Don't Ask Don't Tell

[BradyB]

I hate to burst your leftist judgemental bigoted bubble pal, but you should keep your prejudiced narrow comments to yourself. I am as conservative as they get and I don't fit your preconceived mold whatsoever.

 

You're the exception, not the rule. Based on your postings, I have always considered you more of a libertarian. Of course the logical conclusion of conservatism should be your position (less government intrusion), but neoconservatism has essentially crushed libertarianism at this point (although the resurgence of Ron Paul supporters has given me hope).

 

There are now five pages of homophobic rhetoric supporting my original claim. There are some people on this forum who are deeply insecure with respect to homosexuality. It makes them feel uncomfortable and icky. These are the people I was talking about. And they have delivered in spades.

[CAdamsPAC]

You're the exception, not the rule. Based on your postings, I have always considered you more of a libertarian. Of course the logical conclusion of conservatism should be your position (less government intrusion), but neoconservatism has essentially crushed libertarianism at this point (although the resurgence of Ron Paul supporters has given me hope).

 

There are now five pages of homophobic rhetoric supporting my original claim. There are some people on this forum who are deeply insecure with respect to homosexuality. It makes them feel uncomfortable and icky. These are the people I was talking about. And they have delivered in spades.

 

 

I don't like liver, loud motorcycles, Rap music,okra, loud car stereos,barking dogs , ill disciplined children , tailgaters and I especially dislike the liberal thought police who some how think their views are superior to all others and are the only opinions that may be held or expressed . I make note of the tendency towards personal attacks on the speaker in the "caring" and tolerant responses posted by those who know that everyone should accquiesce to their views on the issues they disagree on. I am always amazed by the claim of some posters to have such great knowledge of individuals they don't even know. Others may enjoy the items on my list and and I'll not launch a crusade to tell them they are wrong and that they should reject them because I do. After all ,this is a country that permits one to hold whatever views they please....as long as the don't badger and try to unlawfully compel others to accept and hold those beliefs.

Just my outlook from the hate filled bunker of the conservative ,gun toting, God worshiping, tax paying ,heterosexual, monogamous "Real Men" where the plot to deprive anyone we disagree with of their right to hold their views is in the advanced stages of planning and we are coming for you!!! BOO!

[BigDuke06]

I don't like liver, loud motorcycles, Rap music,okra, loud car stereos,barking dogs , ill disciplined children , tailgaters and I especially dislike the liberal thought police who some how think their views are superior to all others and are the only opinions that may be held or expressed . I make note of the tendency towards personal attacks on the speaker in the "caring" and tolerant responses posted by those who know that everyone should accquiesce to their views on the issues they disagree on. I am always amazed by the claim of some posters to have such great knowledge of individuals they don't even know. Others may enjoy the items on my list and and I'll not launch a crusade to tell them they are wrong and that they should reject them because I do. After all ,this is a country that permits one to hold whatever views they please....as long as the don't badger and try to unlawfully compel others to accept and hold those beliefs.

Just my outlook from the hate filled bunker of the conservative ,gun toting, God worshiping, tax paying ,heterosexual, monogamous "Real Men" where the plot to deprive anyone we disagree with of their right to hold their views is in the advanced stages of planning and we are coming for you!!! BOO!

 

 

Please PM me the address of your bunker.

[Greg Cain PA-C]

I don't like liver, loud motorcycles, Rap music,okra, loud car stereos,barking dogs , ill disciplined children , tailgaters and I especially dislike the liberal thought police who some how think their views are superior to all others and are the only opinions that may be held or expressed . I make note of the tendency towards personal attacks on the speaker in the "caring" and tolerant responses posted by those who know that everyone should accquiesce to their views on the issues they disagree on. I am always amazed by the claim of some posters to have such great knowledge of individuals they don't even know. Others may enjoy the items on my list and and I'll not launch a crusade to tell them they are wrong and that they should reject them because I do. After all ,this is a country that permits one to hold whatever views they please....as long as the don't badger and try to unlawfully compel others to accept and hold those beliefs.

Just my outlook from the hate filled bunker of the conservative ,gun toting, God worshiping, tax paying ,heterosexual, monogamous "Real Men" where the plot to deprive anyone we disagree with of their right to hold their views is in the advanced stages of planning and we are coming for you!!! BOO!

 

CAdams PAC I only wish that you had been born 230 years earlier and signed the Declaration of Independence yourself!!! I have been talking about the feminization of America for 15 years and you really get it. I guess it takes a real self-reliant man who lives out on the edge (or back in the woods) to really know truth.

I keep asking Heme questions that he can never answer. Here are a few. He has a lot to say about business (private practice), taxes, and Obama care, but has never owned or ran a business. He talks with such authority about what should be done with DADT and military policy, but has never been in the military. He talks extensively about the practice of medicine, but has never practiced medicine a day in his life (he's still a student). He thinks he is a tough man in a tough world with an eclectic background, but one of the sweetest things he has seen in his life is two geriatric homosexuals (70 and 80 year old men) hold hands in bed. As I understand it he is > 38 years old and never been married with no children. (I could be wrong about married or children, but if so I'll let him correct me.) My point is that he thinks he knows all, but he has experienced little. I'll bet 99 to 1 odds that he lives alone in a 'burb or an apartment in some metro area were 90% of the people he encounters every day think just like him. Heme have you ever really laid your a$$ on the line and risked your life for anything? I'm beginning to suspect that you are dead inside and this forum is the only thing that gives you purpose. You have all of these strong opinions...where do they come from a life of rich experience or is all of this just a philosophical argument that you engage in in order to give purpose to an empty unfulfilled life?

[Acromion]

Greg you are a pathetic, immature piece of ****. It really says something about your sad life that you have so much time and energy to trash talk an innocent person over the internet. **** you

[trout]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, I just wanted to put in my two cents. I say, "join up". One more PA in the army (gay or straight) means that I may not have to deploy again next year. I'm a big supporter of gay rights, but in the military, it goes even further. I am shocked that we are kicking out 500+ soldiers every year while trying to fight two wars. Soldiers (gay and straight) are on their 3rd, 4th, and 5th deployments while other people are getting out because they are (or claim to be) gay.

[BradyB]

http://www.andrewtobias.com/newcolumns/000504.html

 

"You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin."

[roman6163]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, I just wanted to put in my two cents. I say, "join up". One more PA in the army (gay or straight) means that I may not have to deploy again next year. I'm a big supporter of gay rights, but in the military, it goes even further. I am shocked that we are kicking out 500+ soldiers every year while trying to fight two wars. .

 

I agree. We need every swinging d!*# (pardon the pun :) ) we can get fighting two wars.

 

Anyone willing to serve our country through the military, whether straight or gay, gets a lot of kudos and a world of respect from me and I support them 100%.

[Iain1028]

As much as I am against Illegal Immigration, I would endorse a bill that would allow them to become citizens after 3 years served in the military, and the rest of them can be shipped home!!

 

That would be the only acceptable pathway to citizenship that I would endorse.

 

JD Hayworth in 2010!!

[CAdamsPAC]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, I just wanted to put in my two cents. I say, "join up". One more PA in the army (gay or straight) means that I may not have to deploy again next year. I'm a big supporter of gay rights, but in the military, it goes even further. I am shocked that we are kicking out 500+ soldiers every year while trying to fight two wars. Soldiers (gay and straight) are on their 3rd, 4th, and 5th deployments while other people are getting out because they are (or claim to be) gay.

 

No problem with homosexuals serving, it seems the problem is compliance with DADT. Follow the rules for all service members or face the consequences. BTW how many "Fat" Soldiers have you seen chaptered for non compliance with the policy or drug/alcohol failures, w/o a hue and outcry? I've seen a lot of functioning competent Soldier go away on the points, due to........their behavior/actions.

[just_me]

I remember the outcry on a few military boards I use to frequent when the policy change on tatts came about-----you would have thought they made it a requirement to have a vasectomy or something with all the crying grown men showcasing

 

it was quite sad

 

No problem with homosexuals serving, it seems the problem is compliance with DADT. Follow the rules for all service members or face the consequences. BTW how many "Fat" Soldiers have you seen chaptered for non compliance with the policy or drug/alcohol failures, w/o a hue and outcry? I've seen a lot of functioning competent Soldier go away on the points, due to........their behavior/actions.

[CAdamsPAC]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, I just wanted to put in my two cents. I say, "join up". One more PA in the army (gay or straight) means that I may not have to deploy again next year. I'm a big supporter of gay rights, but in the military, it goes even further. I am shocked that we are kicking out 500+ soldiers every year while trying to fight two wars. Soldiers (gay and straight) are on their 3rd, 4th, and 5th deployments while other people are getting out because they are (or claim to be) gay.

 

 

 

"Soldiers (gay and straight) are on their 3rd, 4th, and 5th deployments while other people are getting out because they are (or claim to be) gay. "

 

Ask what happened to the 5th,6th,7th,8th,9th,24th IDs, 2nd,3rd AD VII Corps to find out "Why" so many service members are doing so many tours. The architect of DADT should be able to answer that question.

[trout]

Oh, I know why. My unit lost a good dozen people right before our deployment who suddenly decided they were gay. Every time I did a chapter physical for one of them, it made me sick. On the other hand, I know of good soldiers, soldiers who love the Army, with 18, 19 years in who were suddenly outed against their will (and against DADT) and lost everything. It's just wrong all around.

[Greg Cain PA-C]

Greg you are a pathetic, immature piece of ****. It really says something about your sad life that you have so much time and energy to trash talk an innocent person over the internet. **** you

 

Good luck with those 3 years of PA school with that temperment.

[BradyB]

Good luck with those 3 years of PA school with that temperment.

 

If a close minded bigot such as yourself can do it, I'm sure Acromion will have no problem.

[3GeronimoPA]

I don't like liver, loud motorcycles, Rap music,okra, loud car stereos,barking dogs , ill disciplined children , tailgaters and I especially dislike the liberal thought police who some how think their views are superior to all others and are the only opinions that may be held or expressed . I make note of the tendency towards personal attacks on the speaker in the "caring" and tolerant responses posted by those who know that everyone should accquiesce to their views on the issues they disagree on. I am always amazed by the claim of some posters to have such great knowledge of individuals they don't even know. Others may enjoy the items on my list and and I'll not launch a crusade to tell them they are wrong and that they should reject them because I do. After all ,this is a country that permits one to hold whatever views they please....as long as the don't badger and try to unlawfully compel others to accept and hold those beliefs.

Just my outlook from the hate filled bunker of the conservative ,gun toting, God worshiping, tax paying ,heterosexual, monogamous "Real Men" where the plot to deprive anyone we disagree with of their right to hold their views is in the advanced stages of planning and we are coming for you!!! BOO!

 

Hat's off to you my friend. Well said.

[3GeronimoPA]

If a close minded bigot such as yourself can do it, I'm sure Acromion will have no problem.

 

Closed minded? Is it because he holds conservative views or is it because he made a reasonable deduction (with a jab or two) from the information he was presented with on this forum? I'd really like to see Heme respond. I don't expect him to have to defend his honor on a forum because that is something that can neither be gained or lost on such a platform but the vantage point from which people engage in their prescriptivism will shed light on things would it not?

[andersenpa]

If a close minded bigot such as yourself can do it, I'm sure Acromion will have no problem.

 

 

Please folks, try to stay on the issue if you're having a debate and avoid personal attacks.

One temporary ban adminsitered on this thread already.

 

From the Forum Rules:

*KEEP IT PLEASANT*--- Do not troll. Always be polite and courteous in your posts, even if you do not agree with another member. Do not post racist, sexist or prejudiced remarks or comments. Do not spam the forum with useless or off-topic nonsense. Do not flame other members or post anything that has a good chance of being taken in a bad way. Remember, the internet is emotionless and we don't always know when you are being sarcastic. Do not participate in flaming wars.

[Hemegroup]

Closed minded? Is it because he holds conservative views or is it because he made a reasonable deduction (with a jab or two) from the information he was presented with on this forum? I'd really like to see Heme respond. I don't expect him to have to defend his honor on a forum because that is something that can neither be gained or lost on such a platform but the vantage point from which people engage in their prescriptivism will shed light on things would it not?

 

Uh, I'm still waiting for YOUR response. Anyhow, "vantage point"? lol Come on man, time to grow up a little. Greg Cain just sounded like a typical sore loser, his response was pretty predictable. I see no reason why my own life has anything to do with facts or thoughts presented. If I'm gay, should I not take classes taught by straight teachers? And in turn, If I'm straight, should I not take classes from gay teachers? You've got to be kidding me. And you guys are practicing medicine?? What, do you use your brain just enough to squeak by and to 'hell' with the rest? Are you saying that I can't understand what a black person might go through in a certain situation, or be able to empathize with them, because I'm white? If that's the case, what a small and narrow world you must live in. But hey, I guess if you're comfortable there?

 

Some of you seriously need to open your minds and realize that a) the world is not completely about you, and b) accepting other people for who or what they are, specifically has nothing to do with you. You remind me of the Intern I'm with currently, all she can see when she speaks to me is, 'he's a PA-S, he's different than me'. As hard as she tries to keep up pretense, especially for others around her, she can't help but let a bit of her true feelings fall through the cracks. I understand what she's having to deal with, but in time she'll mature and see the entire matter for what it is.

 

How about this ... I've been with the same redhead for about 12 years, who drives me crazy. We both want to adopt, and we're waiting until after our schooling to marry. Does that help? I hope not.

 

This whole thing is pretty amusing, and I've definitely gotten some laughs out of it. But at the very least, I hope it made you think and and rethink any need you might feel to accept dogma for anything other than what it is. You don't have to, no matter how much someone else tries to scare you into it. Now, back into your dresses and high-heels, since we learned in Human Sexuality that the majority of cross-dressers are (drum roll) heterosexual.

 

As Dr. William Stayton, Head of the University of Pennsylvania's Department of Human Sexuality and himself a therapist for cross dressers, reported, "People associate cross dressing with effeminacy and being gay and the fact is most of them are not gay. They are very definitely heterosexual."

http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/article/cross-dress

[Guest POTR]

My suggestion would be to join the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.

 

Why?

 

You get an Officers Commission.

You will wear a Uniform.

You will be promoted administratively in the lower levels easier and probably quicker than in Military service.

You will be awarded medals equivalent to other uniformed services medals for doing your job just like any other officer (also probably easier than Military service).

You CAN deploy to the front lines to provide hopefully excellent care to Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen.

The USPHS CC is non-military, ask a USPHS active recruiter what this means in relation to DADT (not military, no DADT), and whether or not commissioning (and clearance) is possible.

For some jobs, you will have to make a certain commitment of time, like the Military, for others you don't.

 

There you go... service to the Military, with out many of the usual Military inconveniences. And a chance to possibly prove your worth with out risking your a55 to make a case.

[3GeronimoPA]

Let's first look at the topic of Human Sexuality. This is usually an investigation and education regarding the topic of humans and (drum roll) sexuality. There is no room for bias in the study of this topic, or any other scientific study. You don't learn Human Sexuality in church, you learn it in colleges and universities which teach science (fact). It's not a class that has to do with religious themes. It's not about your opinion, or mine. It's not about liberals or conservatives, or "destiny". It's simply about what is.

 

This statement is presumptive that the scientific community and educational institution is a non-biased source. This is obviously a fallacy. I don't think I even have to provide examples of scientists twisting science and the university pushing a viewpoint. Waste of key-punches.

 

On the one hand, you seem to acknowledge the place of the prostate in male sexuality (of course, it has multiple functions), yet on the other hand you state that it has been placed there to be denied. Tell me, do you believe that Satan the Devil was responsible for it's placement in the male human body? Likewise, are you telling your God that He made a mistake?

 

So is it your perspective that the prostate only serves the function of receptive anal intercourse? So if I were to say that my belly-button gives me an entertaining sensation upon my rubbing it therefore that was its intended purpose? Acknowledging sensation does not admit that it is intended. That's like saying, "God gave me "mu" receptors, it's obvious that he intended for me to get high! Oh, but the mu receptors serve another purpose! We manipulated our environment to get morphine!

 

Let's move on to your comment that, "the Bible speaks against a homosexual lifestyle". Yes, I do know 'the bible' very well. I in no way believe it to be any type of sole communication with our species, by any type of deity.

 

Seeing as ALL religions are exclusive in nature (even Buddhism came about as a rejection of the Vedas and the "inclusivists" exclude the "exclusivists") it is logically possible to assume that they are all wrong but it is illogical to assume that they are all right. If Islam has it right, Christianity is wrong etc. So either Christianity is "no method" or the "only method" of communication... if we are to use logic to reach our conclusions. I propose it as the "only method" though I don't feel one should be forced into that viewpoint.

 

The deity of the bible, the Hebrew god YHVH, is many times portrayed in the text as a very selfish, manipulative, tyrannical and hysterical figure. 'He' supposedly demanded certain things, in what is referred to as the "old testament", from the people who lived in a certain region of the earth. These people lived in a pre-scientific time which included mass murder, slavery and oppression of women.

 

So should we find a god that is a little more humanistic in nature and then chose him as god merely because we, the creation, have decided which character trait criterion we deem fit for a god?

 

The best way I can think of to approach this, is to include a letter that someone sent to "Dr." Laura. It really does sum up this part of our discussion nicely.

"a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

 

I am not about to write you what would amount to a 4 forum page thesis in response to your litany of copy/pasted questions especially pre-Christ not that they don't deserve to be addressed, but your later questions are more to the quick of what I am getting to. You have quoted Leviticus after Leviticus after Leviticus. However, you must acknowledge since you are such a Biblical scholar, that with the coming of Christ a more perfect law (or dispensation if you will) was laid down with His birth, life, death, and resurrection. I see you are not able to challenge the words or Christ which is comforting. SO, laws of cleanliness was a standard for worship and prayer and not a "sin vs. not sin" type of "law". With a new dispensation, many of the punishments, standards for prayer, etc. that were meant to close the gap between our inadequacy and God's perfection were replaced with Christ. You'll notice that of the laws you are copy/pasting, you ignored homosexuality and it is the one that re-presents itself in the NT

 

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

If mere intellect and sarcasm were salvation granting you my friend would be twice as well of as the only sarcastic me.

 

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. "

You're welcome.

 

You state that 'the bible' "clearly speaks against a homosexual lifestyle". Using the 'old testament' as an example, do you understand how ridiculous you sound?

I said it aloud and then I typed it above and "ridiculous" didn't come to me. Sorry.

 

So let's look at the 'new testament'.

Sure

 

I presume you would refer to the 'scripture' Romans 1: 26-27, where it states, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."Interesting.

 

That and "1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders" where Paul lumps homosexuals in with adulterers, prostitutes, sexually immoral, and idolaters and states that they will not go to heaven....

 

 

This was written by a man who is referred to in the bible as the 'apostle Paul'.

...

 

Paul also condoned slavery (Ephesians 6:5, 1 Timothy 6:1-2).

Paul was not telling people to go get slaves. That would be condoning slavery. Rather Paul was establishing an appropriate behavior for a slave who became a Christian. That their attitude in which they conducted themselves may actually bring the "slave-master" to Christ. If a slave fought and freed himself during that time, he would have only freed himself. Imagine if that slave would have softened the heart of the "slave-master" with Christ's message and all of his slaves were then released. They would be wondering why?. The slave-master would have told them about Christ, and the word of God would continue to spread. For a person fixated on the idea that "this 100 years if we are lucky" life is all we have, passive attitudes among slaves may be offensive, but in God's eyes, we have a purpose in eternity and this life, though it may be unnecessarily short or long and painful is only a small drop of life on the spectrum of time.

 

He also approved of the oppression of women (1 Corinthians 11:7-9,

God wants women to have long hair.... THE AGONY!!!

 

1 Corinthians 14:34-35,

With context removed, this could be offensive though Paul is merely establishing standards for conduct in the church. I don't see how this fits the "cruel" definition of oppression. Additionally, since you have studied to such a great extent, I am sure you have wondered what this text actually is saying so you looked to a verbatim translation from the Greek and found that the word "silence" there actually was "siago" which is not used in every translated "silence" in the Bible. "Siago" is interpreted as "Silence under consideration". Our dumbed down English sometimes doesn't give the Greek the credit it deserves so on matters of contention, it serves one well to delve in a little deeper. Paul was telling the women to "think before they speak". Considering that this was included in the letter to the Corinthians and extrabiblical resources point to Corinth having many problems with orderly worship, it only makes sense. 1 Cor 14 is loaded with rules for orderly worship. Not that these rules cannot be applied to the modern church, but rather that they were written to address the specific issues at Corinth. One can reasonably assume that it would also contribute to order if men would "siago" as well. Again, not oppressive in nature.

 

Ephesians 5:22-24,

The preamble to Eph 5:25-31 which commands men to be willing to lay down their lives for their wives as Christ did for the Church and to present them without blemish or wrinkle. Those poor ladies. If they only had bras to burn!

 

1 Timothy 2:11-15).

God created man first, He used Paul to communicate the message that He did not want women teaching men in the church. How do any of these bring and I quote the definition of oppression, "the feeling of being heavily burdened, mentally or physically, by troubles, adverse conditions, anxiety"???

 

 

Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night

But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

Death for Fornication

A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Kill Old Men, Young Women and Children

"You are my battle-ax and sword," says the LORD. "With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms. With you I will shatter armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer. With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens.(Jeremiah 51:20-26)

More Rape and Baby Killing

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

Mass Murder

Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

 

OK, logical flow, "If I am created, I am created with a purpose". "God establishes my purpose since he created me". "If I am in willing opposition to my established purpose, there are consequences". What does that sound like???? OH! REALITY!!! If I touch a hot stove, it burns! If I jump off something too high, it hurts and I may break bones. If I defy God, he established consequences. We establish consequences for our rules with our children. With God being the omnipotent being, those consequences were only magnified. Actually, this of Deut. makes known that the sacrifice of Christ encompassed so much.

 

Wow. That YHVH, he seriously demands attention and worship, doesn't 'He'? Even to the point of slaughtering innocent children, even babies. Is that really a deity you want to believe in, and allow those types of beliefs and morals to rule your life?

 

So should we find a god that is a little more humanistic in nature and then chose him as god merely because we, the creation, have decided which character trait criterion we deem fit for a god?

 

Anyhow, back to our discussion, if you want to allow one type of 'moral judgment' that is supposedly inspired by YHVH (gays are bad)

Not "gays are bad" but "we all are bad" and "homosexuality is a sin".

 

then you have to also follow the other type of moral judgment that condones.....

 

So should we find a god that is a little more humanistic in nature and then chose him as god merely because we, the creation, have decided which character trait criterion we deem fit for a god?

 

Also interesting to note is that Jesus never made any mention of homosexuality, and never condoned slaughter of children (or anyone else). A bit of contradiction there, compared to YHVH.

He came not to abolish but to fulfill. Christ's purpose was to take the wrath that you are condemning, not to bear it. So not a contradiction, but however a prophesy fulfilled.

 

 

This is America, we can believe what we choose to. But you can't expect or force others to accept your beliefs as representation of fact.

Unless you are a liberal college professor where you hold someone's degree/livelyhood in your hands or you're a scientist and you can tweak your "unbiased facts" to make people believe what you want them to. And I did not try to force my beliefs on another. I merely said, "I think homosexuality is wrong". Then I said, "in practice, open homosexuality is not in the best interests of the military" which was an informed deduction based on the facts at hand and experiential relevance.

 

I certainly do not. And I certainly don't view 'the bible' as being any type of credible source of education regarding human sexuality.

I've heard of this, you can get this white out pen and just get rid of the verses that don't fit your lifestyle. It was called redemptacil or something. A funny skit.

 

As for LSD and Meth.....

They are both drugs, they both induce their own form of euphoria, they both are illegal, they both destroy lives though they be at different rates. Our differences here are much reflective of our others. I view things as black and white and you view things in shades of gray (unless on LSD at the time).

 

 

Edited to add: You know, 'the bible' has some nice things in it too, I'll be the first to acknowledge that. Certain parts have some great sentiment, same as other 'holy' books.

Nice or not, the Bible is truth. When aesthetics and niceties supersede reality you will always end up detached from reality.

[3GeronimoPA]

Uh, I'm still waiting for YOUR response

My apologies, I was at my bro-in-law's for his wedding and I did not see the onslaught of questions you had lined up for me. Forgive me for not spending another hour responding, I have a family. Good luck with that intern. Many a PA-S have saved an intern's biscuits. Don't think about that, think about what you need to learn to treat your patients adequately. Put as much passion into your patients as you do the keyboard and you'll do well.

[Hemegroup]

"... the Bible is truth".

 

Well, you can keep on telling yourself that. You can shout it from the highest mountain. You can continue to loudly state those words to anyone who debates you.

 

But that doesn't, and won't, make it so.

 

As for the rest, I'm going to let it go as there's obviously no point.

 

Keep on reading ... oh and incidentally, you seem to use the word "God" a lot. Do you know where the word originated? Look it up, it's interesting. Maybe you can try and find a non-biased University for resources or something.

[Firemedic13]

I read about half the posts, skipping a couple pages. Wow, looks like it really devolved. To the OP: It appears from both what my friends in the military say and what I have read about over the years that if you are quiet about it you will be OK. However it also appears that you will have to deal with regular, blatant homophobia from which you will, by necessity, be unable to defend yourself. The question is how important is it to you that you serve.

 

As to Nate: Dude, you are aware the "old testament" (I prefer Torah) was written by people who still thought bronze tools were an awesome thing right? And the New Testament written by a bunch of people who had never traveled outside of the Mediterranean, never lived under any system but the Roman Empire, and had prejudices against their somewhat homosexual neighbors, the Greeks, that they inherited from the Jews who were about a xenophobic as you could get. When you take into account both the social and cultural influences of the time, and then look at the world we live in now, a world the apostles literally couldn't envision because it is so wildly different, don't you wonder if maybe we should take some time to reinterpret G-d as a more humanistic figure? The Enlightenment's humanism is what produced our country, as well as all Western liberal democracies. It also provided a positivistic atmosphere that allowed science to flourish, that allowed modern medicine to evolve and Newton to theorize. My final question: how could the bible be truth if it was written by men, men who are, according to your belief system, inherently flawed and sinful?

 

That being said, you have a right to believe that homosexuality is wrong, provided you don't stomp on their rights. Very good arguments from you supporting your position as well, even though I disagree with you.

[moestown1016]

Sounds like you already know what you're going to do. Is there some kind of policy about the military paying for school and then deciding you aren't "military" worthy? Can you keep the tuition money? I have been to a handful of PA dinners sponsered by various military branches and they are practically begging you to join up. Maybe you can ask without giving your name (just in case) and watch their response?