Facepalm

[Little Faerie]

Ok some of you might find offense at what I have to say. If you are a member of the Tea Party (and not the kind with frilly dresses and dolls), you might not want to read this. Mind you, these opinions are about ONE person, and not an entire party.

Christine O'Donnell thinks that having gay sex and masturbating are adultery. Stephen Colbert seems to think this means she thinks masturbating makes you gay lol. If that's true then I must be really, really gay (even though I am in a hetero relationship) I'm sorry but if masturbation = adultery then you're doing it wrong! Also, how is a gay man sleeping with his OWN HUSBAND adultery? I thought adultery was cheating on your spouse. If it's your own hand or spouse, how is it cheating? She gave some blah blah about lust, saying anything lustful is adultery. Ummm, I thought you were supposed to have lust for your spouse? Isn't that how you get to the having babies part for hetero couples? This is one Teabagger with a room temp IQ!

I don't know diddly about some of the details of Christianity, never having been one. If I'm missing a point somewhere there, let me know. I know most sects are against homosexuality but I didn't think their bible said anything about it being adultery.

All that said, gay people are just like everybody else, why not let them be miserable like the rest of the married folk? (lol... kidding really, marriage is a beautiful thing. Why not let everybody enjoy it?) Somebody needs to shut this woman up!

Please note I am merely ranting... I do not expect responses really.

[Little-Daddy-Toa]

LOL I totally agree with you.

[TheMagicDragon]

Well, I must be totally gay since I've been masturbating every day for, lets see....48 minus twelve is...thirty six years. Hmmm, I wonder what is the total volume of ejaculate - maybe later I'll do the math. But its many liters. No need to gross anyone out any further here, ME SORRY.

Huh, I always thought I was a hetero. Well, actually I'm a masturbating heteroDIAPERSEXUAL if I must choose a title. I'm also with you. She's a complete nut.

I don't mind voting for witches - I know a nice one who wears diapers and she's got my vote as a cool person.

[Little Faerie]

It's people like her who cause 12 year old little boys to commit suicide because they couldn't stop masturbating (what 12 year old can?! I certainly couldn't even though I tried) and they were ashamed of natural things about their body, seeing it as sinful, debauched, and wrong.

[KittenAB]

According to them I'm a "born again virgin" ... I know ... it's total BS LOL I just realized one day I don't like sex ...

Now as for your christianity comments ... really, if you read their books, and I do mean actually read and memorize all of it not just the parts you like (like so many do) then you'll notice something quite disturbing ... everything is good for you and everything is bad for you. Clearly this lady just took the bits she agreed with and decided to run with them like so many others do. The Tea Party ... I'm still deciding on how good of an idea they are ... we clearly need more than two parties, since they are now the same anyway, but ... another extremist party won't be much different. On the other hand ... lowering taxes is a good thing. Thankfully Christine is actually a minority in the party, most just seem to want the government out of their lives as much as possible and that even means letting each person decide what's right for themselves instead of having laws for it (double edged knife but one even I would fall on).

But the problem is who they choose as spokespeople ... and if this is their face ... that's just as stupid as having Palin as the other face of the Repubs.

[Guest NaughtyAshes]

most just seem to want the government out of their lives as much as possible and that even means letting each person decide what's right for themselves instead of having laws for it

They only want the government out of rich, white, straight, "christian" peoples lives. They want the government ensuring that everyone else acts like they do.

[timmyc]

The Enrons, BP's, insurance companies, banks and other major capitalists are far scarier than the government. Rampant greed is what is killing America. I would rather have a government that regulates business than one that tries to regulate my sex life. I was raised catholic, I still consider my a christian, but am definitely not a catholic. Organized religion is a business just like any other. They want to control sexual expression, while half their leaders are child molesters.

[dprtodd]

As a libertarian (NOT the same as the TP folks) I think the best way to deal with Gay Marriage is to get government out of marriage all together. My thinking is that marriage is basically a religious institution and as such it should not be intertwined with the state. Government concerns for marriage mostly center on tax law, inheritance, and property issues. All of these things could be addressed by a civil union that has no implicit religious meaning beyond registering another person (or persons) as your spouse, much like you designate a beneficiary for insurance. With the Goverment no longer having a stake in Marriage then individual church's will be able decide who they will and wont marry, and anyone is free to enter into a civil union with whomever they choose.

This solution allows greater freedom for all, in that for the purposes of the law all persons have the same civil union available to them regardless of orientation or religion. No Christian will feel their institution is being undermined or that they are being forced to compromise on an article of faith. Individual Church's will decide who they will and won't perform marriage ceremonies for, in much the same way that they decide who they will or won't make a deacon or elder, and people will continue to seek out churches that reflect their beliefs. With the civil union providing the legal framework that Marriage currently does the actual institution of Marriage will have the same significance as say baptism or confirmation - a highly personal and spiritual rite shared with the congregation - generally speaking your baptism, bah mitzvah, confirmation, etc has no greater legal aspect to it, marriage would be no different.

The biggest problem I see in getting people to accept a common sense solution like this are the polarized feelings on both sides of the debate and peoples need to 'win'. I fear that you would still have the bible thumpers who want to keep the gays from from getting hitched no matter what it is called simply because they don't like them and then there are the gays who want to triumph over the holy rollers and would like nothing more than to use the police power of government to compel the Christians to act incongruous to their faith. Kind of a shame really, becuase this seems to me such a silly issue for folks to be riled up over.

I'll leave the common sense solution to the masturbation issue for someone else to deal with

[BBB]

I agree with a lot of what people that align themselves with the Tea Party.... but I disagree with a lot of them as well.

I agree with some democrats, I disagree with some.

I agree with some republicans, I disagree with some.

I've realized a few things. Tea Party has become a catch all for anyone that doesn't fit into the other two groups. There is nothing that stops some one from saying that is what they are. its a tough break, they get some real loony toons, but there are some good people mixed in there too.

I've never been one to vote down the party line. If I like a candidates ideas, or stances on issues that are important to me then I support them. If they're from a district or area that I have no say so in their election, well, I ignore them. nothing I can do about them anyways.

[LILJIM]

& these people call us weird!!!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

The Tea Paty is not new. Between 1976 and 1981, there was the "Tex Revolt " whose motto was" I'm Mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it any more!". That vanished by 1984

The Tea Party has yet to determine its identity. You have Glen Beck say on one day that we should "go Galt" and ont the next "Turn to God". Well, the creator of Galt was described n the words of liberal commentator Jay Diamond" and CORRECTLY SO in the following quote "Thieir [conservatives'] economic system is the creation of a devout Russian atheist". So Beck is talking out of both sides of his face. I cannot believe he is unaware of that since he had as a guest Yaron Brooks. So it is 94% likely that Beck is a flaming hypocrite and the Tea Party would be ill-served by continuing under Beck's influence. Even at best they become like the White Russians. Of whom John Galt's creator said "I despised the Reds and welcomed the White Russians. After a few weeks of the Withes, I longed for the return of the Reds".

As to the Tea Party both the organized and loosely confederated "outer party" this is a matter of integrity. I am perfectly willing to give this information to the liberals to use as they will. If that breaks the Tea Party then they were not up to the challenge anyway.. Of the Right, I ask the question, With which system, capitalism as we understand it, or socialism do the following go "It is easier for a camel to pass through the ehye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven" and "Give us this day our daily bread"? How does this last square with being self-responsible, an attribute of capitalism, if you are to be a beggar, therefore dependent for your very existence? What claim to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as "inaliabke rights", the source of the political underpinnings of capitalism, can you make thereafter"? Just how "inaliable" are these rights if "The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away"? What comes to my mind, in practical terms is "thin reed". Does this explain why 85% of the churches are not marching, but drifting inexorably left?

Another Gem; Google up Gingrich and Pelosi and Gingrich and Sharpton. Again the word that comes out is "integrity", but then what do you expect out of someone who's intiials are NG

EDIT: Correction "Goggle up" Should be "YouTube up"

[Repaid1]

Again the word that comes out is "integrity", but then what do you expect out of someone who's intiials are NG

Hey wait a minute what the heck does Naughty Girl have to do with this, and why are you picking on her ?

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

ROTFLMAO!!!

+1!

[treefrog61]

1.The occasional rant is good for the soul. Oops! gotta drop the religious reference - maybe good for the blood pressure.

2.Moving on, I think the phrase "it takes a village" is wise in many ways. It takes a village of many: talents, skills, ages - but most of all opinions. If a village all thinks alike and all agrees on everything, sooner or later a fatal flaw will occur, and the village is doomed.

3.So I try to avoid labeling opinions different than mine as "stupid" "bigoted" or any other sharp put-down that comes to mind (yes, they're in my mind. The challenge is to prevent them from passing through my lips, or fingertips.)

4.Generalizations never hold up well in close quarters. Is O'Donnell the summation of the Tea Party? Nah. There is no one profile for any political party, or any religious denomination whether protestant, catholic, muslim, or any of the others under the sun. If you can't define a person as an individual, you really can't define them at all.

[Diaper Mike 05]

You are all aware the TEA Party is not an actual party, and that it has to do with economic responsibility and smaller government, right? It would be an extreme Conservative idea, not TEA Party idea. The TEA Party is based on reducing government spending and the size of the bureaucracy to reduce the federal deficit and debt.

Besides, not all states recognize gay marriage, so in that state (I don't know the marriage laws of her state) that may technically be true because gay marriage may not be recognized. And also, I have heard that according to the Bible, all sex outside of marriage is adultery (wish I could remember the source).

[PArms]

I think the best way to deal with Gay Marriage is to get government out of marriage all together. My thinking is that marriage is basically a religious institution and as such it should not be intertwined with the state.

I've been saying this for years. Glad someone else sees it that way, too.

If the government wants separation of church and state, then they need to get out of the business of marriage.

[Diaper Mike 05]

I've been saying this for years. Glad someone else sees it that way, too.

If the government wants separation of church and state, then they need to get out of the business of marriage.

Isn't that the truth.

Like someone said earlier, make civil unions have the same status of marriage now and allow any consenting adults to marry how they would like, and the government is only involved for tax purposes and nothing else.

[Little Faerie]

What about the gay folks who want to be married in a religious ceremony, by licensed clergy, whose religious beliefs allow it? Several non-denominational churches, including christian ones, are in support of same sex marriages, as well as Wiccan churches. "Marriage" isn't just for Christians, and it's been around a lot longer than they have too. Gay people can be religious too, and who are we to deny them union before their God(s)? Yes, government needs to get out of marriage... but we also need to ensure that everyone has equal rights to marry.

[dprtodd]

What about the gay folks who want to be married in a religious ceremony, by licensed clergy, whose religious beliefs allow it? Several non-denominational churches, including christian ones, are in support of same sex marriages, as well as Wiccan churches. "Marriage" isn't just for Christians, and it's been around a lot longer than they have too. Gay people can be religious too, and who are we to deny them union before their God(s)? Yes, government needs to get out of marriage... but we also need to ensure that everyone has equal rights to marry.

Given my proposal (Recap: Civil Unions for government purposes, marriage reverts to a religious ceremony) Then any two or more consenting adults could get married at any church they wish to be married at, provided that church is willing to perform the ceremony. As you make an effort to point out there are already church's that would be willing to perform the ceremony and if there weren't there is nothing stopping someone from founding a church based on their own beliefs. That said I would however not support compelling a church of any faith to perform a religious ceremony they do not wish to.

[dprtodd]

I've been saying this for years. Glad someone else sees it that way, too.

If the government wants separation of church and state, then they need to get out of the business of marriage.

I'm very glad you share similiar thinking as my own, it is always nice to find others who share similar opinions when so many others out there do not. Please don't think me an ass, I know this is nitpickey - so forgive me if this bugs you but the semantics surrounding this kind of discussion are important.

You stated "If the government wants separation of church and stat"

The Government doesn't get to 'want' things - we the people 'allow' the government to do things. The separation of Church and State is in many ways a great inconvenience to the government, and a great boon to the the citizenry. One need only look at the theocracies of the world to see that religion and goverment make poor bed fellows for the states citizens.

[Missy Q]

 theocracies of the world to see that religion and goverment make poor bed fellows for the states citizens.

Usually in those countries, religion and government are so intertwined that you can't really tell the difference anymore. (For example, the middle east and the "religious" police, executions for blasphemy, etc)

[Little Faerie]

Right, but it was worded in a way that seemed to imply Civil Unions were good enough in place of marriage. I'm sorry, but they just aren't. I wanted to point out that Marriage isn't solely a Christian institution as so many are led to believe. Therefore, it shouldn't be up to them to define marriage since people of all faiths have marriage ceremonies. Ideally it should be up to the individual pastors to decide who they will or will not perform the ceremony for. The couple must still find compliant clergy. Thus no Christian minister is forced to go against his or her beliefs. I would not want my relationship to be called a Civil Union. I want to be married. If my partner was a girl, under current law I would be denied that which should be everyone's right. There are also social stigmas that come with "just" a civil union, and I'm willing to bet they would remain even if it entitled the persons united to the same benefits of marriage. Marriage is not only a religious ceremony, but a highly cultural and social one. Perhaps your wording simply confused me, as it currently seems we are on the same side.

To sum up what I think:

I think that yes, civil unions should exist with the same legal benefit as marriage, primarily for those with no desire for "marriage" or a religious ceremony.

I also think that any fully consenting adults who wish to be married should be able to do so regardless of gender.

Tax laws should be equal for both types of union.

The government should remove laws restricting marriage and civil union both to only heterosexual pairings, and stay the f out of people's relationships.

The views of one religious group should never impinge on the rights of other groups. Those stating that marriage is only a Christian institution and passing legislation based on those assumptions whether or not that exact wording makes it into the laws are denying other faiths their religious rights and thus violating Constitutional law.

[Little Faerie]

Oh, and maybe if O'Donnell masturbated once in a while she wouldn't be such an uptight cactus-cunt. Just sayin...

As we all know, repressing basic desires really screws with your psyche.

[Missy Q]

Oh, and maybe if O'Donnell masturbated once in a while she wouldn't be such an uptight cactus-cunt. Just sayin...

As we all know, repressing basic desires really screws with your psyche.

This.

A million times, this.

[dprtodd]

Now look what you did, I have a cactus-cunt fetish and now I can't stop from wanting to have my way with O'Donnell. Now I'm gonna have to go and masturbate - and then she'll never want me. *cry*