James Dobson leads Christian Soldiers into battle

Perhaps Mr. Dobson needs to be reindoctrinated. I found this interesting little gem and I would love to share it (I apologize for not having a link)

When Marriage Between Gays Was by Rite

RITE AND REASON: A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St Catherine's monastery on Mount Sinai. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman pronubus (best man) overseeing what in a standard Roman icon would be the wedding of a husband and wife. In the icon, Christ is the pronubus. Only one thing is unusual. The "husband and wife" are in fact two men.

Is the icon suggesting that a homosexual "marriage" is one sanctified by Christ? The very idea initially seems shocking. The full answer comes from other sources about the two men featured, St Serge and St Bacchus, two Roman soldiers who became Christian martyrs.

While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly close. Severus of Antioch in the sixth century explained that "we should not separate in speech [Serge and Bacchus] who were joined in life". More bluntly, in the definitive 10th century Greek account of their lives, St Serge is openly described as the "sweet companion and lover" of St Bacchus.

In other words, it confirms what the earlier icon implies, that they were a homosexual couple. Unusually their orientation and relationship was openly accepted by early Christian writers. Furthermore, in an image that to some modern Christian eyes might border on blasphemy, the icon has Christ himself as their pronubus, their best man overseeing their "marriage".

The very idea of a Christian homosexual marriage seems incredible. Yet after a 12-year search of Catholic and Orthodox church archives Yale history professor John Boswell has discovered that a type of Christian homosexual "marriage" did exist as late as the 18th century.
Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has evolved both as a concept and as a ritual.

~snip~

These ceremonies had all the contemporary symbols of a marriage: a community gathered in church, a blessing of the couple before the altar, their right hands joined as at heterosexual marriages, the participation of a priest, the taking of the Eucharist, a wedding banquet afterwards. All of which are shown in contemporary drawings of the same sex union of Byzantine Emperor Basil I (867-886) and his companion John. Such homosexual unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th/early 13th century, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales (Geraldus Cambrensis) has recorded.

~snip~

Boswell found records of same-sex unions in such diverse archives as those in the Vatican, in St Petersburg, in Paris, Istanbul, and in Sinai, covering a period from the 8th to the 18th centuries. Nor is he the first to make such a discovery. The Dominican Jacques Goar (1601-1653) includes such ceremonies in a printed collection of Greek prayer books.

While homosexuality was technically illegal from late Roman times, it was only from about the 14th century that anti-homosexual feelings swept western Europe. Yet same sex union ceremonies continued to take place.

~snip~

From: The Marriage of Likeness: Same Sex Unions in Pre Modern Europeby John Boswell, Harpers-Collins

Sorry, but I cannot help buy question one's morals and values when they see Bush as some paragon of virtue. Can they not hear the lies, the disingenuousness? I recently heard Darrell Waltrip endorse Bush because he is a man who 'talks the talk' and 'walks the walk', I just about spit, especially because they were addressing the war and the issue of Viet Nam, the SBV and that B.S.

To quote Proverbs 6:16: There are six things the Lord hates and seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans and feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies and a man who sows discord amongst his brothers.

Which of the above is Bush innocent of, pray tell? Which one's fit Cheney and Rove?

I do not believe there is a person who is pro abortion but many that are pro-choice. I've decided the partial birth abortion issue is a red herring. I do not believe any respectable doctor would use this procedure as a means of birth control anymore than I can believe a woman would put herself through it. According to my mother, who had to undergo two back in the 50's, it was a traumatizing nightmare. It is not a routine procedure. It takes time and in the process according to my mom, every bone of the baby was broken trying to extract him & her. (She was 8 and 8 1/2 months along for each)

The Christian right should not have it both ways. They cannot argue that an embryo is a viable life and therefore, to abort it is a sin yet, an embryo that sits frozen in an inanimate state is o.k! What is to become of these embryoes? Who is going to bring them to fruition? Is it not just as sinful for an infertile couple to pump themselves full of hormones and fertility drugs to enhance the chances of getting impregnated and what of the multiple pregnancies? Instead of doing the sensible thing, selective termination, some opt to carry all at the risk to all.

In any case, is it any more moral or ethical to allow these embryos to languish in some lab. At some point a decision on whether to use them or 'abort' them will have to be made. Perhaps we should legislate the options of infertile couples. Maybe they should accept their inability to get pregnant (for whatever reason) as God's will. Perhaps, the moral and ethical thing to do when confronted with a complicated issue such as this is the next best thing, use God's gift - potential - to improve the lives of others through stem cell research and advancement.

Just what is a God-people hater? Perhaps he meant God-hater people? Whatever, we know where the hate mongering comes from. We spent eight years listening to the viriol from the GOP and their lackey's when Clinton was in office. That and the right wing talk radio shows are more responsible for the hate then anyone and really, we don't even come close to displaying what they have. Thank God.

How I dread the next four year.

Oh, and it is the conservative judges that are the 'activists'>

Here's a way to shut this guy up. Make him give up his tax exempt status.

From Salon

Focus on the funding

Last week the United Church of Christ made a good-humored effort to show anti-SpongeBob crusader James C. Dobson the error of his ways. It was Jesus' way, UCC head Rev. John H. Thomas reminded us, to welcome all beings into the community, even happy little cartoon characters who stand for diversity and tolerance.

This week Colorado Springs watchdog group Citizens Project is wondering if Dobson doesn't also need a little refresher on tax law as it pertains to nonprofit organizations like Dobson's own Focus on the Family. Citizens Group believes Dobson may have violated the law by openly supporting President Bush during the 2004 presidential campaign. According to the Associated Press, the group has asked the Internal Revenue Service to look into the matter:

"In a letter Tuesday to the IRS, Citizens Project complained about a November article in a magazine printed by Focus comparing presidential candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry and their positions on abortion, stem-cell research and same-sex marriage.

"'You're pro-life, and you want to preserve the traditional definition of marriage for the next generation,' the article stated. 'So which of the presidential candidates comes closest to sharing your values?'"

Organizations that operate under nonprofit tax-exemption status, including Focus on the Family, are forbidden by law to endorse political candidates or parties.

"Our organization believes that this article may have violated federal tax law with its use of code words such as 'pro-life' and with its implied support of President George W. Bush as a candidate for president," said Ellie Collinson, the executive director for Citizens Project.

According to the AP, Focus officials responded that the article was written under the umbrella of its lobbying arm, Focus on the Family Action, an organization operating under a different set of tax criteria, and whose money can be used for lobbying.

That assertion of arms-length legality sounds about as convincing as the theory that Jesus himself was anti-tax.

Meanwhile, Dobson is defending his campaign against SpongeBob's latest star turn in an educational video.

"If you had told me a month ago that I’d be devoting my February letter to a cartoon character named SpongeBob SquarePants, I’d have said you were crazy," Dobson wrote in a Focus newsletter. He went on to clarify the "complicated" problem:

"The video, which millions of children will soon see, features nearly 100 favorite cartoon characters that kids will instantly recognize, including not only SpongeBob, but also Barney the Dinosaur, the Muppets, Dora the Explorer, Bob the Builder, Winnie the Pooh, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Jimmy Neutron and Big Bird. The video itself is innocent enough and does not mention anything overtly sexual. Rather, it features the children’s cartoon characters singing and dancing along to the popular disco hit 'We Are Family.'

"But while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister. My brief comments at the FRC gathering were intended to express concern not about SpongeBob or Big Bird or any of their other cartoon friends, but about the way in which those childhood symbols are apparently being hijacked to promote an agenda that involves teaching homosexual propaganda to children."

-- Mark Follman