RE: http://www.oskaloosaherald.com/local/local_story_308112010.html

Thank you to Chuck Hurley and Iowa Family Policy Center and Oskaloosa Herald playing whatever role you played so that this article could be published.

If Eric Palmer wants to promote the homosexual agenda, that's his prerogative, but he should at least be up front with his constituents about it true intentions, rather than trying to hide behind the facade of family values in his campaign mailers and advertisements.

Hopefully legislators who are unwilling to represent the true social values of the majority of Iowans will not be legislators much longer. And then there's the Iowa Supreme Court with Judge Appel to contend with, as well as other judges like Hansen ... will the madness ever stop?!

An Iowa Poll earlier this year showed that, while 62% of Iowans opposed same sex 'marriage', only 40% oppose 'civil unions'. Under the latter scenario, no church would be forced to marry same sex couples, but equality of rights would be extended. The same poll showed 48% supporting a constitutional amendment, while 47% opposed it (a constitutional amendment requires a simple majority in a general election, so it would be tight). The feelings of Iowans are not the overwhelming tide that some would suggest, and I have little doubt that opinion continues to shift in the direction of equal rights.

As far as Eric and 'family values', perhaps (no, not 'perhaps' - in fact) Eric believes that 'family values' INCLUDE such things as education, health care, a working wage, sustainable and sustained infrastructure, equality of opportunity, a social safety net (NOT a hammock), stewardship of the environment, a right to privacy, etc.

Danny Carroll may be the candidate of the 'Religious Right', but my impression is that Eric believes that Jesus just might have actually MEANT the radical things he said!

What group did that poll you're referring to?

The Des Moines Register, right?

Let's see how accurate the Des Moines Register's polls are after tonight. (They predicted Obama to beat McCain 54% to 37%)

Don't kid yourself OskyBooster ... the Register is in bed with the homosexual activists just like Palmer is, despite the image that they try to portray to a largely uncritical and sheep-like public.

By the way, OskyBooster, what radical things did Jesus say that make you think homosexual marriage - or the approval of homosexuality in any form - is acceptable?

OskyBooster - To show you that I'm haven't thrown everything you say out, I've gotta admit that I like your distinction between "social safety net" and "hammock" ... that's a good distinction to make, although I'm guessing we might differ on what constitutes each one.

It's true - Jesus said nothing about homosexuality, either way. His unconditional love for all people, including (especially) the socially marginalized, leads me to much of my beliefs concerning the rights of homosexuals. Jesus' words reflect his priorities.

When the social safety net results in the perpetuation of a dependent underclass, it hurts those it was meant to help.

It doesn't matter what has been written about what Jesus views on homosexuality are about governing. You can't combine biblical values with laws governing the rights of people.

JaV, I think I see where you are coming from, but all law is in some way rooted in particular values. For me, the values that determine my political beliefs (and vote) are in turn rooted in my faith. Law and government never originate in a moral vacuum.

OskyBooster -

Amen to your 13:38 post.

Just a Voice -

I think I dealt with your 15:04 comment on the other thread, and in general I agree with OskyBooster's 15:51 post (although not completely).

As for OskyBooster's 13:35 post, you must differentiate between the words of Christ and the words of, say, Paul or any of the other canonized writers, right? What do they call that, "a red-letter Christian" ... someone who puts pre-eminent importance on Jesus own words in Scriptures vis a vie other Scripture writers. Kinda like Tony Campolo.

If so, that's a key place where you and I would differ ... I take all parts of Scripture as equally significant. So when Paul writes about homosexuality or when an OT writer writes about homosexuality, I give that the same value as if Jesus said it.

And finally, I think it is totally possible to uphold Jesus' priorities and still speak out against homosexuality ... you can do it in a way that isn't hateful and degrading. In fact, not to speak out against homosexuality would be to compromise Jesus priorities in the long run ... after all homosexuality destroys people's lives and it destroys civilizations ... and I'm guessing you and I would agree that Jesus cares deeply for both.

"after all homosexuality destroys people's lives and it destroys civilizations"

Oh dear, don't tell that to...

Leonardo da Vinci
Edward Albee
Richard the Lionhearted
W.H. Auden
Francis Bacon
Frederick the Great
Lord Byron
Marcel Proust
Gertrude Stein
Cole Porter
Aristotle
T.E. Lawrence
Herman Melville
Tchaikovsky
Willa Cather
John M. Keynes
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Yukio Mishima
Rainer Maria Rilke
E.M. Forster
Harvey Fierstein
Allen Ginsberg
J. Edgar Hoover
Elton John
John Maynard Keynes
Christopher Marlowe
W. Somerset Maugham
Michelangelo
Walt Whitman
Tennessee Williams
Plato
James Buchanan
Hans Christian Andersen,
Alexander the Great,
Leonard Bernstein,
William Blake,
Renaud Camus,
William S. Burroughs,
Laurence Olivier,
Rudolph Valentino,
Walt Whitman,
George Gershwin
Gore Vidal
and let's not forget Martina Navritalova.

You go, Wuzy!

The gay folks I know and have known are no greater threat to civilization than the straight folks I know or have known. Also, my wife and I don't lay awake at night pondering the great danger that same sex unions would be to our marriage. If anything, we find it encouraging to think that those persons would be strengthened in lifelong monogamous relationships.

Hey OB- The Bible does speak about homosexuality. Read Leviticus 18:22 , 1st Corinthians 6:9
Levitcus 20:13
Romans 1:28 -31

Forgive me for butting in madonna, but if we want to get ridiculous, here we go. Religious arguments are fruitless (pardon the pun) but have at it:

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. 29 Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

Isaiah 13: 15-16

Whoever is found will be thrust through, and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. 16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered, and their wives ravished.


Numbers 31: 17-18

17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Psalms 137: 9

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the rocks.

Exodus 21: 20

And if a man smite his slave, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. But, if he live for a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Deuteronomy 22:5

A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your GOD.

Matthew 19: 12

For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; ...and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.


Deuteronomy 25: 11-12

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.