Lucy,

Let's not forget the lessons of the past! The pope is no fruit or fly by night guy. He is a very powerful fella and is extremely influential. Ignore him all you want, that is your luxury. But for Kenny and his ilk any potential groundswell of animosity or violence could be devastating. We have our rednecks and fringe leaders over here that certainly pose no threat, but the Pope? I wouldn't dismiss him or his followers so easily.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

EDIT: We lose more good people to these gay threads.

edited EDIT: And the odd thing is the ones we lose are usually are not gay.

It’s strange for me to have conservative leanings on most political issues but be in such an opposite corner from most conservatives on the issue of gay marriage.

America, unlike many countries, was founded on individual liberty and one of those liberties is to freely form associations with others of your choosing without interference from the government or others. It’s the whole freedom of association thing, ask any conservative about the Boy Scouts and their ability to have leaders of their own choosing (meaning not gay) and you will hear all about it. Unfortunately conservatives now seem to have re-interpreted freedom of association into “freedom from association” meaning they believe they should be free to not have to encounter anybody acting in some way that they don’t agree with. Its like how the left decries anything they don’t agree with as “hateful”—“please just make it all go away!!!”.

Conservatives should be championing gay marriage because it’s a conservative issue. “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. So you want to elevate marriage to a religious practice? Fine, nobody is saying your particular church has to perform same sex weddings, but who are you to deny another the same thing which you enjoy in the eyes of the State? Show me the section of the constitution that gives you that particular right.

My wife and I (who also disagree about this issue) completed classes for foster kids and several of the couples in the class are of the same sex. One couple we got to know has been together for 25 years. How many married heterosexuals here have been together that long? This nice couple is willing and happy to provide loving foster care and even adopt kids who have been the sad victims of some pretty poor heterosexual unions. But heaven forbid they get the same rights as those automatically granted (by god or the pope or whoever) to that same very screwed up hetero couple!

Kirk

I think the question is clear, short, and obfuscates nothing.

Your observation presupposes that right, wrong, Good, or Evil depends upon an unequivocal definition by all concerned.

That seems illogical.

Here's what really ought to tell you how out of the mainstream you are...it's not the vast majority down my way who would oppose it (80+%), it's the almost 70% in the much more liberal sections of the country.

As for witches and sorcery...there is a Dark Prince, and I'm sure those who serve him can do some pretty amazing things. While I would agree that they existed in nowhere near the numbers thought at the time, I'm not entirely prepared to admit their non-existence, either.

Possible, but not likely.

If I was kenny, I'd worry a lot more about being in a car wreck, than exterminated by the Pope. The odds in the latter are astronomical, while the former are likely, given a lifetime of driving...

What's wrong with being out of the mainstream? I'm not ashamed of that. In fact, when seeing what is mainstream opinion, I'm quite proud of it.

EDIT: almost every great thinker, revolutionary, and mover/shaker in history was "out of the mainstream". I'm in pretty great company.

As for your remarks about Dark Princes, witches, and boogie men, that fills in the last piece of the puzzle.

Banter all you want, lad, but most people feel that Evil does exist, by whatever name you wish to place on it.

If that means that you think all those who do are ignorant, insipid fools, then so be it.

I'll take the folks on my side of the fence anyday. I can assure you that many are neither ignorant, nor insipid....

A dark prince? Oh Jolly! I think I saw this one - does he turn into a frog at some point?

By the way, can we all pause for a few minutes and deconstruct Jolly's use of the word 'dark' to describe said prince?

Yes, they do. so what? Lots of peole think lots of things. For you to wave that around as some sort of demonstration of its correctness simply demonstrates the associated ignorance. More people watch Jerry Springer than Nova. (Nova is show on PBS that focuses on science and knowledge).

Huh?
What's science and knowledge?

Of course I was being facetious. But.....clearly it is not out of the realm of possibilities. Hopefully not. But if the Pope, the leader of the US, the leaders of its respective states deem that it would be better to focus on a miniscule percentage of the population as the source of so many problems than the backlash could be pretty huge.

As you know, from being in medicine, it isn't rare if it happens to you.

It's a synonym, my friend. You can replace it with the Devil, Beelzebub, or Old Scratch, if you wish. But, considering who Satan originally was, and that we are told he rules over princes and principalities, I think Dark Prince conveys the proper message.

Or have you never heard the term before?

Still more obfuscation....

My observation presupposes nothing. One may state that murder is wrong, evil, etc., to which there will little or no objection. The issue is that "murder" can be applied to any instance of taking the life of another. If one wishes to distinguish murder as the willful taking of another life, then war may not be excluded. In order to exclude war, the concept of murder loses its equivocacy because it is now being subject to exception.

From a literalist viewpoint, the Sixth Commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," appears unequivocal; there is no "except" or "unless" clause that follows it. The meaning of "kill" is unequivocal. It means an act that results in another's death.

Are "kill" and "murder" synonymous? To some people they may be; to other who are more prone to ethical compartmentalization there are reservations. Therein lies the real debate; what is murder and what isn't.

It is?

Well, gol-durned! I'll have to gather up my degrees in biology, chemistry, and my minor in physics sometimes, and try to make heads or tails out of it.

Tell you what, Sid, answer a question for me: Does Good exist?

I have heard the term, but never without irony.

I still think the choice of adjective requires some explanation.

Obviously, this does not apply to our own God-given government, right? Right?

In war, the taking of life can be quite willful.

In the Russo-Finnish war, a decorated Finnish sniper was asked whether it was hard to look at another man, and shoot him down.

The reply was that it was very hard to kill a man. They ducked, they dodged, and they shot back, you see.

We progressives should sit tight - I'm sure we outnumber the troglyodytes. After all, this forum is for piano players, not nascar fans.

- Jon
A PBS Mind in a FoxNews World

Keep dancing, son. Nobody has contended otherwise.

Of course not, Matt. We in the know have tried to tell you numerous times that G.W. Bush is annoited by God.

Haven't you listened?

I made no mention of any administrations, Jolly. You may answer the question, or just keep on dancing.

I agree! It seems aveu has left his mark on this forum, as many imitate his great art!

"They came at us in the same old way, and we killed them in the same old way."

Somethings never change, do they?

I was being facetious, Matt, as you well know.

But you tell me, Matt, does Evil exist? Can it co-opt governments? Or was God actually with the German SS, as it stated on their sidearm holsters?

And if Evil can take over and lead a government, does not that also mean that Good can do the very same thing?

Earthly government is the work of man. Man is sinful. Thus, earthly government, as a product of sinful man, is sinful.

Does not Holy Scripture inform us that we are not to put faith in any earthly ruler? Why would that be?

Good and evil are adjectives. Does 'heavy' exist? Does 'loud' exist?

Then I would expect more intelligent remarks from someone with degrees of these sorts.

Good and evil are ideas. So the question is moot to me. They exist as icons we've associated with complex human experiences of different natures.

Not for a minute do I believe that there are good and evil forces in the universe with agendas wielded by personified dieties. That is fairy tales and mythology.

Clearly, you do believe in these myths, so any productive discussion on the matter is impossible, since our fundamental understanding of the universe differs drastically. Not for a minute would I expect the best argument from the most skilled persuader on this matter to coax you away from your ideals upon which your identity as a human is based. Nor should it.

And I know for a fact your talk of demons and dark princes isnt gonna make a dent in my convictions. so lets not even proceed into what will undoubtedly become an unfortunate exchange of attitudes.

I do respect your right to believe what you like, be that in demons, gods, or gay-bashing. And I dont even assert that you SHOULD believe anything differently. And I respect your right to behave in any way you like so long as it doesnt infringe upon or harm others. The difference, as I see it, is you dont hold that same respect for your fellow man. You seem to feel that they should behave according to your beliefs. And yes, I must say, I find that inherently ignorant.

Depends on your skill at anthropomorphization.