogynist, makes perfect sense coming from you CAUSE YOU AIN’T GOT NOTHIN’ ELSE to build up your ego.
  51. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 12:55 pm
    I am talking to Gangfang.
  52. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 3:30 pm
    Take your meds.
  53. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 4:57 pm
    @ Nate: Not funny. I do not take any meds but I know many people who take meds just to stay alive, and even a few to stay sane. I get your ignorant, prejudiced comment further stigmatizing persons with mental health issues and would suggest you need them far more than I do.
  54. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 7:16 pm
    Perhaps you need meds and don’t know it.
  55. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 7:33 pm
    @ Nate: I am not encouraging you to continue to make disparaging remarks about people with real health issues by keeping this conversation going. Or do they only deserve your compassion and advocacy if they are in the USA illegally? When you want to have a real conversation, please let me know…
  56. Your Web GuruAugust 4, 2010 at 4:01 pm
    Oh come on. Gay marriage is right there in the second amendment of the Constitution. What do you think “The right to bear arms” means anyway?
  57. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 4, 2010 at 5:43 pm
    Hahahaha, bear arms, classic. It’s a good day when common sense and humanity trump bigotry and hatred the same way it was a good day when Slavery was abolished, women were given the right to vote, blacks were given the right to vote etc. The will of the majority never has been an argument to suppress the rights of the minority. Interesting that Walker was first appointed by Reagan and denied by the senate for representing the USOC in a lawsuit against the use of the Term Gay Olympics so Pelosi blocked him as being against gays and the Poor. Also interesting that he was then appointed by the first President Bush, who was elected by Majority will. AKA, he was entrusted to act on behalf of the will of the majority in a system that has a judicial branch to oversee constitutional issues.
  58. Ex-Cali GirlAugust 4, 2010 at 4:34 pm
    I’m so proud of the courts of my birth state! Woo Hoo.
  59. Your Web GuruAugust 4, 2010 at 4:52 pm
    All in-jokes about daddy bears aside, I truly hope that this can eventually lead to a healing and open-hearted acceptance that everyone (Yes, EVERYONE) is created equal. This is not an attack on anyone else’s morality or belief system, nor is it fair for those with a singular theistic ideal to perpetrate such narrow concepts on those who don’t believe as you do. It hurts absolutely no one to allow persons of the same sex to legally marry and be acknowledged as such. And if you’re still concerned about the eternal damnation of those poor, sick, demented souls, remember this while you’re hard at work thumping your bible: Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. The Gospel According to St. Matthew: Chapter 7, verses 1-5
  60. Brenda ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 6:28 pm
    Interesting that you use Scripture to address this subject, is it an authority I can expect you to refer to often? Anyway, here is a contextual understanding to those verses (taking verses out of context is something many people do to support an unrelated subject). You can read or listen to it! http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/2250_Stop-Criticizing
  61. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 7:12 pm
    So……are homosexuals “the evil, Christ-rejecting, God-hating, Scripture-denying who would trample the pearl”?
  62. Fred ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 7:23 pm
    I take it that you actually read the sermon?
  63. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 7:43 pm
    It is wonderful to see someone so perfect they can worry about everyone else’s “sin”… hurry up and run away everyone Jesus said he that is with out sin… and the Butler family just brought their own bag of rocks to make sure they don’t run out.
  64. Brenda ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 7:53 pm
    Just curious if you read my link. I was actually addressing a specific comment. I’m not sure how your’s relates. I am no less a sinner than anyone on the planet! Before God saved me, I was a God-hater deserving of God’s wrath (along with every other adulterer, liar, fornicator, and yes, homosexual). I am more than thankful for His grace!
  65. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 7:57 pm
    I am thankful that our country did the right thing today… I am also thankful for hookers and blow.
  66. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 8:14 pm
    Homosexuals are deserving of god’s wrath……… That would be the cliff notes version of that sermon.
  67. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 8:18 pm
    I take it the Butler clan are members of the Westboro Baptist Church?
  68. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 7:46 pm
    I nodded off in parts, I admit. I was just hoping for the cliff notes version. My point is this: God has zero to do with this Proposition being passed, and zero to do with it being overturned. Thank you. I have celebrating to do!
  69. Fred ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 7:57 pm
    God has zero to do with this Proposition being passed, and zero to do with it being overturned. Actually, God has all to do with it being overturned: It demonstrates a society that has been given over to their own sin in judgment.
  70. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 10:21 pm
    Mmmmmkkkkaaayy…..thanks for the bonus sermon, Pastor Butler. Very…..ummm…righteous of you.
  71. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 8:01 pm
    I am working on a petition for a proposition that would turn all house of worship into casinos
  72. CCAugust 4, 2010 at 9:49 pm
    Aren’t they already?
  73. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 11:00 pm
    They are casinos if you bring your kids there… they are like 600x more likely to get molested at a church then anywhere else even the public park.
  74. Your Web GuruAugust 4, 2010 at 7:28 pm
    Based on the sermon you provided me, I’m wondering what I’m taking out of context. This? “I mean, any time a person, a man or a woman, invents a system of morality, they then become the judge that sits on the throne of that system and determines whether anybody else qualifies or not, and that’s exactly what happened in the Pharisees’ case. And so they became oppressively judgmental of other people. They condemned and criticized. They were censorious. They were unmerciful and forgiving, unkind, lacking grace, in their constant, carping criticism of everybody who didn’t come up to their own standard.” Or this? “In other words, they made judgments, but their judgments were wrong. They sat as condemning, critical judges of other people. This is the one thing that marked their relations with others: a judgmental, condemning attitude. And, frankly, folks, it belied their claim to be citizens of God’s kingdom. They couldn’t be and be that kind of person. And so the Lord, in recognizing this particular problem, speaks to this issue.” Or maybe even this: “But we’re not to judge people’s motives. We’re not to condemn them because they don’t look like we think they ought to look or they don’t act or talk like we think they ought to talk or act. They don’t come up to our supposed self-righteous standard. We have no business doing that. That is forbidden. Romans 14:13 succinctly puts it, when it says, “Let us not, therefore, judge one another anymore.” Stop doing that. Stop criticizing. The Bible is very clear about the kind of judging we’re not to do. In the first place, we’re not to do some official kind of judging. Do you remember when we studied back in chapter 5, eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, and we said that that is a legal prescription, not one for personal relationships? That’s for the law courts, and you have no right to carry those things out. There’s no place in the Bible for personal vengeance. We cannot make official or vengeful judgments.” And finally, this: “He gives three reasons why not. And I’m going to go through these rapidly, so hang on to your seat. Number one, to make that kind of a judgment manifests an erroneous view of God, verse 1. An erroneous view of God. “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” And He simply reminds them that they are not the final court. You do this, and you will be judged. Have you forgotten that you are not God? That is precisely the bottom line in this sin. To judge other people, their motives and so forth, is to play God. It is to usurp the divine position.” So thanks for the eye-opening perspective. It almost all makes sense; the awesome parts about healing your own heart and getting your own act together before you rebuke your brother for his sins, the parables, the discussions about various forms of judgment and why we should not partake in them. BUT…Toward the end the speaker discusses homosexuality and the potential reaction of the ‘righteous’ is that “they are the hogs and the dogs of which Jesus spoke.” He sums the whole thing up rather poignantly and openly by closing with: “We must make judgments, beloved, but they must be proper, righteous judgments. We must discriminate, and we must deal with sin in the life of another brother or sister. But we must never be judgmental and critical, because we set ourselves up as some self-righteous judge. And I’ll tell you frankly, folks, it all comes down to an attitude. And I say this because I really believe this. It all comes down to an attitude. Are you criticizing, are you evaluating, are you discerning, are you discriminating in order to know the truth and honor God? Or are you doing it to exalt yourself and hurt somebody else. Ultimately, it comes to that decision.” I stand completely by my previous post.
  75. Fred ButlerAugust 4, 2010 at 8:09 pm
    Your original post suggested that you took Matthew 7 as some sort of an authoritative standard and that any individuals who judge homosexuality as sin and a clear violation of God’s moral law, are in a sense violating Matthew 7. The point my wife is making is that the text is not saying what you want it to say. If you read the sermon deeper into the sermon, it makes this very clear. In other words, it is not being judgmental or judging unjustly to call sin what it is.
  76. GangFangAugust 4, 2010 at 10:28 pm
    My cousin likes to “read deeper into the sermon” with his boyfriend. It’s sweet.
  77. Your Web GuruAugust 5, 2010 at 6:43 am
    It’s obvious I read ‘deeper’ into the sermon. And the minister does make that point, but he also makes it absolutely clear to check yourself, your reasons and your attitude before passing judgment on anyone or rebuking for sins. Did YOU read the sermon deeper? If you believe homosexuality is a wicked sin, and that all homosexuals are sexual deviants destined for the same fate as those who resided in Gommorah, then that’s your bag. I find that type of thinking leads to a hard heart and a narrow mind, and I can’t adhere to a belief system that justifies such ideals of hatred and bigotry. It’s a great big universe out there, and I can’t believe that any higher power wouldn’t want his/her/it’s children to be completely open and accepting of each other without judgment. To assume that homosexuality is a choice of deviants and sinners is absolutely preposterous and tells me that those who do adhere to that ideal obviously haven’t really taken the time to know homosexuals enough to understand that it’s not a choice. Well, it might be a choice to hide who they are, which I’m guessing would be fine with you. Homosexuality has been around since time immemorial. The rebuke of such has historically been out of hatred and fear, which goes against an open heart and the ideal of an awakened spirit. Sounds quite hypocritical if you ask me…but it’s your God and your belief, so who am I to argue when you’re so rock solid in your point of view?
  78. Fred ButlerAugust 5, 2010 at 7:07 am
    So basically you have a problem with God’s holy character as revealed in Scripture? You write, and I can’t believe that any higher power wouldn’t want his/her/it’s children to be completely open and accepting of each other without judgment. To assume that homosexuality is a choice of deviants and sinners is absolutely preposterous and tells me that those who do adhere to that ideal obviously haven’t really taken the time to know homosexuals enough to understand that it’s not a choice. Does your philosophy apply to those who wish to practice polygamy? pedophilia? Or are you inconsistent at this point like everyone in your openess camp is. And don’t attempt to dodge the implications of your philosophy in these areas of sexual deviancy by saying these things are unrelated. They most certainly are.
  79. Your Web GuruAugust 5, 2010 at 8:12 am
    They most certainly are unrelated. You simplify your theological philosophy by lumping those who are not heterosexual in with wonton hedonists, sexual deviants, those with sexual obsession and other disorders that may manifest themselves in obsessive sexual behavior. My guess is you have little or no homosexuals on your friends list. If you want to make this issue about sex as opposed to love, then that’s your thing, not mine.
  80. Mike MAugust 5, 2010 at 8:17 am
    Point of order – pedophilia involves forcing sexual acts on individuals who are not old enough to consent. The fact that you and other “Christians” continue to equate pedophilia with homosexuality and polygamy, both of which are between consenting adults but happen to scare you, is a sign that you lack the ability to discern fact from fiction or hold an objective point of view, and should not be allowed to make decisions that affect the lives of others.
  81. Fred ButlerAugust 5, 2010 at 8:37 am
    My guess is you have little or no homosexuals on your friends list. You would guess wrong. You’re still not dealing with the argument. Love does not equate sex. Point of order – pedophilia involves forcing sexual acts on individuals who are not old enough to consent. Okay. Let’s run with that definition. If we lower the legal age of consent so that a “sophisticated” 14 year old can now consent with a sexual relationship with 34 year old man, is that behavior now no longer sexually deviant?
  82. Mike MAugust 5, 2010 at 8:43 am
    Do you consider a 14 year old sophisticated? I certainly don’t. I know quite a few 14 year olds who think they are, but it’s certainly not the case. You’re attempting to equate the definition of marriage with the definition of personhood, which deals with the ability to reason and process as a mature adult. Those are two completely different arguments, unless you simply believe that homosexuals are not capable of reason.
  83. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 9:33 am
    Hey Fred, Mind your own damn business… their “SIN” has nothing to do with you.
  84. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 9:03 am
    Amen Mike. Nothing like making the issue of people who are of the same gender about nothing more than the act of sex. I would ask Mr. Butler based on these assertions are you only married for the purpose of sexual intercourse? It is certainly what you are boiling down those who are of the same gender and wanting to be married to be all about. Keeping them from marrying does not somehow eliminate the sexual acts of homosexuality which is really what you are railing about. I also saw your personal blog post and have to love the irony of your statement”Painting your opposition as Nazi monsters who want to bring forth a fundamentalist dystopia is typical of progressive propaganda.” Followed directly by painting your opposition as “shallow, unthinking minds of our MTV generation.” Then again both sides of the …political spectrum do this exact same thing constantly. You are just as dismissive of those with an opposite viewpoint. The way that your arguments come off is very much in line with the way the Pharisees acted in their self righteousness. AGain that message of judging not was delivered for those who were practicing scornfull judgment, just because the actual title of Pharisee doesn’t exist in our culture does not mean this passage is now irrelevant and there aren’t any around. They are all over the place. Christ himself would have been loving and kind to people even that he morally disagreed with such as prostitutes and adulterers. His rebukes were from a place of love and compassion, yours are not. They are venom filled and spiteful. Your quickness to dismiss passages like this one at will are not surprising.
  85. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 3:00 pm
    Mr. Jeff, I post below. I try reply you but no hit button. I no too good. I want thank you for you good insights. I oost at bottom of comments.
  86. just a guyAugust 6, 2010 at 8:03 am
    Scripture CAN BE and usually IS taken out of context. Most Christians, including myself, believe that every word and every line in the Bible is in context with itself and is Holy, thus cannot be twisted nor misused. Taken as a part or as a whole, scripture is scripture and your use is no more valid than the next. You wouldn’t complain when someone uses a short phrase to support your beliefs or even going as far as only citing the address (John 3:16). Where’s the context in that? In itself. I plan on including scripture in my gay marriage.
  87. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 6, 2010 at 8:25 am
    Great response, and very true. Scripture, and the nature of many of the sermons and parables in scripture are often interpreted by the person utilizing them for the purpose of their sermon. For everything in them that seems cut and dried and absolute there are another dozen verses that appear to contradict them to some extent, To act as though there is no interpretation used when quoting and discussing scripture is naive at best.
  88. SCVSuckzAugust 4, 2010 at 5:47 pm
    Sadly I did understand “You aIm to please” Cash….I do know when you’re passionate about an issue you’re spelling oft times suffers in your quest to make your point known…not like we don’t all know your feelings on many of these issues already. in any case…here…here Judge V….a marriage license is just that…a civil license… a license should be granted to two consenting adults 18 years or older…here….two (not 2 or more for all you morms out there) consenting (nobody is under duress…) adults (nobody is a dog, child, goat, or any of the other nifty caveats people like to throw in when they say…”What’s next? I can marry my dog?” Love that intelligent red-neck point of view…) Get over it…like someone said…go let ‘em marry…let ‘em divorce….let ‘em create jobs for caterers, vendors, lawyers, etc. And let’s get a real governor and legislature in our state to deal with real issues like the budget…the schools….blah-blah-blah. Government and churches need to stay the F- out of people’s bedrooms…and mind their own!
  89. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 4, 2010 at 5:57 pm
    Now here you are talking about anti bigotry and you can’t help but come off as a bigoted asshole yourself. This is the problem with so many of these debates, no one seems to be able to acknowledge that they act just as childish as those on the opposite side of their point of view. Your digs against those who feel differently than you do are no different than their digs against people they don’t understand, ie homosexuals who want to marry. Your digs on Mormons are just as ignorant, did a big bad Mormon Bully steal your lunch money at some point??? Grow up a little bit and stop giving those who believe in equal rights for gays a bad name the SAME WAY Cash gives those with more conservative values a bad name. Pot meet Kettle, Kettle…Pot
  90. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 8:03 pm
    SAME WAY Cash gives ……..! and why is this. Need I start to sugar coat my comments? I don’t have a soft spot for the issue.
  91. John AdamsAugust 5, 2010 at 7:32 am
    Mormans don’t steal lunch money. Now if there is a beer hanging around, it is gone. ‎”He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything else.” ~ Benjamin Franklin
  92. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 7:59 pm
    Today was nothing more that an insignificant judge throwing his two cents into the debate. Don’t waste your time running to City Hall for a license.
  93. damageincAugust 4, 2010 at 11:02 pm
    I don’t think you know how much of landmark case this was… HAHA Wait and see… Pablo will be expecting matching rings. Hope you have been saving.
  94. SCVSuckzAugust 4, 2010 at 6:11 pm
    Re: Jeff(But not the one who runs this blog): yawn : O as my kid says, chillax…just having me some fun with the cash-man…go on Anderson Cooper 360 if you’re so serious about this dude. and no…a mormon bully didn’t take my lunch money….but put my best friend in icu for 10 days after kicking his head in for defending two gay friends at a restaurant in Provo…. go deal with yourself. and yes…i’m an asshole….not a bigoted one…albeit an asshole!!!! wink! wink!
  95. cashAugust 4, 2010 at 8:08 pm
    Anderson should have a great deal to say about todays decision!
  96. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 9:14 am
    So all Mormons should be judged by the actions of this one? Again this somehow makes it OK to make bigoted comments about Mormons in general in defense of your position against bigotry? Your statements about Mormons are bigoted, and factually incorrect besides. there is not OK bigotry and bad bigotry. All I am asking, as someone who happens to agree with you on the prop 8 issue, is to practice what you preach. Don’t lace your anti bigotry with bigotry against another group, it does little to help find common ground in an important issue. And yes Cash, you do give conservatives a bad name, if all conservatives were judged by your bigoted, racist attitudes then there would almost zero reason for rational discourse, thankfully you are a minority within your own political demographic. You are the kind of supporter that conservative candidates pray do not open their mouth to support them.
  97. Tim MyersAugust 5, 2010 at 8:51 am
    Web Guru and Mike M: I love Fred B. and would be honored if he were my son in law but as you have by now figured out he is the master of the straw man argument. Instead of talking about marriage between two adults he wants to skip right to animal love and pedophilia!
  98. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 9:22 am
    Well Tim, “This loaded rhetoric assumes, however, that supporters of gay marriage are all supporters of deviant perverted sexual acts at heart to begin with who all just really want to destroy any semblance of heterosexual marriage. Painting your opposition as sex crazed deviant perverts who want to bring forth the downfall of Christianity and the decimation of heterosexual marriages is typical of conservative propaganda. It’s the type of sloganeering that plays upon the scared, group think minds of our born again generation. There is no need to intellectually engage the arguments if your opponents are really just a bunch of pervy drag queen types who just want to have sex with anyone they can get their hands on.” Wait, where id I see this similar posting the other way? Hmmm, oh yeah, here on Fred’s blog: http://hipandthigh.blogspot.com/2010/08/prop-8.html
  99. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 2:56 pm
    I sorry. I no too good at website. I reply to Mr. Jeff but no hit reply button. Muslim websites no so complicated.
  100. Ryan KingAugust 5, 2010 at 1:27 pm
    Oh, happy day! Now I just need to find myself a groom…
  101. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 1:55 pm
    This Muslim glad for insightful comments telling Mr. Fred Butler what for. Mr. Jeff (who no run this blog) obvious read Bible close and know Jesus always kind and loving. Jesus joke in Revelation 21:8 when he say sexually immoral burn with fire and sulfur one day. I Muslim no worry about Bible warning. Mr. Jeff say all OK. I sure Mr. Jeff know best.
  102. FrankAugust 5, 2010 at 3:33 pm
    All I can do is pinch the bridge of my nose and shake my head when I read this.
  103. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 4:52 pm
    “But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.” Well you appear to fit at least 2 descriptions to keep them company in the “cowardly” and “vile” with your stereotyping of those of Muslim faith, so at least you’ll be there to keep them company. Additionally, you can cherry pick any verse you want to, the fact is that the gospel of Jesus Christ was written primarily as a ministry of love and compassion, not of the venom and hatred that many of you spew in his name. As for the sexually immoral, be careful Raulemir, there are an awful lot of things declared sexually immoral in the bible that you may have participated in. There are many more things declared sexually immoral in the bible than just homosexuality, including spilling one’s seed. Hope you are without sin, then you can cast the first stone.
  104. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 5:52 pm
    Mr. Jeff, you say Jesus love and compassion. I write question in you post below.
  105. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 6:01 pm
    I sorry, Mr. Jeff. Muslim no too good on Bible. You say Jesus love and compassion. But you no read where he say, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34)? You no read where He say “Depart from me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire” (Matthew 25:41)? Can you tell Muslim how this love and compassion from Jesus you describe? Muslim read Bible and see something different.
  106. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 5, 2010 at 4:53 pm
    I also didn’t say Jesus never rebuked people or raised his voice or temper, he did… ironically it was most often towards people like yourself that he got the angriest, the self righteous and judgmental.
  107. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 5:50 pm
    Mr. Jeff, I try agree with you. But if what you say true, why Jesus say “Fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28) and “Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division” (Luke 12:51). Mr. Jeff, too easy you make conclusion what Jesus like. You no support. You just say you own ideas. Why you no quote Bible instead of you own words? No problem for Muslim. But you no need to prove what you say?
  108. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 7:18 pm
    Please tell me you people are not falling for this impostor. This guy is no more a foreigner and Muslim than I am. He is pulling your chain…
  109. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 7:37 pm
    Bertha, Muslim no good on reply device on blog. I so sorry. Please see comment below. I glad you read what Muslim say.
  110. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 6, 2010 at 1:05 am
    A) Thanks Berta, but I am well aware he is not a Muslim but rather a moron.. B) He’s not even smart about quoting scripture and cherry picking short quips from verses. C) Because I find this amusing the following cherry picked verses to counter the moron’s cherry picked verses: Matthew 5:9 -”Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” Psalm 34:14 “Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.” Psalm 120:6-7 “My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace. I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war.” Matthew 5:43-45 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 2 Timothy 2:24-25 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; Matthew 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
  111. RaulemirAugust 6, 2010 at 6:12 am
    So Mr. Jeff, why you no answer verses I quote where Jesus describe Himself? You call me moron but no answer simple question. You only change subject. You one who started discussion about Jesus. I ask questions. I no think you can answer. Tell us what Jesus mean when he say “Fear Him who destroy soul and body in hell.” I serious, Mr. Jeff. Tell us without changing subject.
  112. Jeff (But not the one that runs this blogAugust 6, 2010 at 8:37 am
    Well in that verse he is describing satan, not himself.. but that would require an intellect beyond your juvenile need to mock Muslims with typing out broken English. Your masquerading as a Muslim is what tells me you are a moron, and a juvenile, or racist. You are childish and petty, you like to group individuals together under a stereotype and have others feed off of that stereotype. For every scripture you have quoted there are a dozen more that talk about Jesus as a peacemaker and utilizing love as his ministry, I have supported my initial assertion, period. Christians seem to want to shout and scream and abuse those who believe differently from them, wearing their WWJD bracelets while barely even considering that there is zero chance what Jesus would do is nowhere close to standing outside of a gay youths funeral with a sign saying Jesus (I) hate fags. The fact that they can’t see that, and how it makes them more like the pharisees than they realize is disconcerting. On the flip side of that discussion are those who argue against bigotry and then sling verbal arrows and bigotry right back at their opponents with slams and slander. Instead of practicing what they preach they stoke the fire in a way that only steels their opponent against their view and makes them look just as petty. At some point human beings need to learn how to listen, and at least understand that there are more than one thought on given subjects. We can learn from each other if we would stop screaming at each other (Or making up racist characters to poke fun at one another) Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman style. What you are doing with your characterization falls exactly into the category of some of the sins you mention as being ones that will cast you into fire and damnation, if you are a believer of that scripture you should probably check the log in your own eye first. Other than that I am no longer amused at discussing this with you as you clearly have no actual desire for intelligent discourse so I will no longer respond to your comments, I suppose you would be the swine I am no longer willing to cast my pearl before. Take care of yourself, and more importantly take care of others, even the least of them.
  113. RaulemirAugust 6, 2010 at 12:01 pm
    Mr. Jeff, thank you for you response. You call me moron, juvenile, racist, childish, and petty because I ask you question. I no call you names. I let others judge who has hate in his heart. It no me.
  114. just a guyAugust 6, 2010 at 12:07 pm
    This is just wierd.
  115. Berta González-HarperAugust 6, 2010 at 12:13 pm
    @just a guy, Raul the Caliph is an impostor, ignore him and maybe he will go away since he won’t have any playmates.
  116. DamageincAugust 6, 2010 at 2:41 pm
    I wonder if that would work with Berta?
  117. RaulemirAugust 5, 2010 at 7:36 pm
    Bertha, I no need defend Muslim background. Please tell Muslim where Bible verses no relevant to Jeff comments. He say Jesus loving and compassionate. I ask about Bible verses I read. Why you attack me?
  118. Berta González-HarperAugust 5, 2010 at 9:30 pm
    @ Raul the Caliph, give me a break you are not even a good imposter. My grandkids could pretend to be a better “Muslim” with an accent!
  119. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 10:40 pm
    Am I Raulemir too…
  120. Berta González-HarperAugust 6, 2010 at 4:40 pm
    @Nate, even you do not think I am an impostor. You just want me to go away Sheik Abdullah? Puleez… The “Bertha” and the idiotic comments to stir up controversy just keep giving you away. The only thing missing is the hair comments. It is not even fun trying to guess anymore. How many pseudonyms is it now?
  121. RaulemirAugust 6, 2010 at 6:22 am
    Bertha, I know I new to blog. I sorry you no like my English. I sure you grandkids nice and you proud them. I hope they have happy life.
  122. NateAugust 5, 2010 at 10:42 pm
    Berta knows all!
  123. Berta González-HarperAugust 6, 2010 at 7:57 pm
    @Nate, finally we are getting somewhere.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support