Pastor Bob Emrich is Maine’s voice for the social conservative right-wing, both on AMG and in public.
He must be a lovable guy. I mean, look, here he is feeding a duck while a cute child stands nearby.
Unfortunately there is a darker side to that picture.
The duck was at Emrich’s church for some sexual identity re-alignment therapy. Yes, it was a gay duck. Thanks to Bob Emrich and several years of therapy and bible reading, it married a nice female duck and had several ducklings before being found dead in a hotel room several years later when, succumbing to years of self-delusion, it spent a long night out at a gay duck bar dancing to club remixes with other “bear” ducks and then hung itself out of shame the next day. This is a sad story, but Pastor Emrich had immense sympathy for the duck’s widow who, of course, is the only victim in such a scenario.
Because as Pastor Emrich stated in regards to the public shaming and then suicide of a gay college student last year:
The “victim” of suicide is the person left behind, not the one who committed the act.
And later in the same thread:
A person who commits suicide does it to themselves. To give them “victim” status shifts the blame to others.
Such an easy, simple rule to follow. And it conveniently erases all responsibility for third parties regarding how they treated the suicide victim.
Consider a hypothetical: a person in a dictator’s prison camp kills themselves to escape daily abuse and oppression. What does the Emrich Rule tell us about the situation? Don’t blame the people running the camp. Obviously, the suicide “perpetrator” (as Emrich would call them) is only the person who actually did the final, physical act.
That’s a bit of an extreme example, but it fits. If a gay person is told he is wrong, that the way he feels inside is wrong, and unless he fixes it he will be ostracized from his peers… well, that is going to raise the risk of suicide. It just is. Not everyone in that situation will wind up hurting themselves, but the more public and thorough the hate is, the greater the chances of something bad happening.
But Reverend Emrich can’t admit that, because, hey, how would gay people know not to be gay if we treated them the same as everyone else? It is all the gay person’s fault. They choose to be gay. Sometimes they choose to kill themselves. So be it, right?
And now we find out that Rev. Emrich knows The Distributist/Michael Pajak personally. Shocking, isn’t it?
And Rev. Emrich doesn’t think Michael Pajak should lose his job for the years of hate he spewed. Shocking, isn’t it?
And Rev. Emrich never found any of Pajak’s comments to be immoral enough to warrant even a slight rebuke. Shocking, isn’t it?
Hmm.
Nope.
Well I guess that’s kind of my point. Why? Why wonder? If someone hated Chinese people I would assume he or she is ignorant or nuts, and move on. Well, that’s not completely true. I’d probably make fun of that person on this site a little…and then move on…unless it was Naran.
LOL I guess making fun would be better, and funnier. Discrimination angers me. When I found out info about bob Emrich and learned he was no better (and maybe worse) then the people he was brainwashing others into condemning it bothered me. Because I have no solid evidence other than what I know to be true I only asked that this was looked into, researched, by people who think this man is great. Just like any other decision an intelligent person makes it should be made with all the facts.
WOW!! With the debut of correction, we have the seeds of Asmainegoeslolz-lolz. I feel like I’m standing between two mirrors facing each other.
Touché.
But in my defense, I endeavor to not imply things are true about other people when I do not know if it is the case. Honor among thieves?
I know exactly what is true and not true. I have not wavered but I also have left it to others to find their own answers. I only opened the door. We all, those of us who were there, know what is true. Accusing is not as profound because there are those who will say thinks are not true. letting others figure things out with direction is much more effective. I know the truth and so does bob and with the direction given so will others.
Woohoo !! Bring it!! We need tom C to moderate this thread !! Time for a cigarette. Was it as good for all of you?
Oh my God, I would love to see Tom C moderate this thread and the next 13 Republican debates as well.
Let me try a test to see if there is truly cross-dimensional leakage from my usual circle of hell.
“Coyote”.
If you keep that up, you are going to make the ecology of this thread become an unstable family and extinct or something.
The esteemed and above reproach Rev. Emrich recently posted this misleading gem on AMG:
http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/here-we-go-ads-oppose-natural-marriage
It almost makes me wish someone would find some dirt on him. Bet he was pals with Bob Carlson. Bet you were too, Joe Mama. “Christian” birds of a feather tend to flock together.
Joe Mama said, “I’ve never known Bob to drink”. Then you don’t know him very well, do you? He does not hide the fact that he is a recovering alcoholic. It is one of the few things I admire about him.
Yet another fine example of why it is never wise to mix politics & religon is breaking out on AMG…..They are all over the Penn St. fiasco like ants on jam, yet for the first few hours, nothing but accolades regarding Rev Bob Carlson. In fact the esteemed editor posted a pick with the Rev & boy scouts….How “appropriate”…Then further opines that since he is overweight he may have fallen off the bridge…really??? talk about grasping at straws….The whole logic of religin, politics and hero worship just really blure reality…I really hope Paster Bob Emrich is marginilized so that we do not have to constantly hear from him on his warped logic going forward through next November…Meanwhile Naran’s complete lack of reality nevermind editing skill set renders her powerless to reign the whole thing in…….
In my discussions with him via email I asked about this and he said he had never had a problem with alcohol.
Ah and the lies begin to unfold. I told you so. Also, as much as it goes against my grain, associating Bob Emrich with child molesters is un called for. He is a jerk but I have never heard anything that would imply that he ever touched a child. Lying about someone makes those accusing look worse. Keep to what is true.
Moderator, I hope you are keeping track. One of Bobs good friends just contradicted a lie Bob told you. I know the truth and so does Bob. He is an alcoholic. Drinking or not. Trust me.
I do not understand why anyone would lie about something like that if it were apparently public knowledge.
Then perhaps I am wrong (or he is lying to you). I thought I recalled that he had made reference to this a few times on AMG, but that was several years ago and I may have either misunderstood or it was someone else. At any rate, I certainly wouldn’t hold that against him. It’s his misguided activism that I despise.
There are several recovering alcoholics on AMG and so I think the most likely scenario is you mixed one of their comments with Mr. Emeich’s.
myvoice,
I didn’t mean to imply that Emrich might be a child molester, just that it wouldn’t surprise me if he were friends with Carlson. Anyone who would pal around with the likes of the Mikes (Pajak, Heath, and Hein) certainly wouldn’t be a very good judge of character. Wouldn’t you agree?
Yes, there are several in recovery, and many who are dry and definitely not recovering.
Sorry but I really wouldn’t agree. Rev Carleson has not been found guilty of anything yet. Not saying his suicide doesnt incriminate him but still As far as friends, i mean, who really knows. So, by taking the Emrich thing beyond the actual truth we are no better than him and his lies.
And, moderator, he didn’t mistake anything. Emrich had an alcohol problem and was asked to leave his post in Sangerville. Period. His wife, by his daughters own admission, began a relationship with another woman several years after the marriage dissolved. And I would definitely check into the reason why as it is explained that he was asked to leave because he was caught in an affair during his first marriage. Again, I am not accusing, I am only opening a door. HOwever, that being said. Before the posts were deleted from the svweekly his daughter Cari admitted her mother left the family and began a relationship with another woman several years later. This being said, his daughter is a wonderful person and neither her or the rest of her family should ever be judged by their fathers actions.
Yes, Jim and many of them turn to religion to save them rom the evils of alcohol and never lose their narcissistic attitudes…..hmmm religion, narcissistic sounds like Enrich.
I don’t care whether or not he is an alcoholic or an adulterer. I care about his message and the harm it does.
Here Here
Just right, jimvisanidiot. I could care less about what Emrich drinks, or who he sleeps with or who his wife sleeps with. Totally unimportant. But when he claims that my daughter, her partner, their baby, and their baby to be are “unnatural,” I’d like to kneecap the jerk. I don’t care to compare families. Just leave mine alone.
You people are unbelievable! I am Bob Emrich’s daughter and HAVE NEVER STATED that my mother had a relationship with another woman, nor has my father ever had a drinking problem! Your pal MYVOICE spends apparently most of their time spreading complete lies about my father in a pathetic and obsessive attempt to destroy him. Not sure why, but that is the person who first started suggesting that my mother left my father for another woman…the only statments I made about this subject were that this person is completely lying…literally a complete falsehood with not even a kernel of truth. This person has suggested adultery, lesbianism and now alchoholism as absolute truths and the reason my father left the church in Sangerville…I guess that can be expected from people who’s entire website is to make fun of others…sort of childish and sad that grown adults cannot have their own reasonable discussions but instead ride the coattails of people who do by mocking them for it! What a bunch of LIARS !!!!!!!
MYVOICE: I cannot believe that you would post this “Before the posts were deleted from the svweekly his daughter Cari admitted her mother left the family and began a relationship with another woman several years later. This being said, his daughter is a wonderful person and neither her or the rest of her family should ever be judged by their fathers actions.” all the while, knowing better than anyone that it is a complete lie and then attempt to compliment me…my you are a terrible person! Call me naive but I find it amazing that you can print and submit such bold lies! Having you call me a wonderful person at the same time as telling a bold lie astounds me and reminds me that for some people, there is no such thing as stooping too low!
I am sort of on Pastor Emrich’s side on this because frankly myvoice is making my bullshit detector go off, but when you imply that we are generally riding on the coattails of AMGer who are simply having “reasonable discussions” it made me snort milk out my nose.
And Average Joe is absolutely correct; if Pastor Bob was an adultering, drunken liar, he would still be a more compassionate and moral person in my eyes than his current public persona: a guy obsessively attempting to force his particular religious views on other people who do not wish to hold those views and working hard to deny people I love the ability to marry the person they have spent decades building a life with. It is incredibly sad. People like Pastor Bob are the George Wallace’s of our time, and I hope some years after Bob Emrich loses this argument he changes his mind like the real George Wallace. If he doesn’t he will be remembered by everyone in my generation as a hateful person regardless of whatever else he does in his life.
I don’t know or care who George Wallace is, but am always confused as to why my father isn’t allowed to push his opinions on people who don’t want them but you folks are! Is it because his views involve religion or is it simply because the concept of everyone being entitled to their own beliefs only applies to you or those who agree with you? He has a belief, based on his religious principles that God intended marriage for a man or woman. You have beliefs that you, or people you love, should be able to marry whomever you want. Honestly, I think both sides are entitled to their opinion and couldn’t care less either way! Honestly I am tired, as are a lot of people in Maine of having to listen to, vote on, spend tax dollars preparing for voting, having my lawmakers focus on this instead of jobs and education! I just don’t understand how lies about who my mother slept with or my father’s supposed battle with alcohol is relevant either way! I think it sinks to a whole new low level of humanity to make up false personal attacks in lieu of a reasonable intelligent argument. Don’t you realize how this makes the average person look at your side? If you are not a religious person with a strong passion or a passionate gay marriage supporter, but instead are the rest of the population (in other words, most people), who sounds smarter, wiser, and possesing of more integrity: the pastor who is well spokenand NOT engaging in personal tabloid attacks on others or the gay marriage supporters who call anyone who disagrees with them hateful or a bigot or unintelligent or liars and stoops to attacks like this? I am a registered independant, mostly vote along Democratic party lines, ESPECIALLY in the social politics (and my dad still loves and accepts me) and I wholeheartedly voted against gay marriage because of these type of high school mean girl sort of actions! the people that don’t take your cause seriosuly or turn away from supporting you do it because of people like MYVOICE who slander and lie and gossip and threaten and imply who make the rest of you look ridiculous! My family got death threats, harrassed, lied about and everything in between during that stupid campaign, but I don’t recall a single time my father threatened violence against an opponents family. I have three children the oldest of whom is a teenager and I had to warn them all not to go places alone, not to talk about their grandfather and not to engage in discussion with people about this. My father offered my oldest son something silly like $1 for each campaign sign he collected after and brought back to his grandfather and I had to put a stop to it because grown adults in groups would gang up on and threaten him, a mere kid! And this from people who support tolerance, diversity, equality! I am not trying to imply that ALL SSM supporters are like that, any more than I think all SSM opponents are wonderful people, but giving a “voice” to jackwagons who are clearly and pettily making your bullshit detector go off doesn’t win your side any votes or support. I cannot count how many NONreligious people I know who voted against gay marriage rights because of the way that side behaved so often, because no one is allowed to disagree with you unless they want to risk being tarred and feathered for the audacity of having an opinion…ya know, like in countries where they jail you for disagreeing with the government…no matter what your beliefs are, don’t we all have a right to them and a right to stand up for them in the most honest way we can?
PS You are so right about AMG..sorry to all the AMGer’s out there, but that site makes me see red too, but my point about creating an entire website to make fun of them stands…it is silly, unproductive and makes the whole argument seem as though it is being carried on by middleschool tween girls with all the name calling, mocking and trash talking. AMG would certainly be guilty of the same thing since all they do is mock and bash liberals and anyone unlike themselves, but can’t someone be the proverbial better person? Can’t a few people out of lots of grown adults carry on a civil respectable debate, maybe teach our children and future generations the art of debate, negotiating, politics, comprimise, respect for fellow humans?? Anyone, on either side?? Please! Stop digging up bullshit gossip from 20 years ago that is completely untrue, not to mention irrelevant and talk maturely about your views and beliefs? Can’t anyone present a logical, serious fact based argument for something they support? Can’t any of you respect eachother no matter the opposing views? I have no interest in being a Republican, but don’t think they are all dumb! I have no gay tendancies, but have gay friends. I think marriage is a great thing but am ok with people not being married. Organic farming is great, but I hold nothing against a veggie grown in non-organic conditions! Guess where I got this personality trait from? MY DAD! Guess who taught me to love and respect everyone, almost to a fault…DAD! Guess who still loves me even though I voted for Obama, might do so again, even though I don’t regularly attend church, have strong religious beliefs, and have opposite opinions of my dad on a regular basis…as much as you don’t want to hear this, it was all my dad! He doesn’t agree with you nor you with him, but he is a caring, dedicated, intelligent and respectable man. I am not sure what generation you or your other posters are from, but you are wrong…there are people all over the country who know and love my father and do NOT consider him a hateful person!
“I wholeheartedly voted against gay marriage because of these type of high school mean girl sort of actions!”
You voted to take away the rights of thousands of hard working Maine citizens because of a few you didnt like.? I really had more respect for you. Wow, I though i knew you. I have nothing against your dad. But he did rally a whole bunch of people against a lot of my friends and had me believing he was right. I think that, as the Bible says let he who is without sin cast the first stone, people who stand up and throw stones are under scrutiny. If your dad cheated or lied or whatever he is going to be under scrutiny. You shouldnt take it on yourself.
Cari,
Your comment shows that you love your father and have a more nuanced view than he presents in public, so I commend you for that.
Here are where I think most people will disagree with you:
1. We are not trying to force our view on your Dad. He would be free to run his church and teach whatever he wants to teach. But there are other churches that teach gay marriage is good. Why does your Dad’s view get to win out? We could live in a world where both churches get to live out their beliefs, but people like your Dad want only their view put onto practice by everyone.
The way I see it, Bob Emrich thinks that if the whole society doesn’t follow his religious views on marriage then they are violating his religious rights…. Sorry, but it doesn’t work that way. No one gets to call the shots for the entire society. He is free to do what he wants in his church. That is what religious freedom means. But he shouldn’t use government to tell other churches who would marry gays and lesbians that they can’t.
2. I am sorry that there were death threats and harassment towards your family. Unfortunately this happens on all sides of all tough social issues. My experience is exactly the opposite: people who volunteered with the pro-gay marriage side were pinnacles of politeness, while “jackwagons” from the anti-gay marriage side called them pedophiles. That is just how the world works. It is sad if people voted on the issue based on their perceptions of one side or another rather than the underlying morality, because then you are only punishing innocent people and letting the jackasses make your decisions for you, but that is sadly expected as well.
3. I am not giving voice to MyVoice, he is doing it himself. We live in a free society and part of being a public figure is that jackasses will say mean stuff about you. The fact that your Dad has chosen to be the spokesman for a position that a majority of the under-35 crowd views as amoral doesn’t help. On the one hand he is brave for having chosen to go forward and put up with all the crap, but on the other that doesn’t give him the ability to just shut it down.
Thanks for commenting and helping us understand what is really going on.
I also want to say that I view your father’s viewpoints on this issue as hateful, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t a good person in the sense that he is a loving father and compassionate towards people in other ways.
But he is very, very wrong on this particular issue, and it is one that is denying people the ability to make a family. This is a very black mark and he will be stuck with it for a long time. Many people including myself will teach their children to not be like Bob Emrich.
George Wallace was the Governor who stood on the school steps in the South saying, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.” He later recanted those views and appointed blacks in his cabinet. I’m sure he was a nice guy too, to people that knew him.
Thanks for at least being kind in your disagreement with me! I should correct one thing in reference to my comment : “and I wholeheartedly voted against gay marriage because of these type of high school mean girl sort of actions! ” and say that it was a large part of a tough decision for me…The overall divisiveness that the issue caused together with the fact that it would put people of a religious ilk in legal jeopardy for their beliefs was the other part of my decision. There was no reasonable allowance in the previous marriage bill that allowed not only religious institutions, but average folks to refuse to take part in something that they firmly do NOT believe in. As a purely hypothetical example, what if a person who believes that marriage is for man and woman is asked to take the pictures for a SS wedding and they refuse based on religious principles? There was no protection for that and it pits the rights of one’s religion squarely against another’s right to marry. My understanding, albeit it limited is that the new referendum has an allowance for that sort of issue but only for religious institutions as opposed to private citizens…that would make a big difference…as another aside, I must say thanks for both allowing my angry rant as well as proving me wrong….both AMGLOLZ and IVOTED YES BUT CHANGED MY MIND responded so reasonably, it gives me pause and makes me realize that my anger at MYVOICE and the continued lies and gossip from him or her should be limited to that and not a group simply because myvoice uses your forum, and others, to spread that BS! There are still reasonable people capable of disagreeing politely and firmly!
If Emrich is all that and more, then why would he post a bullshit title on AMG like this: Ads Oppose Natural Marriage ? Since when does advocating for gay marriage mean opposing heterosexual marriage? He is misleading the public in the most insidious of ways – by masquerading as a man of God. I would be embarrassed were he a member of my family.
@amglolz – ” We are not trying to force our view on your Dad.”
I think that’s where you’re wrong. The entire Question 1 campaign was not about what gays are allowed to do, but about the laws being changed to make ok what is not ok with many people of faith.
Many people of faith, my self included, voted against making homosexual marriage legal. Let me speak for myself here and assure you that it is a not uncommon reasoning among others like me.
I don’t care who sleeps with whom or what. Not my business.
But I was dragged into a situation where I had two choices: actively follow my faith or actively vote against my faith. A vote for what my bible tells me is sinful is a vote against my conscience.
I’m not hateful about it. I am just exercising my legal and moral right to vote the way I believe is right.
Before you all get froggy about it, let me point out that my principles are based on who I am and who I am is based on my faith. I would not vote to make any sin legal. Not adultery, murder, theft, not anything I consider a sin.
Would any of you vote against your conscience?
I do not believe in forcing people to abide by the things my faith says are right and wrong. If you led a perfectly clean life, it would not be enough to save you, according to my faith, so it would be a waste of my time and your comfort.
However, I do believe that I am accountable to my Creator for everything I do in this life.
Joe,
So evangelicals should vote to ban divorce except in special cases of abuse, Catholics should vote to require confession and rosaries as punishment instead of parking tickets, and Muslims should vote to require loudspeakers playing daily prayers?
I don’t buy it. You can believe in your faith without having to vote to make everyone else follow it. I’m an atheist. Would I vote to ban churches? No, I would vote against that, because I believe in freedom and fairness.
Emrich is free to define marriage as he sees fit in his church, but his powers stop there. Otherwise we simply live in a theocratic nation defined by whose religions has the most believers, and thus the most voters. America wasn’t designed to be that way.
Very well said, amglolz.
@amglolz: I don’t have anything to say about what anyone “should vote” for aside from sharing my reasons for how I vote. But I would vote to ban divorce as you say, if it came up for a vote. Not because I think that everyone should have to believe the way I do, but because I believe that divorce, which is the renunciation of a vow before God, is wrong, and I cannot and will not endorse anything that I believe is wrong.
It’s not about me making you follow my faith. It’s about you not being allowed to force me to say “Yeah, sure. That’s ok.” to something that I feel in my heart and am led by my faith to know otherwise.
Re: “Catholics should vote to require confession and rosaries as punishment instead of parking tickets, and Muslims should vote to require loudspeakers playing daily prayers?”
Again, I am not in a position to tell people how to vote, but certainly they have the right to vote for such things, if indeed they ever came to the ballot, which is improbable.
People have voted for sillier things for sillier reasons. That is their right.
Re: “You can believe in your faith without having to vote to make everyone else follow it.”
I did not vote for anyone to follow my faith. I was asked as a citizen to follow someone else’s belief. I was asked to endorse a lifestyle which I believe to be wrong.
Whether I come by that belief via anecdotal evidence, polls, studies, or my faith, it is my belief.
How in the name of everything holy does a person divorce what he believes about right and wrong from what he believes is right?
And how is it that your “side” (for lack of better terminology) gets to push their beliefs on me but you say I don’t have the right to vote according to my faith?
Again I mention that I don’t give a flying hoot who sleeps with whom.
I just want to be left out of any process I consider to be sinful.
I personally don’t believe that the government should have anything to do with marriage. I don’t believe that there should be federal or state tax incentives to be married.
So if gay folks want to have marriage moved from the government’s prying control, I would be happy to be very active in that movement.
amglolz: “Emrich is free to define marriage as he sees fit in his church, but his powers stop there.”
Clearly his powers do not stop there. If they stopped there, he would not be allowed to vote on the issue.
I agree that you should vote with your heart to an extent. Say the religious balance changed to Muslim and they believe it is a sin for a woman to show her face. Would it be fair for a vote to be called? Would it be fair for your wife to have to wear a veil everywhere? You should not have to vote against your faith but leaving the box blank is ok also.
I think there should be civil marriage and religious marriage and technically there is. Homosexuals cannot even get a civil marriage (outside the church)
I wanted to add something about what I have learned. Homosexuality, although defined as such, really isnt about sex or who you sleep with. It is about the ability to fall in love. True homosexuals, not those who are looking for a thrill or an experience, cannot truly love those of the opposite sex. As far as ex-homosexuals it is possible that they have the ability. That perhaps they can love someone of the opposite gender. I have learned that many cannot. I believe that there are many issues people are born with and that we have not found a gene for many of those issues. Just because we have not pinpointed a gay gene does not mean it does not exist. There is no autism gene either. If you do not believe in same gender marriage than please, leave it blank.
As far as Bob Emrich and the organizations he helped bring in from other states to lie about gay marriage (one of the reasons I switched my vote) he is a liar. PLease look on youtube at Marc Mutty hyperbole and you will see why I realized that those who led the fight to oppose gay marriage lied to put fear into people. I hate liars.
Why is it that people who profess to not care about what other people do seem to care the most about what other people do?
What if the government passed laws saying that you couldn’t marry someone of a different religion than you? Or a different race? Or from a different state? Or any other arbitrary delimiter of human attributes? Such laws have existed in the past and, one by one, they’ve been struck down.
As will the ban on same sex marriage. No matter what Bob Emrich says.
Joe, I like you and I like that you argue your case honestly and openly. So don’t take this the wrong way, but you are dead wrong!
Bob Emrich’s powers do stop at his church. He can vote on the marriage issue, but that has nothing to do with his church powers. In his church he can combine people into a holy union, all by himself, regardless of what the government says. He can marry people. Before God. Forever. That is a big deal (His other special power is that he knows exactly what God actually meant when He wrote the Bible despite 1) the literally billions of other people in the world who read the same book and take a different meaning, in both large and small ways; and 2) the fact that the book was interpreted to mean something different, in both large and small ways, during the majority of the 1700 years it has been in existence. But luckily Bob Emrich of Maine, USA, reading it in 2011 in a language not its original, has the exact right interpretation. Very fortunate for us, I suppose, but probably irrelevant to this argument).
On the other hand, when Emrich votes he is on the same plane as the devil worshipping punk rocker 18 year old smoking pot. Which is to say he has only the same power as the rest of us do. The fact that he has the same basic civil rights we all do doesn’t mean that his religious powers don’t stop at the church’s walls- they do. When he votes he is nothing special compared to you or me. That is what I mean when I say his powers stop. If Mainers vote to allow gay marriage, all his bible interpreting holiness won’t mean a damn thing.
Second, you say you want government out of marriage and would support that. But you won’t let gays participate in what the government does as long as it calls it marriage. Huh? You imply you would you be okay with, or at least legally allow, other churches to marry gays, but you would not allow the government to? What is the difference? Neither one is done in your church. Why does your logic separate your church from other churches that also use the word “marriage” to name what they do, but it cannot separate your church from the government using the word “marriage” to name what it does?
Government can never interfere with your religious marriage beliefs because government doesn’t have anything to do with them, they are already separate. They are your beliefs. Government could interfere with your practice- as another poster said, it could force your wife to wear a veil- but that isn’t at stake here. The government allowing gays to participate in civil marriage has zero impact on your religious practices.
Next time you vote, just remember that whether or not the government calls it “marriage” doesn’t actually have any impact on you or your church and what you believe. It is a totally separate thing, semantics aside.
Third, we aren’t arguing about whether you or I or Muslims have the right to vote on stupid ideas. We all agree they do. But the question is whether or not a particular idea makes sense. Whether we SHOULD vote for those things. I argue we should not, you subtly changed the debate in your response to make it about rights rather than the wisdom of a vote. I agree that under our legal system we have the right to vote on how the state defines marriage (although I think that is against the spirit of our system, it is the way it is due to historical reality).
And lastly, would you vote to allow me a divorce? My marriage vows didn’t mention God and neither I nor my wife had any intention of such vows being made before Him.
Eventually it will be lifted but not for a while. People are afraid of some sort of hideous punishment from their God. Fear drives people to do bad things. Unfortunately the people from out of state that were hired by Bob and his henchmen did bring fear into the hearts of good people.
Watch youtube Marc Mutty hyperbole. He admits to the Yes on 1 people LYING. He was upset of it I will give him credit there. May be why he left. If people could understand that there are people in the world, albeit a small number, who are born with the innate attraction for the same gender and that there is nothing they can do about it then they would understand. The Bible says so many things that are outdated today. I cannot, in good conscience, discriminate. My God loves me and wants me to love. If I knew then what I know now I would have voted no. If you are voting on your faith but really dont care then please leave the box blank. Dont go against your faith but dont discriminate either.
@Average Joe: “Why is it that people who profess to not care about what other people do seem to care the most about what other people do?”
Maybe I was not clear.
I don’t care what people do in their spare time. Don’t care who they sleep with, love, or live with.
Until they drag me into it. I am dragged into it when there is a question on the ballot asking my opinion. At that point, I vote honestly and according to my faith. No on gay marriage.
I know that you don’t agree with me, but do you honestly not understand what I’m saying?
You sound like so many AMG naysayers. Why get “dragged” into it? Just let it slide. Leave the ballot blank. Live and let live. If it’s really of no concern to you, let it be so.
Do you honestly not understand what I’m saying?
@I voted yes but changed my mind: Why should I have to limit voting with my heart (or as I said, “conscience”) to any extent. Do I have the right to tell you what you may or may not consider before you cast your vote?
I have as much right to vote according to my Christian beliefs as an atheist has to vote according to his beliefs that there is no God.
I also think you are very wrong about homosexuality being about “the ability to fall in love.” That phrase isn’t making sense to me, but it is not what being gay is about.
@amglolz: I don’t think we disagree on where Pastor Emrich’s powers end.
When I say that his powers do not stop at his church, I mean he has the power of casting his one vote, just as all of us, including atheists, have. And he also has the power of his own bully pulpit and those who agree with him on matters. Just as all of us.
What I mean is that he has no more and no less power in an election than any citizen is allowed to have.
Glad to hear you like me. I feel just like Sally Fields! ;)
I’m not going to go into what all I would vote for or against, because it really isn’t the topic here, but suffice it to say that if and when an issue comes up for a vote, I apply my faith, just as you apply your belief system. I’m not apologizing for it. It is, after all, my right.
Fortunately, most of the things people bring up as examples would never come to a vote. But rest assured, if they did, you could definitely predict what my vote would be.
@Average Joe: Are you suggesting that because I exercise my first amendment right to freedom of religion, I should have less freedom than you? Why would I leave blank any part of a ballot? Because you don’t like how I arrived at my decision?
Hey, please vote your heart. This is what you should do. I want to ask you this and then I will go, could you ever, as a heterosexual, sleep with, live with, share an intimate life with another person of the same gender? Also, do you really think women, who statistically stay together longer than heterosexual marriages, stay together for 20 and 30 years for the sex? I can tell you, with all faith in my heart, that homosexuals true homosexuals, cannot fall in love with, look at with true love, or have sex and enjoy it completely with love, with some one of the opposite gender.
Many people are born with more estrogen or more testosterone than they should. Thousands of babies are born with indefinite gender every year. Girls are going through puberty at 6 years old because of chemicals in the food. Do you truly believe that there is no possibility that there are people who are born homosexual? If there is do you truly think it is ok to deny them the right to feel like they belong to a society that loves and accepts them the way Jesus does? God Bless and Goodbye
I give up. I fail to see how allowing my daughter to marry the woman she loves and allowing them to raise their two children as a legal family affects Joe Mama in any way, shape, or form.
Sure, Joe, vote your conscience but remember your vote negatively affects others, not you.