For those who insist that Socialism is evil, I invite you to read the platform of the Socialist Party USA. Frankly, it's much more in line with Christian principles than just about any other platform you'll find: Here it is: The Socialist Party stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation, whether based on social class, gender, race/ethnicity, age, education, sexual ori...more

For those who insist that Socialism is evil, I invite you to read the platform of the Socialist Party USA. Frankly, it's much more in line with Christian principles than just about any other platform you'll find: Here it is:

The Socialist Party stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation, whether based on social class, gender, race/ethnicity, age, education, sexual orientation, or other characteristics.

We are committed to the transformation of capitalism through the creation of a democratic socialist society based on compassion, empathy, and respect as well as the development of new social structures. Socialism will establish a new social and economic order in which workers and community members will take responsibility for and control of their interpersonal relationships, their neighborhoods, their local government, and the production and distribution of all goods and services.

For these reasons we call for social ownership and democratic control of productive resources, for a guarantee to all of the right to participate in societal production, and to a fair share of society's product, in accordance with individual needs.

As we pursue a socialist transformation of society, we join with others in making radical demands on the existing system: demands that challenge the basic assumptions of a capitalist market economy while pointing the way to a new society. Although reforms will not in themselves bring about socialism, the fight for them will advance the cause by demonstrating the inherent limitations and injustice of the capitalist system. As we build the socialist movement, we organize around a platform committed to our common and interdependent struggles and aspirations.less

Part of Huckabee's platform says that insurance companies should not be required to cover any pre-existing conditions. . . . http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/09/17/huckabee-says-no-to-insurance-for-people-with-pre-existing-conditions/ . . . I wonder how many Evangelicals would vote for him once their child is born with a condition that wouldn't be covered under Huckabee's plan? That position...more

Part of Huckabee's platform says that insurance companies should not be required to cover any pre-existing conditions. . . . http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/09/17/huckabee-says-no-to-insurance-for-people-with-pre-existing-conditions/ . . . I wonder how many Evangelicals would vote for him once their child is born with a condition that wouldn't be covered under Huckabee's plan? That position of Huckabee's has got to be the most heartless, anti-life position ever.less

As some of you might know, I’m a state official with a background in mental health counseling here in Illinois. I’ve always been surprised with cases that are brought before me. Recently, one of my supervisors presented a disability case, SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance) of a male who identified as exclusively homosexual (sexually, psycho-socially) but expressed an exclusive desire...more

As some of you might know, I’m a state official with a background in mental health counseling here in Illinois. I’ve always been surprised with cases that are brought before me. Recently, one of my supervisors presented a disability case, SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance) of a male who identified as exclusively homosexual (sexually, psycho-socially) but expressed an exclusive desire of forming psycho-sexual relationships with members of the opposite sex who only viewed him as a homosexual man.

Upon further investigation, the subject had engaged in long-term romantic-sexual relations with females but only after each of them had known he was homosexual. The subject had no desire nor any ability to form psycho-sexual relationships with members of the opposite sex unless they viewed him as a homosexual; that is, a man who was exclusively attracted to members of the same sex; sexually, and psycho-socially. Upon further investigation, it was revealed that such a condition was not an uncommon occurrence
Many homosexually-identified men have formed long-lasting sexual relationships with women but only when both parties identified the male as being exclusively homosexual. Conversely, there have been an equal amount of cases with lesbian-identified women in which the converse was true.

Since there seems to be a large group of individuals with the same diagnoses, a condition of “Non Gender-Specific, Trans-Homo Heterosexualism” or NGSTHT has been submitted to the American Psychiatric Association as an official diagnosis for these individuals afflicted with the same condition.

APA officials have since leaned toward including NGSTHT (Non Gender-Specific, Trans-Homo Heterosexualism) in the newly updated Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV-TR-Dr edition.

Needless to say, conservative voices have expressed their opposition toward the new inclusion of Trans-Homo Heterosexualists into American culture. Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich and Robert Johnson have all lent their support behind the de-authorization of the Trans-Homo Rights Abolishment Bill that is before our legislators as we speak.

This is superfluous legislation that will protect a tiny class of misfits. I ask that you will support your elected officials in their efforts to support the de-authorization of this bill. Otherwise, before you know it, Trans Homo-Heterosexuals will be protected class of citizens in this country.less

So, let me get this straight, Chuck...Kelsey Grammer can end a 15-year marriage over the phone, Larry King can be on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55-hour marriage, Jesse James and Tiger Woods, while married, were having sex with EVERYONE, New Gingrich can marry wife #3 and cheated on wife #1 while she was dying of cancer. . . Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institut...more

So, let me get this straight, Chuck...Kelsey Grammer can end a 15-year marriage over the phone, Larry King can be on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55-hour marriage, Jesse James and Tiger Woods, while married, were having sex with EVERYONE, New Gingrich can marry wife #3 and cheated on wife #1 while she was dying of cancer. . . Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institution of marriage? . . . It's ridiculous notions like that one, espoused by you and your ilk that cause such resentment. If you want to continue with such rationalizations, don't bang on your high chair when others resent it.less

Imagine that. A country that spends HALF its annual budget (close to one trillion dollars) on military forces, yet only .07 percent on humanitarian aid. If God is ever going to strike down this country, don't you think it would be because of those deplorable facts?

Well, for all the fundamentalist Christians who keep saying that allowing gay marriage will infringe on their ability to use free speech, I think this ruling should prove once and for all how much free speech is protected in this country. For any Christian fundamentalists who still want to use this "free speech infringement" scare tactic, all we have to say to them is "SNYDER vs PHELPS"!

All this university is doing is setting up a group that dialogs about sexual orientation and Christianity and adding sexual orientation as a protected class against discrimination. It's sad that so many people like David Fowler, president of the Family Action Council of Tennessee, identify "anti-gay" with being Christian.

Moral codes? Perhaps. But when you get down to the bottom of it, all the deeds we perform, both good and bad, are for personal benefit. I cannot think of one truly unslefish act that we humans perform. Even martyrdom or substitory suffering - - these people did those things because they found fulfillment in doing so.

Clay - It's truly refreshing to read such an intelligent, articulate, and well-thought comment here. I hope to hear more from you.

MaxVeritas: Does this sound like Old Covenant law to you? Mark 10:2-12: And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" 4 They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." 5 But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment....more

MaxVeritas: Does this sound like Old Covenant law to you?

Mark 10:2-12: And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" 4 They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." 5 But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' 7 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

MaxVeritas seems to think that Jesus' command was "Old Covenant" law and it doesn't apply to born again Christians. Actually, Jesus himself was going beyond Old Covenant law. . . But I guess if you're a born again Christian like Max, Jesus' New Covenant laws don't apply either.less

Why not let the public vote on marriage laws for Christians? After all, the Bible (and Jesus) explicitly say that no one who is divorced can get remarried (except for divorce in the case of infidelity). Why not let the public hold Christians to these laws? Let's see the Christianists put their money where their mouth is!

This article is a blatant LIE!! . . This article states that the couple was barred from fostering a child "because the couple had said they would not be willing to promote the practice of homosexuality to a young child." . . LIE! . . No one is requiring them to "promote" the practice of homosexuality. (If any couple did promote the practice of homosexuality, or any sexual behavior, to a child, th...more

This article is a blatant LIE!! . . This article states that the couple was barred from fostering a child "because the couple had said they would not be willing to promote the practice of homosexuality to a young child." . . LIE! . . No one is requiring them to "promote" the practice of homosexuality. (If any couple did promote the practice of homosexuality, or any sexual behavior, to a child, then that child should be removed from that home.) But foster parents ARE supposed to be non-judgmental especially when it comes to fostering someone else's child. What a blatant LIE this article is!less

gmd1952: The fact is, that there are hundreds of thousands of kids in foster care who are the product of heterosexual parents who cannot or will not raise them. Would you rather that they languish in foster care? (A horrible way of life for any child) or be adopted by gay parents willing to give them a home? THOSE ARE THE CHOICES. And if you think they should remain in foster care, take a look at ...more

gmd1952: The fact is, that there are hundreds of thousands of kids in foster care who are the product of heterosexual parents who cannot or will not raise them. Would you rather that they languish in foster care? (A horrible way of life for any child) or be adopted by gay parents willing to give them a home? THOSE ARE THE CHOICES. And if you think they should remain in foster care, take a look at the thousands of kids on the site below and tell them that: . . . http://www.adoptuskids.org/Child/ChildSearch.aspxless

WOW! I've never seen so many horribly bad metaphors and comparisions in one piece. Amazing!

The U.S. spends over 700 BILLION per year on its military -- six times more than China yet we have a quarter of the population than China does. That's pretty immoral if you ask me. How about we begin by cutting the military budget in half. There's 325 billion dollars right there. Problem solved.

Sure - - let polygamy be legal. The first time some poor fool tries to divorce his 20 wives and gets hit with 20 alimony payments and child support orders for 50 kids, that will be the end of that.

The reason marriage is not allowed between those within certain lines of consanguinity is because there's a greater chance that the offspring would be born with deformities. However, in the case of two brothers (who couldn't reproduce) I would suppose that the same reasoning would apply as if they were a brother and sister who couldn't reproduce. I have to hand it to you -- it's a good question.

I feel sorry for Huckabee who traps himself into the literal word of the bible. Why is it so frightening for these conservative Christians to accept the fact that the Bible is not the inerrant word of God, but rather, simply a record of human inspiration?

Let's look at the facts: Lowest Education Rate: Mississippi . . 19% with Bachelors degree, 6.4% with Masters degree. . . Highest: Massachusetts: 37.%4 with Bachelors degree, 15 % with Masters. http://www.statemaster.com/states . . . Marriage rates for heterosexuals vs homosexuals: According to the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics, the divorce rate is NINE TIMES higher for HETEROSEXUALS than ho...more

Let's look at the facts:
Lowest Education Rate: Mississippi . . 19% with Bachelors degree, 6.4% with Masters degree. . . Highest: Massachusetts: 37.%4 with Bachelors degree, 15 % with Masters. http://www.statemaster.com/states . . . Marriage rates for heterosexuals vs homosexuals: According to the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics, the divorce rate is NINE TIMES higher for HETEROSEXUALS than homosexuals during the first four years of marriage. Obviously, Massachusetts is a MUCH better place to raise children than Mississippi.less

Carter was NOT a failure as a U.S. president. . . . The U.S. failed Carter!