Street Evangelist Tony Miano Arrested Yet Again: Is it about his story or His story?

311 thoughts on “Street Evangelist Tony Miano Arrested Yet Again: Is it about his story or His story?”

1. “As with my last arrest in Wimbledon, sadly we anticipate losing some of our monthly support. Some Christian simply do not understand that there is a cost for following Jesus Christ.”

   Tony takes a Bible verse out of context & completely mangles it. Does Tony think he is Jesus?

   Counting the cost as referenced in the Bible is to count the cost of discipleship (following Jesus) found in Luke 14. Basically, we must think hard about the decision to follow Jesus & what it means. Jesus instructs us to make an informed & educated decision upfront on whether or not we follow Him. Jesus does not bait at the beginning & switch at the end.

   Christians are smarter than Tony Miano thinks they are & we know what “cost for following Jesus” actually means.

   No, the cost for following Jesus is not about funding Tony Miano’s travel & expense account for trips around the world.

   Did Tony himself count his own “costs” or expenses before leaving for Scotland? It doesn’t seem so since he implies there may be a shortfall. This is called: counting on Christian chicken eggs before they are hatched & handed over to Tony.

   LikeLike

2. Just goes to show the sad state of those churches in Scotland. Miano should enter Pubisher’s Clearinghouse sweepstakes, maybe they’ll knock on his door with a ten foot check; as Diane pointed out…leave that memo line blank!
   Today’s Christianity certainly doesn’t look anything like that of the Bible, but then again, why would it? The early church did NOT seek financial gain, they did not abuse the word of God for their own misguided purposes. However, since MOST don’t even bother studying their Bibles, they label junk like this as persecution, and as a ministry. UNREAL is right.

   LikeLike

3. Up North, Please see lyn’s excellent quote in her Jan15 4:40PM comment. This is a great example & description of humility. Not once is worst of the worst, profoundly broken, chief of criminals, vilest of the vile a criteria or prerequisite of humility. See the difference?

   LikeLike

4. “How dare he even solicit donations for himself, let alone his wife!! He purposely brought this on, and now he expects people to PAY for his return trip?! Get real.”

   Maybe his wife is getting tired of funding her husband Tony’s travel & expenses around the world and needs a vacation herself?

   LikeLike

5. A Mom,

   I am sure she is, I cannot fathom going to work while my husband travels all over and does as he pleases. While the rest of the world is working, this is what Miano does – http://www.keek.com/!Nl1pdab
   If that one wasn’t exciting enough for you, watch this – http://www.keek.com/!7Wzpdab

   Now answer me this…WHY would you need to videotape yourself eating, then post it? Thank goodness he doesn’t take that camera into the bathroom!

   THAT is what some people’s money supports; he cannot work because then he could not eat out..which is NOT cheap, but what the heck, it’s on donated money anyway!

   LikeLike

6. “I do agree with you about age. Wisdom is not excluded from young people. There is usually a correlation between age maturity & wisdom, but not always.”

   There’s a reason Protestantism in general has forgotten this point.

   [7] But though the righteous be prevented with death, yet shall he be in rest. [8] For honourable age is not that which standeth in length of time, nor that is measured by number of years. [9] But wisdom is the gray hair unto men, and an unspotted life is old age….[16] Thus the righteous that is dead shall condemn the ungodly which are living; and youth that is soon perfected the many years and old age of the unrighteous.” (Wisdom 4:7-9,16)

   LikeLike

7. Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that Tony Miano is a recently convicted child rapist and murderer who has escaped from prison in the USA and fled to Scotland, whence the USA will soon seek his extradition back to the USA, there to complete his cruel punishment of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Let us also suppose, again for the sake of argument, that he is an unregenerate, heretical, publicity-seeking sufferer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, who, with the primary (or even the sole) intention of getting himself arrested by intolerant cops in our modern UK police state, stood on a street corner shouting over and over again, for half an hour, the controversial phrase, “God hates fags”. Let us suppose that |Tony Miano’s so-called “ministry” is thoroughly bogus and that he formed it solely to line his own pockets at the expense of the gullible. Let us acknowledge that Tony is occasionally impolite when he tweets his detractors. Let us even assume that he has an annoying American accent that causes even Scots to suffer attacks of Irritating Vowel Syndrome.

   Even in this hypothetical scenario, assuming the very worst,, I maintain ;that Police Scotland should not have arrested Tony Miano for alleged “breach of the peace”, on the flimsy evidence the news reports suggest they had.

   I made my decision in childhood that I was going to become and to remain a life-long liberal in tandem with my decision to believe the claims of the Lord Jesus Christ, because I had learnt enough history by the age of ten to know where the illiberal thought patterns exhibited on this web page lead. I am part of the Christian Left.

   Actually, the bible and history helped me to develop into the person I am, especially because of the accounts of genocide and “theocratic” extremes of illiberality in bible times, and on the part of a recent enemy European nation against whom my father fought in World War 2.

   None of the inside knowledge that any of you reassure me that you are privy to, as you dish the dirt on stranger-to-me Tony Miano – be it ill-mannered tweeting, paedophilia, incest, cannibalism or (worse, perish the thought) “homophobia” as rampant as my own, self-outed homophobe as I am (and proud), allays my fear. To paraphrase Will Shakespeare, something is rotten in the state of Scotland. Tony Miano’s arrest, to me, demonstrates that the country I live in has pissed all over the sacrifice that my father made in World War 2, a pacifist at heart willing to make an exception to save the world, doing his bit fighting illiberal control freaks who wanted to take over the world.

   Even if Tony Miano was as horrid as Hitler, I’d still want him to have the freedom to communicate unpopular ideas to crotchety shoppers with sons who “were homosexual” (as though practising homosexuality was akin to an ethnicity, or an innate and immutable disability like – say – Narcissistic Personality Disorder), who bothered to listen, and then phoned the Thought Police. Why? Because the freedom of speech I learnt about as a child, and by reading On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, is something mankind once decided to make a universal freedom. If the people you like to bitch about no longer have it, then nor do you, and nor do I.

   Forget the personalities. Let’s talk about the legalities.

   LikeLike

8. @John Allman, “I am part of the Christian Left.”

   There is no Christian Left. If you are a leftist, you are just a Rabbinic Jew who doesn’t keep the Sabbath or much of any of the rabbinic rules…which is to say, a regular rabbinic Jew.

   And obviously you aren’t too bright if you don’t realize that it is the Left that made the law which allows them to arrest someone for speaking against homosexuality!!!! And you’re really dumb if you don’t know that defense of Freedom of Speech only takes place on the Right. What planet have you been living on all your life? Because it sure isn’t Earth.

   LikeLike

9. I cannot understand how anyone sees this as a loss of freedom of speech, especially when we have the very words of a Pastor from Scotland stating this, “We are not banned from preaching the Word of God, nor are we restricted (for now) in doing so. So whatever else the arrest of Tony Miano means, it is dishonest and wrong for Christians to say this means that the Gospel cannot be preached in Scotland today….” http://5ptsalt.com/2014/01/15/pastor-in-dundee-scotland-to-tony-miano-youre-not-helping-youre-harming-and-crying-wolf/

   This was not an attempt to silence someone’s freedom, it was a deliberate act on Miano’s part, for shouting at a woman in a way that caused her to react the same way she was being treated – “ANTHONY MIANO did behave in a threatening or abusive manner which was likely to cause a reasonable person to suffer fear or alarm in that you did repeatedly shout and utter homophobic remarks” – from the Police report. It was his violent demeanor that got him in trouble, as well as pinpointing a certain sin he should not have singled out.

   Those who truly are in Christ demand no ‘rights’ here, we understand this world is NOT our home. Christ already warns us what to expect, so why act like we have a ‘right’ to anything in this life?

   “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. ” John 15:19
   “All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. ” Hebrews 11:13

   LikeLike

10. The greatest defender of free speech in the U.S. for nearly 100 years has been the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) which is definitely not the typical conservative organization, although they fight to preserve the effectiveness of the U.S. Constitution as amended, and have represented people of every stripe, including, btw, people like the religious crazies that picket military funerals b/c homosexuals have rights in the U.S.

    LikeLike

11. “The greatest defender of free speech in the U.S. for nearly 100 years has been the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)…”

    Only if we are talking about the free speech of criminals, deviants, and non-Christian religious groups. They wouldn’t in a million years defend the free speech of someone arrested for speaking against homosexuality, even if you paid them all the money in the world.

    As for those saying this is not a free speech issue, you are wrong.

    “I cannot understand how anyone sees this as a loss of freedom of speech, especially when we have the very words of a Pastor from Scotland stating this…”

    That pastor saying that probably defines “the gospel” is such a way as to dissect all the morality out of it. Now, I’m no fan of Tony or any other Calvinist, but this is a free speech issue. I’m sure it was more than simply that he said homosexuality is a sin. Probably what really got people’s goats enough to call the cops on him was the determinist crap, but since saying the determinist crap isn’t illegal, they got him arrested for the statement about homosexuality. In fact, it may be he said nothing about homosexuality at all and they only accused him of that to shut him up because they were annoyed by the determinist crap. But the fact remains, arresting someone for saying something is a free speech issue. I’m not going to give him any martyr-points for getting arrested, but at the same time I’m not going to deny that its a free speech issue. Even if free speech should not be allowed to go so far as to allow picketing of residences and businesses and/or screetcing in front of them, its still a freedom of speech issue.

    “…including, btw, people like the religious crazies that picket military funerals b/c homosexuals have rights in the U.S.”

    I think free speech has to have limits, and one limit is no picketing of funerals. In fact, I would ban street preaching quite frankly. If you want to preach, find a church, or just stand on the street corner saying “come hear me speak at such and such place” and maybe hand out a tract. But preaching a screetching sermon on the street corner should be illegal, whether you are preaching homosexual deviancy, Calvinism, Islamic fundamentalism, or the truth, doesn’t matter. Why should people be able to accost you and yell at you on the street? Freedom of speech is the freedom to say what you want, not to accost people and yell at them. And if a street preacher is following people down the street rather than staying perfectly stationary in one spot, he should certainly be arrested for stalking.

    What about freedom of protest? Freedom of protest is to redress greivenances against the government, and should be done in front of government buildings. There should be no right to stand outside someone’s home or business in protest, period. That should be considered trespassing and should be illegal. How then would Christians picket abortion clinics? Don’t picket the abortion clinic. Picket concerning abortion in front of government buildings. That would be more affective at getting the government’s attention anyway.

    LikeLike

12. I’m somewhat dissatisfied with my last comment. I think there is a misconception that Jesus and the apostles were “street preachers” and this needs to be addressed for my comments to make any sense. Nowhere in the New Testament do I find Jesus or Paul just start preaching in the street. In fact, as a matter of prophecy, Isaiah 42:2 says “He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.”

    Typically the preaching is done in the Synagogue, or in the Temple, in front of the Temple, in one of the porticoes of the Temple, by a River or Lake, or from a boat on the Lake. Or it is done in personal contexts. Or somehow it is announced that it will be done in a particular place and time, and people go there to hear it. John the Baptist preached in the wilderness of Judea. Surely, somehow he announced that he was going to be out there–otherwise, how is it that the Synoptics say “Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan…”? How did they know he was out there? How did people find their way to the sermon on the mount, or to the sermon in the wilderness when Jesus fed the 5000 afterwards? None of this was “street preaching” in the screechy yelling at people as they walk out of a store way. Yes, Paul is featured preaching in something called “the marketplace” but the marketplace here was a place of public meeting, more like the food court of a shopping mall than the street. It would be more productive, I would imagine, to talk to a group of people in the food court at the shopping mall than to screetch in the street.

    And back in the first century, and earlier, the “street” was just the outside world, not the sidewalk at your local shopping strip. People walked everywhere they went. Preaching to people on the street was more like preaching to people on the beach. It wasn’t the sort of nuisance it is today where you are getting in the faces of people in a hurry to handle their personal business in the slight and thin-stretched free-time they have between slave-times at work.

    LikeLike

13. Now that I’m thinking about it, does anyone know of any churches where you sit on the shore of the lake while the preacher preaches from a boat? Or where you follow him out in your own boats and listen to him preach from a boat? No wonder Jesus was so effective!! Its such a cool idea.

    LikeLike

14. David,

    Yes, the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of Christians and of extremist conservatives, including once, the right of KKK members to march in a parade. But context is important. If it is an open forum, where other speech is allowed, then speech by any on any subject should be allowed, with limited exceptions such as inciting to riot or advocating the overthrow of the government of the U.S. And, until late in the 20th century, the ACLU was the only organization willing to take on such causes.

    The ACLU is a national organization, but the decisions about cases are made at the state and local level, by attorneys who volunteer their time and who are concerned about preserving our rights under the Constitution of the United States, as Amended.

    A case that involved Skokie, Illinois might be of interest.

    LikeLike

15. “Yes, the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of Christians and of extremist conservatives, including once, the right of KKK members to march in a parade”

    How clever of you to try and map KKK to “conservatives”. Not true. (Dominionists/theonomists) have their own brand of racism called Kinism)

    The KKK was founded and grown by Southern DEMOCRATS. And yes, I am well aware most liberals try to spin that ALL those democrats became republicans. They are shameless in that way

    Liberals have used certain groups as voting blocks for years. It is sad they don’t really want them to be independent financially or independent thinkers.

    LikeLike

16. DAvid, I agree very little “street” preaching went on in the NT. That is “street” preaching as we tend to think of it. Most likely the closest we come to as the same is Mars Hill but that was engaging a specific group on their turf. Not yelling at people in the marketplace.

    I do not see it as a free speech issue because Tony is not a Scottish citizen and I think that matters. He acted as a provocatue.. I would agree with you if he had been arrested here. Although I would hold my nose as I do with other groups who use free speech to be bores. .

    LikeLike

17. Lydia,
    That was the Democrats who had previously been Confederates, which was 140 or so years ago, when the KKK was founded. And the policies of the parties were not then aligned as they are now with political philosophies. In fact, they are totally different. So that argument, which I have seen you make before, is totally irrelevant, ignorant and of no consequence, other than its reflection on you. And I am a registered R, conservative on most matters, libertarian on quite a few, and progressive on a few. But honesty about history and the past is important, or we are at risk of making the mistakes of the past. And we tar people of good will with misrepresentations of who they were or are, rather than being open to knowing and seeking answers to the problems we face as a society.

    LikeLike

18. And I know about theonomists, dominionists, kinism, etc., etc. I was not making the point you are attributing. I was merely pointing out that the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of people we would not call liberal or anti-religion, etc.. And there are cases where the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of Christians seeking to share the gospel.

    LikeLike

19. ” They (ACLU) wouldn’t in a million years defend the free speech of someone arrested for speaking against homosexuality, even if you paid them all the money in the world.”

    Oops! Try this link: http://bit.ly/1kEpJLl

    Spoilers from that page:

    “The ACLU of Louisiana (2006) prevailed in its lawsuit defending the right of a Christian man to exercise his religious and speech rights by protesting against homosexuality in front of a Wal-Mart store with a sign that read: “Christians: Wal-Mart Supports Gay Marriage and Gay Lifestyles. Don’t Shop There.”
    /freespeech/protest/27266prs20061027.html”

    “The ACLU of Missouri (2007) represented Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, whose religious beliefs led her to condemn homosexuality as a sin and insist that God is punishing the United States. ”

    “The ACLU of Florida (2007) argued in favor of the right of Christians to protest against a gay pride event held in the City of St. Petersburg.”

    LikeLike

20. “That was the Democrats who had previously been Confederates, which was 140 or so years ago, when the KKK was founded. ”

    You mean like Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia? He died in 2010 and always got a total pass on his Klan activties by the liberal media. And lets talk about how many democrats voted for the 14th Amendment.

    All that changed when they found a new voting block they could keep in poverty.

    LikeLike

21. Flora: ACLU often perfers to defend whack jobs.

    An attorney, I am shocked to hear you are a “registered” R. I have read many of your comments on TWW and you seem to promote Obama and his policies quite a bit and often present a very liberal economic view. In my state we have to vote our registered party in the .primary. Is it that way in your state?

    I usually vote for the person who seems as if they will “allow” me to keep more of my hard earned money and does not want to choose my doctor for me. So, I guess that would make me a greedy conservative or libertarian. :o)

    LikeLike

22. Up North,

    I find this from Spurgeon very relevant…
    The ministry has been very often degraded into a ‘trade’.

    They are ‘selected by man’, they are crammed with literature;
    they are educated up to a certain point; they are turned out
    ready dressed; and persons call them ‘ministers’.

    I wish them all God-speed, every one of them; for as
    good Joseph Irons used to say, “God be with many of them,
    if it be only to make them hold their tongues.”

    Man-made ministers are of no use in this world,
    and the sooner we get rid of them the better.

    LikeLike

23. Lydia,
    The Affordable Care Act is built around a concept that was developed in a conservative think tank. It preserves the private insurance industry, preserved private hospitals, private practice of medicine by doctors, etc., etc. It was proposed as an alternative to European style health care which is single payer and government administration of the system, which would be the “liberal” or “socialist” alternative.

    I am careful and generally support being honest and telling the truth about those on the other side of an issue. And the mischaracterization of policies that originate in any administration, R or D, is inappropriate. We can never succeed in having the best governance we could have if we do not honestly and fairly evaluate programs and alternatives, regardless of who came up with a particular idea. And we need to ensure that our political systems are as fair to all citizens as they can be.

    An example. I am personally opposed to homosexuality. However, I have known some homosexuals who are among the nicest, most generous and caring people one could meet. I also do not think that LBGT people should be denied their rights as citizens because of their choice of partners in life. I separate my views on civil rights from my views on religion and sin. Because of my way of dealing with these issues, and the same stance by several friends, we were able to witness to a friend, one we interacted with every day for many months, who decided to forego homosexual intimacy and made a profession of faith in Jesus. She said it would not have happened if we had rejected her like other Christians had, or sought to deny her equal rights.

    We all need to learn the lesson of 1 Cor 13, and of other passages, to be more careful in our approach to issues, in our speech, etc., always seeking justice, including equality of opportunity and access. When we are in the public sphere, and people know we claim Christ, we need to be especially gentle in our approach to those with different values and ideas.

    And I can tell you that the traditional liberals do not like the ACA because it was not single payer. It is too conservative a program for them!!!

    LikeLike

24. “The Affordable Care Act is built around a concept that was developed in a conservative think tank.”

    Which think tank and what year? I am sure their paper is available if not too long ago. Got a link? Of course there are many Think Tanks who have white papers on healthcare.

    I get the DNC talking points from a relative who works for them. You know them well.

    LikeLike

25. “And I can tell you that the traditional liberals do not like the ACA because it was not single payer. It is too conservative a program for them!!!”

    How can that be when the IRS was included in the law?

    LikeLike

26. ” It preserves the private insurance industry, preserved private hospitals, private practice of medicine by doctors, etc., etc.”

    No it does not. I know Health Care company CEO’s who will tell you just the opposite. In fact, thinking corporate execs are always so wise is wrong. They were convinced young people would sign right up which has not happened. Without them balancing out the older folks usage, we have a huge problem. However, the penalties have not kicked in yet and they will have to be higher in order to force them to buy the mandated insurance. This is where the IRS will come in real handy.

    “It was proposed as an alternative to European style health care which is single payer and government administration of the system, which would be the “liberal” or “socialist” alternative”

    I wish people would wise up on this. Comparing the US to European countries with single payer is always a problem. There is a HUGE difference between micromanaging the health care of a nation of say 30 million people and micromanaging the health care of 300 million. But then those who think government does things so much better with a lack of choice for citizens– will think it a good thing.

    LikeLike

27. “An example. I am personally opposed to homosexuality. However, I have known some homosexuals who are among the nicest, most generous and caring people one could meet. I also do not think that LBGT people should be denied their rights as citizens because of their choice of partners in life. I separate my views on civil rights from my views on religion and sin. Because of my way of dealing with these issues, and the same stance by several friends, we were able to witness to a friend, one we interacted with every day for many months, who decided to forego homosexual intimacy and made a profession of faith in Jesus. She said it would not have happened if we had rejected her like other Christians had, or sought to deny her equal rights.”

    Where on earth did this come from? I have never given my views on homosexuality here. I am not at all opposed to civil marriages and believe most of the Christian culture war has not only been a huge waste of time but an actual deterrent to many people to even thinking about Christ as Savior.

    However, I am NOT a socialist or collectivist. I am a libertarian. I think the left is a lot like the fundy right. They just want to control different areas of our lives— but both want control over people in the end. Both believe they know what is best for us. Fundamentally the left and religious right are more alike than different when it comes to micromanaging people and thinking they are so smart and know best for others.

    LikeLike

28. What rights are homosexuals being denied? If marriage is a ‘right’ for all, then we need to rip verses out of our bible. Sin is not now nor never been an issue of being a civil right. All sexual immorality outside of marriage between one man and one woman is forbidden {Genesis 2:24}. Adultery is also forbidden; these are matters of civil rights, these are defiant rebellious acts against Almighty God and His word, “Let marriage be had in honour among all, and let the bed be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.” Hebrews 13:4

    Homosexuality is driven by a lust that comes from within the heart, it is a result of the sinner exchanging the ‘natural way’ for that which is unnatural { Romans 1:26-27}. God forbid we make light of sin!

    God defined marriage in Genesis 2:24, no one has a right to re-define what Almighty God has already laid out in His word. Homosexuals do not have a right to marry, for it is against what God has ordained. The good news for all sinners is that Christ died for the ungodly. This may be of some help – http://iamhis-lyn.blogspot.com/2013/03/marriage-defined.html

    It’s also disturbing to state that a sinner is able to ‘forego’ their sins and make a profession of faith, and to state that this would not have happened had she been rejected. It brings to mind this from Acts 26:20, “but kept declaring both to those of Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance. ”
    God saves sinners, by grace. “for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God not of works, that no man should glory”. Ephesians 2:8-9
    No one is able to ‘forego’ sin, why? Because all sin is a bondage, which is exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ teaches in John 8:34, “Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.” How is it somebody can free themselves from something they are enslaved to?

    As a former lesbian, saved solely by His amazing grace, I know how dark this sin is, I know how enslaving it is. I would NOT leave my sin of lesbianism, even though it was a miserable way of life. I cleaved to it with white knuckles;and I KNEW it was wrong. Only the supernatural work of God the Spirit could change my heart. God took His truth and His Spirit regenerated me with that truth. I would never have come to Christ apart from being born again by God. May we not make light of John 3:3, “”Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
    I am not saying this to start a war on free will vs. the doctrines of grace war and I won’t engage in any debate over it – I am telling you what I know; I lived this lie for 14 years. I saw the very dark side of homosexuality, and NO, they are not ‘normal’. These relationships are filled with fits of jealous rage, along with rampant addiction and promiscuity because they are based solely on a selfish lust { Romans 1:27}. You do NOT just ‘forego’ sin on your own power, because you are powerless to stop. There is SO much homosexuals do not tell about this dark lifestyle, I address it at http://iamhis-lyn.blogspot.com/2013/03/what-homosexuals-wont-tell-you.html

    LikeLike

29. Lydia,
    The following provides some background: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/did-a-conservative-think-tank-really-invent-the-individual-mandate/247124/

    LikeLike

30. There is a difference between my religious beliefs and what I believe should be imposed in laws of general application. When we write laws of general application or seek to enforce them, religion should not be determinative of what is or is not legal. People should have equal rights before the law, whether they are sinners or saints. Two adults who freely choose a relationship, and who do not have other contractual restrictions (like an existing marriage contract), should not be criminalized or denied other rights.

    But I do not have to like them or what they do, nor do I have to be particularly nice to them. But if I want to win them over to Christ and convince them to live differently, it is only by befriending them, and treating them with the love that Christ advocated and displayed, that that can be accomplished.

    And I was only using that as an example of doing politics, justice, etc., in the spirit of love that the NT teaches.

    LikeLike

31. Lyn, In this country, and in most of the world, marriage is a legal civil contract, not (only) a religious one, which is created by law and involves certain responsibilities and rights. When the government began issuing marriage licenses and enforcing marriage contracts, marriage was redefined. I have long advocated that the civil marriage statutes and related documents, practices, etc., would be better if we separated the religious concept from the civil concept and called the civil contract something else. But we have hundreds of years of there being two concepts of what marriage means, and those concepts are not now and never will be identical or have the same implications.

    As a lawyer, I see a lot of people who have never graced the doors of a church who are “married”, whether in a civil ceremony or by common law. And I see a lot of people who married in the church. But when the relationships become a problem for them, whether religiously or civilly married, they come seeking a divorce, which is a state law civil suit.

    I always suggest counseling and I offer it myself. But some relationships can never be healed and it is best for all to no longer be legally tied to each other (with liabilities for what the other does and inheritance issues, for example). So that, if the marriage is already dead in the religious sense, I can provide assistance with the legal entity that must be dissolved. And the less contentious we make it, the more likely that some form of future relationship can be maintained between the parties, for the benefit of any children and the safety of society. And I have had couples who I have counseled and helped to be divorced who have come back together after some years and freely remarried, and have thanked me for helping them not to hate each other.

    LikeLike

32. Lyn (19. 9:44pm): Because I was in the arts for a long time, I knew a brashly promiscuous gay man and two life-long partner gays. I also knew a lesbian couple of which one wanted an affair with me. Last, I knew a gay man who, after 16 years’ marriage, ended up in a psychiatric hospital. Of those five, the closeted gay and one life-long partner gay were believers. From my observations, the gay subculture is full of the same kinds of garbage and excellence that all culture is, just writ extreme because it has been treated with contempt for so long.

    If we loved them as we are commanded to do, there would be more believers among them, of that I am certain.

    LikeLike

33. Lydia (19, 9:20pm), I like the “collectivism” that is an aspect of democracy. I want our government to only respond to the will of the collected citizens. That would mean that most of us don’t get our way on some things but get what we want on others. (Of course, it only works if the populace is informed on the issues and if the gov’t isn’t captured by monied-interests, both of which we don’t have.)

    I also like “collectivism” inside specific businesses. There is, for eg, a group called Mondragon in Spain that is owned by the workers. It is going well and its owners are quite happy. In a country that is seeing nearly 50% unemployment among the college-aged, they are having a hard time of it but managing so far, which is amazing. This idea seems to me more about bringing democracy into the business model than it is the tried&failed systems of socialism/communism. I think it’s a great way to keep the authority with the individual rather than with those who tend to power-monger at the top.

    LikeLike

34. Lydia (19, 9:20pm), follow up comment. I think some ideas in libertarianism are very good, especially their desire to return to local governance. I do not think it best to have total local but an emphasis towards such. Mondragon-type businesses are that way—when a business is worker-owned, the concerns of the community will be emphasized because the decisions are made by people who live there.

    I think capitalism has succeeded as long as it has because it understands that people are self-interested, whereas communism sees people as basically good-hearted, which ideology slides tout de suite into fascism. Humans are a blend of the two, so the most workable systems (no system can work perfectly and every bureaucracy inevitably grows until it falls under it’s own weight) will be structured for both facts.

    My opinions are not hugely common among the left, but there are quite a few of us. Just to say that there are also sensible people on both ends and I wish with all my heart that we could find ways to reach over to each other for the good of all.

    LikeLike

35. “Lydia (19, 9:20pm), I like the “collectivism” that is an aspect of democracy. I want our government to only respond to the will of the collected citizens.”

    It is a good thing you were not black in the South for much of this country’s life. eh? There is a reason we are a representative democracy.

    “That would mean that most of us don’t get our way on some things but get what we want on others. (Of course, it only works if the populace is informed on the issues and if the gov’t isn’t captured by monied-interests, both of which we don’t have.)”

    It is not about “getting my way”. It is about the principle of individual freedom and not being micromanaged by a government that could care less about you. When you give up those freedoms for what you perceive as security, you get neither. And it is an interesting endeavor to look at the huge money interests in this country. You might be surprised what sort of government they support because they are protected. Limo liberals are not rare at all. In fact, Wall Street is full of them. The independent small businessperson is becoming extinct.

    Don’t worry, collectivism has won so your likes are safe.

    You know who tried collectivism to grow a new democratic country and found it does not work? Israel. They had to give it up. They had too many in the collective who did not pull their weight and it fell on the shoulders of a few who were the producers who got tired.

    And ironically it was only AFTER they gave up collectivism they were able to allow folks in who could not produce and care for them because during collectivism they only wanted those who could produce for the collective and keep the other out. The individual only mattered based on what they could produce. But they found that did not really matter. Many resented the system. That is the thinking that comes with collectivism. It is only natural. If you want to see the history of collectivist thinking, try watching the trajectory of the Soviet Union and how well it worked.

    Those on disability and those have other serious needs for help in our country need to remember that only an expanding tax base is their safety net. A shrinking one is what they should fear— if they are smart. Government can only get money from the people.

    Collectivism ends up NOT caring for those who really need the help. That is the nasty reality many are ignoring. And it is even worse if there is an oligarchy which we have.

    Why would “informed” citizens think it a good thing that the folks who passed this mandated law are EXEMPT from it?

    LikeLike

36. An Attorney, The “Atlantic”, really?

    Do you know how many Think Tanks have produced white papers on Health Care? Let us note it was from 1989 and it was concerning this as mentioned very briefly in the article:

    “Taranto adds that “the Heritage mandate, at least in theory, would have been less burdensome than the ObamaCare one,” since it demanded only coverage of catastrophic conditions, but that “the Heritage mandate was indistinguishable in principle from the ObamaCare one.”

    Catastrophic conditions. Big difference from micromanaging every aspect of your health care from choosing your doctor for you. And I would love to read the paper and see if the author recommended the IRS to be the mandated collector of your catastrophic care policy.

    Guess who sponsored the HMO bill of 1973? Ted Kennedy. And that started us down this road of government in every nook and cranny of our health care from the provider end. It was horrible law whose supposed answers to the problem ended up giving us hospital dispensed aspirins at 30 bucks a pill. Why should we care what an aspirin at the hospital costs? The HMO was paying not us. (Dumb thinking)

    We never seem to learn that government really does not care about individual people. They only care about the collective which is not the same. Check it out in the Soviet Union which tried to micromanage a huge population, too.

    LikeLike

37. Patrice, there has never been such a thing as “Communism” practiced as a nation state. It has only been used as a moniker and is actually a form of totalitarianism using the collective as a model. Of course an oligarchy is needed to oversee the collective but is not part of the collective. It is an elite who oversee the collective model.

    It has nothing to do with individual freedom where individual freedom is the price one pays to have a collective with an oligarchy to oversee it. It is really no different than what some are doing in churches to control people as a “spiritual” oligarchy.

    We cannot bubble wrap ourselves in security whether it is spiritual or economic. The worst thing we can do is teach people to not even try to be responsible for either spiritual or economic growth and that someone else will do it for them.

    LikeLike

38. “As a former lesbian, saved solely by His amazing grace, I know how dark this sin is, I know how enslaving it is”

    Lyn, Praise God for your deliverance! I agree with you that many folks really do NOT understand the dark side. There is a political movement, very organized and wealthy, that works to force it as an acceptable lifestyle that keeps many in bondage. I don’t think we are going to win “fighting” them.

    My position is that the way we have approached the culture war has been a huge disaster and actually driven more people into stubbornly embracing such things. I liken it to how my mom used to handle my less than acceptable friends or boyfriends. Instead of trying to keep me from them, she invited them in. She accepted them where they were and loved them. Only then did I see the real problem and back off myself. Her love for people actually helped some of them rethink their choices. And I think this can only happen in individual relationships not the government.

    It is like the sin of abortion in a way. We cannot legislate it away. But perhaps we can “love” it away so that it becomes more and more rare. In fact, just that sort of thing has happened in some areas.

    LikeLike

39. Lydia – what? As a liberal I am NOT happy that a single payer option was dropped in favor of the individual mandate. It was a blatant cave-in to the insurance industry. Most doctors I know are in favor of a single payer option. They want to treat people, not deal with a patchwork of insurance plans.

    Also:
    “It is a good thing you were not black in the South for much of this country’s life. eh? There is a reason we are a representative democracy. ”

    I wish people conservatives would stop appropriating the civil rights struggle like this.You know that “Communist” was a label attached to all civil rights workers, don’t you? It wasn’t socialized medicine or Head Start lynching people in the South – it was people who hated the federal government and “collectivism” as much as you do.

    Some Martin Luther King, Jr quotes for you:

    “Many white Americans of good will have never connected bigotry with economic exploitation. They have deplored prejudice but tolerated or ignored economic injustice.”

    “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.”

    “The dispossessed of this nation — the poor, both white and Negro — live in a cruelly unjust society. They must organize a revolution against that injustice, not against the lives of the persons who are their fellow citizens, but against the structures through which the society is refusing to take means which have been called for, and which are at hand, to lift the load of poverty.”

    I suppose you’ll demonstrate the same willingness to deal with the facts as when I posted a link to voluminous list of cases where the ACLU defended the rights of religious folks… but oh well. Bad case of SIWOTI I guess.

    Anyway, I don’t see any real conflict between social democracy and freedom of conscience. At all.

    LikeLike

40. “I wish people conservatives would stop appropriating the civil rights struggle like this.You know that “Communist” was a label attached to all civil rights workers, don’t you? It wasn’t socialized medicine or Head Start lynching people in the South – it was people who hated the federal government and “collectivism” as much as you do.”

    Flora, I cannot help what “labels” people give groups. If you want to conclude I “hate” government there is little I can do about that. I am simply discussing the over reaching “role” of government and its encroachments on our individual lives and liberties. We have to have some government. The question is how much and to what end. I want good roads and to be defended from invasion, too.

    “I suppose you’ll demonstrate the same willingness to deal with the facts as when I posted a link to voluminous list of cases where the ACLU defended the rights of religious folks… but oh well. Bad case of SIWOTI I guess.”

    Flora, I thought I made it clear I thought the ACLU chose very bizarre “religious” cases to defend. And fascists too, as in Skokie. For the life of me, I cannot understand why you want to lump me in with them. But I guess that is the way it works these days and why we cannot discuss policy. It is too easy to automatically make it about those who disagree as greedy and hateful. It works as we can see.

    “Many white Americans of good will have never connected bigotry with economic exploitation. They have deplored prejudice but tolerated or ignored economic injustice”

    If we had listened to Dr. King about character instead of color, things might have been different and so many would not have been kept down as a voting block. There is such a thing as soft discrimination. You tell a person how incapable they are and have to stay dependent on others and they believe it.

    I think Booker T Washington had the answer long ago. He said the real color barrier over time was really “green” and encouraged African Americans to be the best at a trade or business. It would serve to overcome more prejudice than anything else as people will eventually want the best quality at the best price. His goal at Tuscaloosa was just that. Guess who stood in his way the most? White people? No. It was black pastors who wanted to keep them ignorant and dependent giving a portion of what little they earned to them.

    Some things don’t change whether black or white. :o)

    LikeLike

41. “Anyway, I don’t see any real conflict between social democracy and freedom of conscience. ”

    Perhaps you will see it when it is deemed inefficient to give grandpa a pacemaker because he is over 80. There won’t be a “choice”.

    LikeLike

42. Patrice,
    True biblical love points the sinner to their sins, then to Christ. I am not called to embrace sin of any kind, rather to expose it for what it is and speak of Christ. Sadly, biblical love is not rightly understood. Not everything that labels itself as Christian truly is- for example – Westboro Baptist Church and Fred Phelps.
    Homosexuality is not a ‘special’ sin, and it does breed other sins as well. Anyone who is outside of Christ will only continually sin, regardless of the ‘sins of choice’.
    It is not possible to purposely stay in sin; a careful study of 1 John 3 proves such.
    This is why the new birth is so essential, God must change the heart – Ezekiel 36:26-27; John 1:13, 3:3; Gal. 6:15. Every day of the believer’s life on this earth is spent in a spiritual battle against sin; the world, Satan, and the flesh are constantly against the believer. There is no such thing as a ‘gay Christian’, for the Bible is clear about this – Psalm 34:14; Isa. 55:7; Col. 3:5-9 as well as this from 1 Cor. 6:9-11; particularly verse 11, ‘and such were some of you’. Homosexuality is not a matter of rights, it is a sexual sin chosen by those who delve into it. True followers of Christ do not shy away from calling sin what it is, nor do they fail to speak of Christ and His finished work. When sin is no longer defined biblically, you have what we currenty see; a society that calls evil good and good evil.
    I do not hate homosexuals, no true born again believer does; nor do I consider myself in a battle with them. I don’t think laws will change anybody, only the power of God can change a heart enslaved to sin {Romans 1:16}. If you truly love sinners, you will give them the whole counsel of God…the truth. Regardless of man’s attempt to re-define what God has already defined, I cannot accept what goes against the word of God.

    LikeLike

43. Lyn

    The references in much of the NT translated as homosexual or with terms that to us refer to homosexuality are more likely to pederasty, the cultural phenomenon of the time for men to take a boy for his sexual pleasure. In other words, child abusers.

    LikeLike

44. The reference to the Atlantic was because it was the first in a Google search, and my time was and is limited. I have had two clients this holiday morning who need my help with legal matters, both of the pro bono. One military needing paperwork to make her mother guardian of two children while she serves. The other having a screwed up health insurance situation resulting in huge medical bills that he cannot pay unless he sells his only asset, a house he inherited and lives in with his mentally ill wife. Some things are more important that finding a reference that your bias will not reject outside of hand.

    The individual mandate had been proposed before the late ’80s by people on the right, in part at the behest of the health insurance industry. I worked in the Congress in the late ’70s, and my area included health policy. Among other things, we found a way to get a funding test done for hospice care under Medicare and Medicaid, and it proved less expensive that hospitalization for cases that were beyond cure and in palliative care only, which was our reason for pursuing that.

    I believe the first president to suggest an individual or employer mandate for health insurance was Richard Nixon. I know that Reagan endorsed the idea, as did the first Bush. And the initial mandate that was adopted was recommended by Romney, the Republican governor.

    The mandatory insurance concept has been the conservative position (not the libertarian one) for a long time, b/c the alternative would be a single payer system like an expansion of Medicare and Medicaid to cover, respectively, those who can pay and those who cannot.

    LikeLike

45. Attorney, I respectfully disagree; my response would be too lengthy to post here; however, I do address this very thing at http://iamhis-lyn.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-does-arsenokoites-really-mean.html as well as http://iamhis-lyn.blogspot.com/2013/03/men-with-men.html

    I have heard the homosexual defense you are using, I encourage you to visit the links provided.

    LikeLike

46. Lydia (20, 7:44am) wrote: “Patrice, there has never been such a thing as “Communism” practiced as a nation state. It has only been used as a moniker and is actually a form of totalitarianism using the collective as a model.”

    I agree. I wrote same but apparently not clearly, using the word “fascism” instead of “totalitarianism”.

    You wrote: “The worst thing we can do is teach people to not even try to be responsible for either spiritual or economic growth and that someone else will do it for them.”

    I think that is one of the three worst things we can do. The second is to make people responsible for everything with no livable return. The third is to not adequately care for those in the group who are in genuine need.

    LikeLike

47. “Among other things, we found a way to get a funding test done for hospice care under Medicare and Medicaid, and it proved less expensive that hospitalization for cases that were beyond cure and in palliative care only, which was our reason for pursuing that.”

    This is the kind of thing that scares me. lawyers (consulting government doctors?) compiling a “test” for to see if Hospice should be paid for or not by government benefits. Why wouldn’t their personal doctor know best? Oh yes, I forgot. When the government is involved, the decision has to come from Washington. I expect to see much more of this “one size fits all” approach to medicine and health care. Past 60? No transplant for you. Of course they won’t tell you this but all sorts of fancy terms will be defined to deny care and most who believe government serves them best will simply believe it with no opportunity for a second opinion. The government has spoken. We have been lulled into a third party system for so long we don’t even know what a doctor visit costs. All we care about is what is our co pay. And the doctor reimbursement was negotiated by the insurance company.

    I don’t doubt your scenario with Nixon. He formed the EPA, too. He was much more liberal than most left wingers give him credit for. He is a popular whipping boy, though. And considering we have just been defrauded royally with lies, amazing too!

    As to the rest of it, you make a compelling case that conservatives were on the forefront of government involvement in medicine. Of course that is the DNC talking points at their best.

    I am simply amazed at how gullible people are about government micromanaging their health care. Especially since those who MANDATED this exempted themselves. If that is not Oligarchy I don’t know what is.

    LikeLike

48. “I think that is one of the three worst things we can do. The second is to make people responsible for everything with no livable return.”

    That is one of the problems with socialism or collectivism is it does not produce “Liberty or the Pursuit of Happiness” because it is mapped out for you in many cases. Socialism can be practiced on a smaller scale and do ok like Sweden, etc. (Things are not that rosy though in real life but it is their normal) To think we can do that here with 300 million people is ridiculous and will require a bureaucracy (which produces nothing) 10x what we see now. Besides it will put many small businesses out of business. Already is doing that now. And we have an illegal population which is more than happy to come here and do the jobs more and more American refuse to do like roofing, etc.

    “The third is to not adequately care for those in the group who are in genuine need.”

    I agree with this one. Problem is we have been creating a dependent class who for far too many years who are able but we have convinced them they are not competent and need the Oligarchy to survive. It is horrid and corrupt. I was hoping electing Obama would help change that mindset. But we got Obamaphones. And Cash for Clunkers.

    LikeLike

49. “Some things are more important that finding a reference that your bias will not reject outside of hand.”

    Attorney, How do you know that others here do not go good works, too, but feel no need to brag about them on blogs? There was no “time limit” imposed on your link so not sure why you felt the need to say that. I am simply questioning your assertions here. Does that offend you? I have read them too often in DNC talking points not to question them.

    LikeLike

50. Lydia,
    Hospice care was not allowed to be covered by Medicare or Medicaid prior to the funding test. The issue was whether it should be allowed. There was a provision in the law that allowed the agency to do a test to see if a new or alternative treatment would be as good as or better than an existing treatment, and if so to then add it to the list of treatments and facilities covered by the insurance. In this case, hospice was considered better b/c it is more humane (no need to test for whether the metastatic cancer is causing the new pain before treating it), and less expensive (less hospitalization at expensive facilities, fewer tests). So the result of the test was allowing doctors and their patients/families to elect hospice care where before the Medicaid and Medicare would not have paid for it, even for those already covered by those programs for hospitalization.

    LikeLike

51. And at the time, I was not an attorney. I became an attorney 20+ years later. And when you challenge me, expect be to come back at you. I spend more than half my time working for the poor who cannot pay, and more of my net income comes from the Social Security check I get as an over 65 year old than from working 60 plus hours a week helping the poor. Get off my case. I live my faith and work every day to carry out the directions Jesus gave us in Matthew 25. And I am politically active from a conservative viewpoint, but understanding that truth is more important than winning, and compassion more important that being respected or feared.

    LikeLike

52. And I am tired of reading your diime store bias which results in distortion of the facts for political advantage, It is a Rush Limbaugh form of argument, which is nothing but bombast.

    LikeLike

53. Flora Poste,

    When Jesus was here, he made it clear that to give to the government what belongs to the government, but to give to God what belongs to God.

    Our government should stay out of the health care business, period.

    When Jesus talked about the poor, when charity is discussed, it is all “individual”, not governmental. Dip into your own pocket book to give to the poor. Do not mandate that the government dips into your pocket book involuntarily to give to something that your own conscience disagrees with. Jesus was about the Kingdom of God, not the Kingdom of man. The two kingdoms are different. The poor, we will always have. What you do as an individual is what is judged by God. What our government does collectively has nothing to do with any of this at all.

    Blessed are the poor in spirit…not poor in pocket book. One old woman gave to God all she had…a penny. She gave more than the rich gave.

    I don’t want our government running our lives, dictating to me where my charity goes. That is my decision to make, not the governments decision. Liberals want to take MY money, and distribute MY money to something that I disagree with. And, I am sure that your money is distributed to what you disagree with. Social injustice, or justice, is different than civil rights of the 60’s, as far as I am concerned.

    Ed

    LikeLike

54. An Attorney,
    I love Rush…I love Hannity…I love Levine…need I say more? Government needs to stay out of my pocket book.

    I served many years in the US Navy…and I can tell you first hand that the liberal side of the house and senate could really care less about the troops. They are all talk and no action. Except for ONE…NORM DICKS, now retired. His main office is just a block away from me.

    Ed

    LikeLike

55. “Hospice care was not allowed to be covered by Medicare or Medicaid prior to the funding test.”

    You just made my point for me. Government did not allow it and then government decided to allow it with a test. So just maybe one could qualify. Government, Government, Government making the decisions for people and their doctor.

    LikeLike

56. ” I spend more than half my time working for the poor who cannot pay, and more of my net income comes from the Social Security check I get as an over 65 year old than from working 60 plus hours a week helping the poor. Get off my case. I live my faith and work every day to carry out the directions Jesus gave us in Matthew 25. And I am politically active from a conservative viewpoint, but understanding that truth is more important than winning, and compassion more important that being respected or feared.”

    Yet, you ignore Matthew 6. Strange.

    LikeLike

57. At what point did Jesus ever tell Ceazar to give government funds to the poor? Or did he tell individuals to give from their own heart? Even the Apostle Paul made note of what Christians do for widows, and for children taking care of their own elderly parents…NOT NOT NOT not relying on Government.

    LikeLike

58. I think this is a first here at SSB: discussing government/politics. It’s getting a little heated and personal. Let’s tone it back a bit and definitely cool it on the personal jabs. Thanks!

    LikeLike

59. Lydia,
    YOUR LAST COMMENT IS A BALD FACED LIE ABOUT ME. PLEASE STOP ATTACKING ME. OR I WILL HAVE TO RESPOND.

    LikeLike

60. I feel the need to throw in a little morning Miano. Someone sent me this. I’m not a fan of Toronto Blessing and all of that hype, but look at Miano’s words:

    https://twitter.com/TonyMiano/status/425543799817781248

    LikeLike

61. Attorney, I do not know you. I responded to your own words written here. So when one “yells” in caps and threatens to “respond” it is time for me to leave the thread as JA has asked us to tone it down. Let us go in peace even while we disagree. :o)

    LikeLike

62. Julia Anne – re: video above – What a bunch of FOOLISHNESS!! I’m assuming you threw that in there for comic relief. . .

    LikeLike

63. Carmen: I find both the video and Tony’s words disturbing.

    LikeLike

64. JA – yup, disturbing is right . . .I could have put a couple of colourful adjectives in front of the word foolishness, too. …but I remembered that I’m not even supposed to call Tony by another four-letter word that starts with ‘D’ . . . wicked grin . ..

    LikeLike

65. LOL – – You can send me whatever colorful expression you want in private e-mail, Carmen 🙂

    LikeLike

66. JA,
    As for my part in the politics, Matthew 25 (Religion) is always used as a means to split, or divide “individual” “Good Works” (Religion) vs. Government “Taxes” (Politics). I was only trying to distinguish between the two, in order to bring it back to the “spiritual” side of the house. When I meet Jesus, I will not be judged by how I was a political activist, but by how I gave, from my own pocket, to an individual in need. It isn’t the government that visits the widow, or those in jail…well, scratch that last one. If the government visits someone in jail…you have the right to remain silent. LOL! Matthew 25 is not for Government.

    Ed

    LikeLike

67. Ed – – I’m just taking note that you get out of dodge and then conveniently come back during a political hot topic 😉

    Good to see you! Hope you are well.

    ja

    LikeLike

68. You know me…I am always up for a heated topic. Politics and Religion, my two favorite topics. Speaking of Portland Wrestling…I’m not into the conspiracy theory stuff (Jesse Ventura), either, as some political activists are. Very busy working and working some more, so I pop in and out when I can.

    Ed

    LikeLike

69. Speaking of Portland Wrestling – haha – – my most boring nights of babysitting as a teen were on Saturday nights were watching Portland Wrestling – – after Love Boat and Fantasy Island – – because nothing else was on tv – -you know the kind of TV with rabbit ears and you’d have to get up out of your chair to turn the station. We’re old, Ed.

    LikeLike

70. Oh, the memories…remember having to “slap” the TV, thinking that would fix the reception? Oh, funny stuff!!

    LikeLike

71. Or get the aluminum foil to wrap on the coat hangers to get rid of the snow. HA! Our kids don’t have a clue.

    LikeLike

72. JA said:
    “Our kids don’t have a clue.”

    My response: I think about that all the time. 8 Track tapes, and Record Players. I’ve seen the youngsters on YouTube asking what a 45 is…Oh, my Gosh.

    LikeLike

73. Funny – I had an Earth, Wind, and Fire album that I played like crazy. It had a skip in it and so of course every time I played it, I got used to the skip. I remember years later hearing that same song and wondered why it sounded so different to me – – no skip. We just suffered with that kind of stuff. Oh, and heaven forbid you leave an album in the direct sunlight and it got warped.

    Oh, Ed, do you remember there was a popular song that “they” said if you played it backwards, had some secret evil message? What song was that? How in the world did the rumor get around so effectively with no internet?

    LikeLike

74. I think it the Beatles started that. Cant remember the song. But Led Zeppelin had one, too…again, can’t remember it. Pink Floyd did one, too in the Albumn “The Wall”. It was all in fun, to be a money maker thing, but the Christian world turned it into some sort of weird evil witch craft thing. Oh, us Christians…always looking for evil where evil isn’t.

    LikeLike

75. I remember an interview that Ozzy Osbourne had in which some goody two shoe Christians were accusing Ozzy of worshiping Satan. His response: “I can’t hardly conjure myself out of bed in the morning, let alone the devil.”

    LikeLike

76. That’s funny. Ok, that’s really funny. I never heard that one, but I did not follow hard rock groups either – – or I tried not to. I went to a Catholic HS and in the cafeteria at lunch they blasted hard rock music, of all things. I was rejoicing during spirit week when they played 50s music. My mom gave me all her old 45s and I loved them.

    LikeLike

77. Well, I didn’t start in the hard rock stuff until I moved to Auburn in 1980, shortly after Mt. St. Helens blew, and started listening to Seattle Rock stations. AC/DC is my all time favorite band…lead singer in his mid 60’s now, still going strong. Seen them in concert 3 times so far. But, got to see the Rolling Stones in 1981 at the King Dome. And the list goes on. There was a Ticket Master right across the parking lot from where I worked at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard…very convenient. In 2012 Led Zeppelin was honored at the Kennedy Center, and Heart (Seen them, too…from Seattle) sung Stairway to heaven…brought the band members of Led Zeppelin to tears…literally. It was THAT GOOD. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf2O3OAQjng

    LikeLike

78. Ed, I saw that video for the first time a few months ago and thanks for giving me another excuse to watch it again. That is a superb arrangement and the choral nerd in me says of course it brought them to tears – – they added the element of a choir of human voices to the new mix. It really was THAT GOOD. It brought chills to me both times, and my ears are picky about when the “chills switch” gets to turn on 🙂

    LikeLike

79. Chapmaned24, when you’ve worked out a way for the “dip into your own pocketbook” theory to feed/clothe the disabled and poverty-stricken in this nation, let me know. Maybe you can finagle Jesus to come back and do his miracle with the loaves/fishes. That’d be sweet.

    But until then, I am hugely grateful to this nation for giving me SSD plus Medicare so that I can live while disabled. Funny thing is, even my family doesn’t want to help me in any kind of consistent way, while they also talk up the “pocketbook dip” and “church charity” theories.

    LikeLike

80. Patrice…If Every Christian did as Jesus asked, there would be no need for government to interfere. I say that we look at ourselves in the mirror before we seek the government to help. There was a time that Medicare did not exist. How did this nation survive? Actually, the funny thing is, once you become dependent on government, it is hard to realize that you can live without it. It is one thing to have a hand up, but it is another thing to have a hand out. Besides, Social Security is deducted from your paycheck…it was yours to begin with…your money, not the governments money.

    But, getting back to Jesus…His point was about YOU giving, not the government giving. If YOU see a need…YOU fill a need. YOU are the one who loves your neighbor, and are judged by how YOU love. The government is not judged on judgment day. What did YOU do in good works, not what did the government do for it’s citizens. Did YOU feed the hungry? Did YOU clothe the naked? Did YOU visit those in jail? Did YOU give someone who is thirsty a drink of water?

    Or will you just say to those people…”I am petitioning for the government for you”, or “I’ll pray for you brother!”, without action to fill the need? How many needy people have YOU bypassed, with an attitude that the government is going to solve the problem? Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. Give to God what belongs to God. Taxes vs. giving from your own heart. The Kingdom of God vs. the kingdom of man.

    Look UP, not out.

    Ed

    LikeLike

81. If Every Christian did as Jesus asked, there would be no need for government to interfere. I say that we look at ourselves in the mirror before we seek the government to help.

    One of the most startling discoveries since blogging is the fate of abused wives in church. Many church leaders refuse to get involved with failing marriages due to abuse. They may get involved if it involves abandonment or adultery, because some leaders believe those are the only 2 reasons a spouse can get divorced. But for the emotionally, physically, or spiritually battered woman, she is often alone. How does a woman who has been a stay-at-home mom get on her 2 feet after being out of the workforce, not having a degree, etc? So, not only does she get battered by her husband now the church has abandoned her.

    LikeLike

82. chapmaned24 Considering the ratio of Christians to general population, we’re talking about completely empty pocketbooks, if you mean what you say. We live in a nation that is not itself Christian, right?

    Moreover, how many of these Christians are more than “so-called”, or are more than halfway to maturity? My family is considered fine upstanding believers, elders/deacons respected in the community. (Even my abusing father was seen as a fine respectable pastor.) So, of those who are church members, what percentage takes charity seriously enough to do the job? As it stands, there’s not enough to cover even the Christians who are disabled and poverty-stricken! And don’t forget, one-time gifts do not cover the requirements to modestly support disabled people (for eg) for the rest of their lives. And if you also want to add medical costs to that, the church is sunk!

    My retirement came from Social Security, but disability, by it’s very nature, is prematurely delivered and medically expensive. People like me drain those coffers and I don’t know why it must be set up that way.

    Thus, as good as your idea sounds, it is deeply impractical. To want to institute such a system because there are those who manipulate the one we have, is not only overkill but also inadequate. Wouldn’t it be better if, for eg, we set our retired professionals to the job of rooting out the corruptions of the system we already have? It is our system, after all.

    And for all the way-too-many legitimate complaints about corruption-in-government, it is also true that Social Security and Medicare (as also the post office) are very efficiently run. So it’s not that gov’t run systems can never work.

    LikeLike

83. So, of those who are church members, what percentage takes charity seriously enough to do the job?

    Well, then you have the churches have their building fund drive, and the mission outreach fundraisers, Christian conferences, etc. Who has money left over to care for the widows, children, disabled?

    LikeLike

84. An Attorney said:
    “The references in much of the NT translated as homosexual or with terms that to us refer to homosexuality are more likely to pederasty, the cultural phenomenon of the time for men to take a boy for his sexual pleasure. In other words, child abusers.”

    My response:
    This is almost like the classic case that is often heard, “Jesus never spoke about homosexuality”, blah, blah, blah.

    But he did, when he spoke of what marriage is, when he was discussing the topic of divorce.

    Mark 10:6-8
    6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

    7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

    8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

    But…if that isn’t enough, this is spelled out pretty plainly, so as not to have any room for ambiguity:

    Romans 1:24-27 (Key words, “Nature”, “Natural”, “Vile”, “Lust”, “Error”, “Unseemly”)
    24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

    25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

    26 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:

    27 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 recompence of their error which was meet.

    Think of that verse from a speaking computer voice, repeating the word, “ERROR, ERROR, ERROR…DOES NOT COMPUTE…ERROR, ERROR, ERROR”.

    Now, if anyone wishes to counter this with “mistranslation” of Greek words, I’m game.

    Ed

    LikeLike

85. Julie Anne and Patrice,

    Yes, you see the mess that our government has gotten us into? We are all poor now, because of our government, because we relied on our government to take care of us, cradle to grave. We allowed that. Now look at us.

    If you go back to the Old Test and read about the children of Israel in the desert, always groaning that they want what other nations have, they want to go back to Egypt, because they had it so much better in Egypt being slaves…good food, etc.

    They got sick and tired of the Manna, and wanted meat. Well, God gave them what they demanded, until it was coming out of their nostrils.

    If God is telling you to seek help from the Government, then by all means, please seek the government. But the Bible tells us to seek ye first the Kingdom of God. God places PEOPLE in our path’s, not government.

    It is OK to seek HELP from government, don’t get me wrong here. But it is NOT OK to be dependent on government. We are to PURSUE our happiness, not to have it handed down to us from the government.

    We, as Americans, have strayed too far from what our founding fathers had intended.

    Again, hand ups are a lot different than hand outs.

    Ed

    LikeLike

86. chapmaned24, Julie Anne points to another problem. We need clearly established best-practices for the problems among us. When it is always left to the local group, the wheel will need to be continually reinvented (or not invented at all) because who is familiar with such things as domestic abuse and the extent of disability for all the various kinds of short-term and chronic medical and mental disorders/diseases?

    Check out the naïve pastor in the vid at this post by Boz: http://boz.religionnews.com/2014/01/21/caught-tape-5-common-responses-sex-offenders-church/#comment-238

    I wouldn’t want such a man to determine how disabled a vet is after arriving back home from war. In the same way, I wouldn’t expect a local congregation of middle class people to understand the complexities of poverty in a city to which they are suburb. We cannot all be specialists, nor should we be. We need best knowledge; we can choose among us those who are competent in their field to make such decisions. Not that it will be perfectly administered, but a system of best-practices is much more likely to do an adequate job than that which you propose.

    LikeLike

87. Chapmaned24, if you think we are in economic trouble because of gov’t hand-outs to the poor/disabled, you are not getting accurate information. Our media does a terrible job these days—it is a travesty.

    We are not talking about ancient Israel where religion and state were the same. Now we have church and state, separate systems run by different priorities. Our gov’t is a democratic republic, supposedly (yah) working for the good of all at our behest.

    Moreover, to allow our disabled and poverty-stricken to live is not to plop happiness onto them at everyone’s expense. Giving them enough to be safe and free from hunger, allows them to pursue happiness in the way that the rest of us are allowed. I think you do not understand how overwhelming and all-consuming it is not to have enough to eat or a safe place to live.

    LikeLike

88. Ugh, Tony is at it again and I can’t keep my fingers from responding. Help me!

    https://twitter.com/TonyMiano/status/425948165431250944

    LikeLike

89. If God is telling you to seek help from the Government, then by all means, please seek the government. But the Bible tells us to seek ye first the Kingdom of God. God places PEOPLE in our path’s, not government.

    Ed, are you missing the point that people are seeking help from church and getting abandoned emotionally, physically, financially, and spiritually? If you are a mom with kiddos, and you need food/shelter and the church has abandoned you, then what?

    LikeLike

90. JA, I think it’s great that you keep jabbing at him. I don’t know where that line is for you personally, but when people don’t consistently register complaint, then everyone ends up thinking the loudmouthed stupidity is standard Christianity, and in the church the line for acceptable behavior moves slowly over to that absurd radical rudeness.

    I thank you with all my heart because I can only do a little here/there where I can, because my dang illnesses lay me into bed for days at a time.

    LikeLike

91. Patrice, I whole heatedly disagree with your premise about our government…Big time. What is stated in the carnal (Ancient Israel) is to be interpreted in the spiritual (present day Christians). You cannot dismiss Ancient Israel…not now, not ever. Our problem is, is that we ditch ancient Israel, and decide to do things our own way, instead of God’s way, thinking in error that what we are doing is God’s way.

    I have been a political junkie since the Richard Nixon’s days. I was active duty navy for many years. Our government is broke. And it’s our own fault, as a nation. We allowed it. And we can’t continue down this path of cradle to grave assistance getting loans from China. When you get down to it, China is paying your social security…not America.

    The bible tells us how to get other nations to borrow from us…yes, from them old Ancient Israel writings.

    The Apostle Paul was a maker of tents for sailing ships by trade. He had a physician named Luke…a doctor.

    I think that our conversation has took a major turn, however…as I was discussing Matthew 25, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving drink to the thirsty, visiting the sick, and those in jail. Those are in Matthew 25. Those are not the responsibility of the Government. It’s YOUR responsibility.

    Jesus made it clear that what belongs to Ceasor give to him, but what belongs to God to give to him. Personal responsibility, vs. Government responsibility.

    If you have a beef with this, take it up with Jesus. Tell him to feed the 5,000/4,000 with the fishes and loaves. Tell him to heal the sick and perform miracles. But don’t expect that from the government. We are Taxed Enough Already.

    Ed

    LikeLike

92. Patrice – – it depends on my mood – – and how many e-mails I get from readers alerting me to all the crazy tweets he sends out. 🙂 Today, I read enough and had to sound off.

    LikeLike

93. JA 🙂

    LikeLike

94. chapmaned24, I know we disagree 🙂 The US is not a theocracy. I am very glad of it and you are not.

    But since we are not, I would love for you to think more about how the system that separates church/state can work better for us. It has some good points, you know?

    LikeLike

95. If you have a beef with this, take it up with Jesus. Tell him to feed the 5,000/4,000 with the fishes and loaves. Tell him to heal the sick and perform miracles. But don’t expect that from the government. We are Taxed Enough Already.

    So is this what you propose to a woman who needs bread and shelter for herself and kids right NOW? Take it up with Jesus instead of asking for help when her church abandons her?

    LikeLike

96. “My retirement came from Social Security, but disability, by it’s very nature, is prematurely delivered and medically expensive. People like me drain those coffers and I don’t know why it must be set up that way.”

    Patrice, you are exactly the sort of person I am very worried about. Without an expanding tax base there is going to be real trouble for the ones who need it the most. It is estimated that almost 90 million adults in this country are not working. Now that includes those who stopped looking, never worked or don’t want to work. You won’t see those numbers in the media but the statisticians know. I used to work on projects with the Economic development folks in my state and I was stunned at how unemployment figures are calculated. It tells very little about the real story.

    We are in crisis and everyone seems to have their heads in the sand from both sides of the aisle! Obamacare has already had a major psychological impact on business. Many are in holding pattern until they see how it fleshes out in practice. We know that economics is not a total science. There is human behavior that comes with it and our ‘experts” always don’t get that part right. Which is why they need to “control” behavior.

    Small to medium sized business are failing/giving up at an alarming rate. That leaves us with the conglomerates—big business—big lobby. Not good for any of us. Our tax base is shrinking. And for those who think people are going to just keep paying more ( not just in taxes but fees, increased health care) as the costs of everything goes up, people are in for a rude awakening. Many folks just stop trying and join the cue.

    LikeLike

97. “Ed, are you missing the point that people are seeking help from church and getting abandoned emotionally, physically, financially, and spiritually? If you are a mom with kiddos, and you need food/shelter and the church has abandoned you, then what?”

    I agree. I can remember what some of the mega’s I worked with said about it. “Well, the government is doing it now”. But the government is not doing it well at all. And then the church decided they had to make sure the single mom was worthy. Was she divorced? Why? And so on. Some of the paperwork was ridiculous. Just fix her dang brakes on her car, folks, so she can get to work safely! It was not like the church did not have the money!

    I can also remember when there were Baptist, Methodist, Jewish and Catholic hospitals in my city as a child that were funded and staffed by same. Often volunteers! When I was a kid, I think the Catholics really got it right about many things and health care was one of them. They seemed to be on the forefront of taking care of people.

    The church points to government now. It is so ingrained in us it is ridiculous. It is a crying shame.

    LikeLike

98. JA and Patrice,

    Wow…I think we have a major difference of opinions here. First, JA, no, that is not what I am saying. I am saying to the person who sees a woman who needs bread and shelter to give that woman bread and shelter. I am not telling the woman who needs bread and shelter to give what she doesn’t have. Whoa!

    Next, Patrice,

    I think we have a major difference in the definition of “separation of church and state”. If you read the Declaration of Independence, which is what our Constitution is Based On (By the way, if you go to THE US Government explanation of being a citizen of the United States of America by way of a Visa, you will see an explanation that the Declaration is known as the PROMISE, and the Constitution is the FULFILLMENT of that PROMISE). What was the reason for the declaration of Independence? It was to depart from a Theocracy…it was for the purpose of worshiping God based on our own conscious. It was not for the purpose of escaping God. Buddhists did not sail here from England. Christians did. This nation was founded upon Christian beliefs. God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, that we have rights from our creator, and that government is formed (In the United States) to SECURE those God given rights. That is what the Declaration of Independence states. Government is for the people and by the people. Government is from the people to the leaders, not the leaders to the people. Having said that, as a fact, separation of church and state is that the government was going to stay out of the church business…not that the Christians needs to stay out of government business. We, the people, are the government. Yes, even us religious people. It is not a theocracy. Especially if you read the declaration of independence, and that we have God given rights that is the responsibility of the US Government to uphold.

    I highly (HIGHLY) recommend the following video of Red Skelton’s explanation of the Pledge of Allegiance:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZBTyTWOZCM

    LikeLike

99. “Tony Miano @TonyMiano
    God’s Word says the godly will be persecuted. American Christians avoid persecution. How then can they claim to be godly?”

    The Christians I know don’t “claim” to be godly. It doesn’t occur to them to label themselves as such or worry about what activities make them godly or not. They don’t tweet, FB, keek, youtube or blog about their godliness (or lack) because they are too busy and actually have to work for a living- some with two jobs- while going about serving others and their families. They live their lives for Christ, all while not letting their right hands know what their left hands are doing.

    Miano should try that sometime.

    LikeLike

100. I had previously said:
     “Wow…I think we have a major difference of opinions here. First, JA, no, that is not what I am saying. I am saying to the person who sees a woman who needs bread and shelter to give that woman bread and shelter. I am not telling the woman who needs bread and shelter to give what she doesn’t have. Whoa! ”

     My response to my statement:
     I wish to expound on this, in order to make sure that I am understood properly.

     If a person who has the means to give when they see a person in need, and does not offer assistance to the person in need, then that person needs to take it up with Jesus…the person who has the ability to help but passes the buck on to the government instead. I mean, really…how hard is it for the person who has the ability to just throw another shrimp on the barbie, so to speak? Or to get a sleeping bag for the living room? If the person who has the ability to help, but doesn’t help, then they have a problem with Matthew 25, and Jesus will say to them, I didn’t know you, for YOU did not feed me when I hungered. I mean, really…where is the compassion, when all a person will do is to give them an address to a soup kitchen? That’s lame if you ask me.

     Ed

     LikeLike

101. . I am not telling the woman who needs bread and shelter to give what she doesn’t have. Whoa!

     No, Ed, I knew that you weren’t saying that.

     I’m asking you to put yourself in the situation of being a woman who is leaving an abusive husband and has to secure housing and food for her family. What if the church she goes to says she is not allowed to divorce her abusing spouse and so they do not support her? How is she going to get on her 2 feet with no support from church?

     LikeLike