Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Maine split on gay marriage question (48% for,48% against,%5 undecided)
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com ^ | October 20, 2009 | www.publicpolicypolling.com

Posted on 11/01/2009 2:06:11 PM PST by Maelstorm

Raleigh, N.C. – Two weeks out from election day Maine voters are divided right down the middle when it comes to whether they will reject the state’s law allowing same sex couples to marry. 48% say they will vote to over turn the law while 48% say they will vote to keep it with only 4% of the electorate still undecided. Opinion on the issue predictably breaks heavily along party lines. 74% of Republicans are planning to vote yes while only 25% of Democrats are. Independents may end up deciding which way it goes- presently 50% of them support rejecting the law with 44% in opposition. Older voters are strongest in their support of cutting off gay marriage. 54% are in support with 40% opposed. Senior citizens can often dominate the electorate in low turnout elections so the ultimate fate of this measure may lie in how many younger people get out to the polls and vote. There is a strong gender gap on the issue with 53% of men but only 43% of women wanting to reject the law. It’s also interesting to note that while white voters oppose undoing the law by a thin 47-45 margin, nonwhite voters in the state support rejection by a 55-35 margin, creating the overall tie. “The fate of Question 1 is going to be decided by which side does a better job of mobilizing their supporters to get out and vote,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Voters in the state know where they stand on the issue and now it’s just an issue of who shows up.” PPP surveyed 1,130 likely voters from October 16th to 19th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-2.9%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify. Complete results are attached and can be found at www.publicpolicypolling.com.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: 1; gaystapo; homobama; homosexualagenda; maine; me2009; one; perverts; prop1; protectmarriage; question; sodomhusseinobama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
It looks highly likely that the law will be rejected and marriage between a man and a woman once again be the law of the land of Maine. The voters who will vote Tuesday will be mostly older voters and Republican. Independents are also clearly in the camp of rejecting the law. This will be another defeat for the radical gay agenda.
1 posted on 11/01/2009 2:06:12 PM PST by Maelstorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

Agreed, but we will at the very least have gay marriage in all but the most rural-dominated states in 15 years, and will likely have it at a national level in 20.


2 posted on 11/01/2009 2:08:08 PM PST by Clemenza (Remember our Korean War Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
In every state where the people have had a voice in the matter, gay “marriage” has been defeated.
3 posted on 11/01/2009 2:10:45 PM PST by NurdlyPeon (Sarah Palin: Americas last, best hope for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

Your lips to gods ears. You should see what is going on with this situation...

HREF=”http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/127393.html";>Link to the BDN</a>


4 posted on 11/01/2009 2:11:10 PM PST by DeusExMachina05 (I will not go into Dhimmitude quietly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

A tie this close shouldn’t be a problem. Gay “marriage” polls always under poll and the antis get stronger as the vote gets closer. Even in deep blue Maine it should pass 53 /47. How it does in the expected court challenge is a different story.


5 posted on 11/01/2009 2:14:09 PM PST by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

You are wrong. We are going to turn it back. The fight isn’t over even though you seem to wish it to be so.


6 posted on 11/01/2009 2:14:10 PM PST by Maelstorm (Party like it's 1776!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

We should’ve preemptively gotten a Constitutional Amendment passed. The fact that we’ve become so sick and twisted a society where same-sex marriage is a possibility that this is even necessary to pass such a law to protect marriage shows how close we are to losing our country.


7 posted on 11/01/2009 2:15:14 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 20, 2009

INTERVIEWS: DEAN DEBNAM 888-621-6988 / 919-880-4888 (serious media inquiries only please, other questions can be directed to Tom Jensen)

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POLL: TOM JENSEN 919-744-6312

Maine split on gay marriage question


Raleigh, N.C. – Two weeks out from election day Maine voters are divided right down the middle when it comes to whether they will reject the state’s law allowing same sex couples to marry.

48% say they will vote to over turn the law while 48% say they will vote to keep it with only 4% of the electorate still undecided.

Opinion on the issue predictably breaks heavily along party lines. 74% of Republicans are planning to vote yes while only 25% of Democrats are. Independents may end up deciding which way it goes- presently 50% of them support rejecting the law with 44% in opposition.

Older voters are strongest in their support of cutting off gay marriage. 54% are in support with 40% opposed. Senior citizens can often dominate the electorate in low turnout elections so the ultimate fate of this measure may lie in how many younger people get out to the polls and vote.

There is a strong gender gap on the issue with 53% of men but only 43% of women wanting to reject the law. It’s also interesting to note that while white voters oppose undoing the law by a thin 47-45 margin, nonwhite voters in the state support rejection by a 55-35 margin, creating the overall tie.

“The fate of Question 1 is going to be decided by which side does a better job of mobilizing their supporters to get out and vote,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Voters in the state know where they stand on the issue and now it’s just an issue of who shows up.”

PPP surveyed 1,130 likely voters from October 16th to 19th. The survey’s margin of error is +/-2.9%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.

Complete results are attached and can be found at www.publicpolicypolling.com.

If you would like an interview regarding this release, please contact Dean Debnam at (888) 621-6988 or 919-880-4888.

October 16-19, 2009

Survey of 1,130 likely voters

3020 Highwoods Blvd.

Raleigh, NC 27604

information@publicpolicypolling.com / 888 621-6988

Maine Poll

Q1 Question 1 for the upcoming Maine Referendum Election reads ‘Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?’

Do you intend to vote yes or no on Question 1, which would undo the law that lets same sex couples marry? If you will vote yes on Question 1, press 1. If you will vote no, press 2. If you’re not sure, press 3.

Yes ........................ .48%
No .......................... .48%
Not Sure................. . 5%

Q2 Would you describe yourself as a liberal, moderate, or conservative? If a liberal, press 1. If a moderate, press 2. If a conservative, press 3.

Liberal ............................................................. 22%
Moderate......................................................... 44%
Conservative................................................... 33%

Q3 If you are a woman, press 1, if a man, press 2.

Woman ........................................................... 53%
Man................................................................. 47%

Q4 If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican, press 2. If other, press 3.

Democrat ........................................................ 38%
Republican...................................................... 30%
Other............................................................... 32%

Q5 If you are white, press 1. If other, press 2.

White .............................................................. 93%
Other............................................................... 7%

Q6 If you are 18 to 29 years old, press 1 now. If you are 30 to 45, press 2. If you are 46 to 65, press 3. If older, press 4.

18 to 29........................................................... 10%
30 to 45........................................................... 22%
46 to 65........................................................... 46%
Older than 65.................................................. 22%
8 posted on 11/01/2009 2:15:33 PM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm; 185JHP; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

9 posted on 11/01/2009 2:15:44 PM PST by DirtyHarryY2K (The Tree of Liberty is long overdue for its natural manure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

These initiatives have been losing support at a rate of 2% per year. The younger generation is much more comfortable with the idea of gay marriage.


10 posted on 11/01/2009 2:17:34 PM PST by Conservativism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
I'm just giving a prediction. If you look at most surveys, opposition to gay marriage drops incrementally as you go down the age brackets.

Personally, I don't think there should be ANY government marriage, nor should the tax code favor married people.

BTW: I would vote against government-sanctioned same sex marriage if I were in Maine, if that is what you are wondering.

11 posted on 11/01/2009 2:18:11 PM PST by Clemenza (Remember our Korean War Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj
Remember Sodom and Gomorrah's fate.

This could be America if gay marriage were to be omnipresent.

12 posted on 11/01/2009 2:20:37 PM PST by myknowledge (F-22 Raptor: World's Largest Distributor of Sukhoi parts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

Maine isn’t really a deep blue state. It is a deep independent state. The problem in Maine is the lack of GOP machine not the lack of potential voters. The same can be said for many of the NE states. They are far more conservative than given credit the problem is if you let the Democrats have the field then how do we expect the game to go? I believe even in Massachusetts gay marriage would be overturned if the battle were waged effectively. There has never been a majority support for gay marriage or the homosexual agenda. The only time the support increases is when we quit fighting.


13 posted on 11/01/2009 2:21:47 PM PST by Maelstorm (Party like it's 1776!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Gay marriage has occurred in lily white states like NH, VT and IA. America is becoming less white. Minorities would stand up and say no to gay marriage like they did in AZ, CA and FL last year. The perplexing problem for the GOP would be these same anti-gay marriage minorites would never vote for a Republican.


14 posted on 11/01/2009 2:26:46 PM PST by yongin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

What you are not looking at is that people as they get older tend to become more conservative. What do you expect young dumb kids to believe with TV shows promoting homosexual characters as innocuous? I was more liberal when I was younger. Not on gay marriage though no one had told me it was wrong. They didn’t have to it is just one of those things that is instinctively apparent. However on issues like socialism I was more receptive.


15 posted on 11/01/2009 2:27:24 PM PST by Maelstorm (Party like it's 1776!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
... (48% for,48% against,%5 undecided)

That extra 1% is the built in advantage that democrats always enjoy.

16 posted on 11/01/2009 2:28:53 PM PST by RobinOfKingston (Democrats, the party of evil. Republicans, the party of stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobinOfKingston

Not on this issue.


17 posted on 11/01/2009 2:34:21 PM PST by Maelstorm (Party like it's 1776!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

.....not surprizing...Maine elected Olympia Snowe!


18 posted on 11/01/2009 2:38:24 PM PST by Doctor Don
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
If you look at most surveys, opposition to gay marriage drops incrementally as you go down the age brackets.

True. And you know why that is.

19 posted on 11/01/2009 2:39:55 PM PST by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RobinOfKingston

You beat me me to it. Only in Maine can they come up with 101%.


20 posted on 11/01/2009 2:41:52 PM PST by OpeEdMunkey (Eat right...exercise...die anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

I was reading just the other day how the New England area is the least religious area of the country. This just confirms it.


21 posted on 11/01/2009 3:08:20 PM PST by longhorn too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

Wonder if those who think same sex marriages are OK would vote for polygamy


22 posted on 11/01/2009 3:12:56 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
There has never been a majority support for gay marriage or the homosexual agenda. The only time the support increases is when we quit fighting.

Agreed. I take some comfort in the fact that over the last few years the number of people who consider themselves pro-life has been slowly increasing. Maybe it's that people are educating themselves on the issue, maybe they see the radicals in power and their taking a good hard look at what abandoning traditional values ultimately gets you. Hopefully the same will hold true with this issue. Anytime the people vote on it through referendum gay marriage always loses. Remember the truth resonates with most people.

23 posted on 11/01/2009 3:14:31 PM PST by YankeeReb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

Even Alice in Wonderland could not conceive that any voter in his/her right mind would define same sex union as marriage.


24 posted on 11/01/2009 3:16:06 PM PST by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

I just said a prayer to defeat this abomination. Everyone else should too. The Lord will hear it.


25 posted on 11/01/2009 3:20:49 PM PST by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DirtyHarryY2K
Perhaps residents of Maine should watch this video of a man in Massachusetts who was fired for expressing his belief on gay marriage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWxOKOcf3zQ&
26 posted on 11/01/2009 3:21:57 PM PST by scripter ("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: myknowledge
"Remember Sodom and Gomorrah's fate."

Liberal "Biblical Scholars" at the major universities have "re-interpreted" that story... now the cities weren't destroyed because of sexual immorality... oh no. They were destroyed because they weren't generous enough sharing their wealth. They were destroyed because they weren't liberal enough.
27 posted on 11/01/2009 3:24:34 PM PST by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
-- It looks highly likely that the law will be rejected and marriage between a man and a woman once again be the law of the land of Maine. --

I'm going to do my part to make that happen. Then the perverts will keep bringing the issue up until it passes without recourse.

28 posted on 11/01/2009 3:25:01 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
I've said it on here before and not everyone concurred, but I agree with him. The poll shows that the only reason the law would be overturned is because of older voters. Every year, older people die and more younger people enter the electorate. Ten years ago, gay marriage bans passed by 70%-30% margins. Today, we're looking at a near even split. Why? The demographic trend. You're never going to convince majority of the 18 year olds in the world today that gays getting married is going to have any influence on their life at all because they grew up watching Will & Grace on television or reading blogs like Perez Hilton where he outs (often with photographic evidence) everyone from actors such as Will Smith to NFL players. For most young people, being gay is about as different as having blond hair or blue eyes in the same way that women working wasn't a big deal for the generation before us.

I'm a conservative on 99% of issues - I believe in limited government, the unconditional right to bear arms, a balanced budget, a strong national defense including a missle defense system, am Pro-Israel, pro-life, support low taxes, vehemently oppose Unions card-checks, and support the right of parents to determine the education and religious upbringing of their children without government interference. But you are not going to get me to tell someone that the government has the right to determine their private, consensual, relationship.

As a Christian, I have my own beliefs on the matter because I believe the Bible is my authority. That's a matter for my family and church. As a citizen of the Republic, I cannot support the idea that the public is going to determine whether or not two grown adults can enter into a legally binding contract (which is what marriage is in the eyes of the law).

Here's the kicker: I'm in my mid-twenties. Most of my friends feel the same way, and most all of them are identical on political issues (pro-life, pro-guns, pro-defense, etc.) I would bet a significant sum of cash that the earlier poster hit the time table on the head - within 20 years, gay marriage will be no more controversial than interracial marriage because my generation just doesn't care. I think anyone who thinks they can convince younger voters to change their position is living in a fool's paradise.

That's why I've also said that the best way for conservatism to win is to focus on the advice of Benjamin Franklin - we must appeal to voter's interest rather than reason. We must show them that conservatism means more money in their paycheck and less government in their lives. We must convince them that conservatism means the freedom to chose their own path without interference from a nanny state. The demographic trends show that on this issue, like racism in the United States, every day that goes by the demographics shift beneath our party, just like sands in an hourglass. Time is not on the side of those who believe in one man one woman marriage as many of us Christians do. To fail to recognize that reality is to fail to rationally and objectively look at the facts.

29 posted on 11/01/2009 3:45:24 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
...you are not going to get me to tell someone that the government has the right to determine their private, consensual, relationship.

Evolution is only possible with HETEROSEXUAL relationships. This is a scientific fact...


As a Christian,...

BULLSHIITE!


I have my own beliefs on the matter because I believe the Bible is my authority. That's a matter for my family and church.

Religious faggotry is an insular self-referential cult.


To fail to recognize that reality is to fail to rationally and objectively look at the facts.

REALITY is axiomatic... If you have to tell a grown man babies will not emerge from his rectum, he is mentally ill.

30 posted on 11/01/2009 3:55:51 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist

You of course then, would have no problem with polygamous and polyamourous marriages? In other words, the word marriage will be meaningless.


31 posted on 11/01/2009 3:59:13 PM PST by MSF BU (++)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: myknowledge
Okay, as a Christian who believes the Jesus Christ is the son of God and the Bible is the Word of God, it really, really bothers me when people take American culture and use it as scripture without reading the text itself. God specifically, to a point, bullet-point listed all of the sins of Sodom in Ezekiel 16:46-50, told his prophet to warn the people because they were committing the same sins and that if they didn't repent, they'd be wiped off the face of the earth just like Sodom was. (BTW: This is no way supports those nut-cases that think the "sin" of Sodom was a lack of hospitality - the Bible clearly states what they were and I believe the Bible is the word of God.)

The two angels that the men of the town attempted to rape did so after they had already been sent there to take Abraham's nephew Lot out of the city so that couldn't be the sole reason the city was destroyed. It was just icing on the proverbial sin cake.

America has been violating almost everything on the "Sodom" list in Ezekiel for about 100 years now and as a Church, we have done virtually nothing to stop it. As a Christian, we have beliefs on the mortality of homosexuality but to say it was 100% responsible for the destruction of Sodom is blatantly against scripture because God spelled it out to warn his children that they were committing the same sins and would be obliterated if they didn't repent and turn back to Him.

Your elder sister is Samaria who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters. You not only followed their ways, and acted according to their abominations; within a very little time you were more corrupt than they in all your ways. As I live, says the Lord GOD, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it. - Ezekiel 16:46-50

Throughout the old and new testaments, God showed tremendous mercy to His people. You're arguing that if we allow gays to get married, there will be more homosexuality in America and thus we will be more like Sodom? You realize that if someone wants to screw members of the same gender they are already doing it - the lack of "marriage" isn't going to stop them so it would have no influence on the percentage of our population that was sinning against God. Furthermore, the same percentage of people were probably screwing the same gender back in the 19th century but they hid it behind sham marriages and in back rooms. Do you think God only hates sin when its public? Or do you think he overlooks that which is in private so it doesn't count? I'm not sure I understand your logic.

I hope I said that clearly. I'm trying to read a book but thought I'd check the latest stories on here and don't feel like going back and editing.

32 posted on 11/01/2009 4:03:38 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: yongin
Thank you! A lot of the comments on here don't have a rational basis or strategy for how we can get conservatives back in control of the government. You nailed it on the head! We have a demographic problem and this is in addition to the age discussion I, and a few other posters, mentioned earlier. What is our strategy for fixing it?
33 posted on 11/01/2009 4:05:04 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
... as a Christian who believes the Jesus Christ is the son of God and the Bible is the Word of God, ...

Blah, blah, blah...

You are in direct contempt of Genesis... You might has well throw the rest of your Bible in the trash...

34 posted on 11/01/2009 4:08:37 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
I wrote about this extensively on another post. That is a huge mistake because sociological evidence shows that people get more conservative relative to the culture not in an absolute sense as they get older. In other words, a radical liberal was one who believed in freeing the slaves in their 20's. The fact that they didn't believe in women voting in their 80's meant they were a staunch conservative because the culture had changed around them.

Today's "conservative" elderly voters are the same people that would be considered crazy liberals by their grandparents' standards. They have probably gotten divorced, accept their social security checks, gamble at the riverboat (the biggest demographic for casinos), and listen to rock 'n roll.

Society very, very rarely grows more conservative in an absolute sense. That's why I said to think otherwise is to live in a fool's paradise. The same people used that argument to believe that someday, the younger voters would realize women working was a bad idea or that blacks and whites shouldn't get married. It's faulty logic. People's beliefs get more ingrained as they get older, not less.

35 posted on 11/01/2009 4:09:26 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
I meant to have my response on the Sodom comment to go you, as well (sorry I forgot to put it in the "to" field).

I think the idea that Sodom was destroyed because it wasn't hospitable enough is idiotic and only someone who was trying to make the Bible fit his own agenda would believe that.

But I believe the Bible is the Word of God so my personal belief is that when God spelled out the reasons for Sodom's destruction in Ezekiel, providing a bullet-point list as to why it was wiped off the face of the earth and warning his children that they were coming dangerously close to committing the same sin, it's the truth. It specifically, to-the-point without exception or any wiggle room says that Sodom was destroyed because she didn't share her wealth. (I posted the verse in the other post so you could read it.)

I'm a huge capitalist. I'm also rich. I hate socialism with a deep, abiding passion. But the reality is, the verse said that (I posted it earlier). I'm not going to call God a liar even if it's inconvenient for me. If I disagree with it, that means that Ezekiel is less the word of God than Genesis and then we have a huge problem because we get to pick and chose what is right for us, as Christians. I don't believe we have that luxury because I believe we are called to a different standard than the world.

36 posted on 11/01/2009 4:15:07 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
I wrote about this extensively on another post.

Yes, evidence of that insular, self-referential cult I wrote about earlier...

37 posted on 11/01/2009 4:17:38 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
I'm a huge capitalist. I'm also rich.

The idea of a camel passing through the eye of a needle comes directly to mind...

38 posted on 11/01/2009 4:18:45 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
1.) You're using evolution as a justification for God's will for personal relationships? No, homosexuality is a sin because God said it, not because of evolution (for instance, some scientists believe that women with gay children are statistically more fertile so homosexuality is a byproduct of female reproduction success and thus is compatible). I don't believe that. God's word alone should be enough for us to believe something is right or wrong for our own life.

2.) I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. I believe that He died for my sins and rose on the third day. I believe that I am accountable to Him for my sins, thoughts, and actions, and that I'm called to a different standard than the world. I believe that by His grace, and not my actions, I am saved. I also believe that I have to live holy as a testament to Him. Yes. I'm a Christian. yes, I live my life according to His standard for morality.

I have a problem with the GOVERNMENT telling people what is and what is not acceptable between consenting adults (not churches, not families, not friends) for the same reason I don't think they have a right to FORCE me to take a vaccine or FORCE me to procreate for the good of the nation. The Government must be morally neutral (as a protestant, I don't believe my divorced grandmother is going to hell but there are some Orthodox Christians who believe that with all of their heart; if we let the Government outlaw divorce, they are imposing their religious beliefs on me).

Again, your reproduction argument isn't logical either because as Christians, our only argument for our own lives should be something is immoral or moral because God said so. Period. There have been multiple posts in the past few days on Free Republic about scientists perfecting techniques that will let two women or two men biologically procreate genetic offspring together, just like an inferitble couple would. Would that suddenly make homosexuality moral? According to your logic it would. Again: Morality or immorality is determined by the Word of God and not by your opinion of scientific fact.

The reason I so strongly believe in the right of individual families and churches to make religious decisions is because I'm a student of history. Our ancestors slaughtered themselves over questions of whether Mary remained a virgin after she birthed Jesus or whether the bread literally becomes the body of Christ or is merely representative of the body of Christ. I don't want the Government to have any say, in any way, shape, or form, on any religious matter. A perfect case in point: I agree on 99% of issues with my Christian brethren but because I have pause over one issue that many in my generation do, you literally attempting to pass judgment on whether or not I'm saved (which, frankly, is a right that neither you nor any other man has).

If you can't understand the rational logic behind that, then I pardon your mental deficiency.

39 posted on 11/01/2009 4:27:38 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
You are a homo-apologist troll.

I am an atheist and I do know how to spot a cultural marxist

I reject your religious faggotry as well as your false witness of the Bible. If you deny Genesis, you deny the whole thing baby boy.

In fact I would bet, despite your fatuous fakery, you would excuse just about any perversity as long as it was beneficial to you in some way.

Sanctimonious creeps like you are the ruin of this country.

40 posted on 11/01/2009 4:40:13 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
You have to be kidding me.

You said something wasn't in the Bible. I provided the verse showing that it was, word for word.

You then said I denied Genesis.

How this is the case, I don't understand because those weren't my words, I just posted the Ezekiel verse you claimed didn't exist letter for letter.

God specifically gave a list of all of the reasons Sodom was destroyed, among which was homosexuality. You said he never said anything about Sodom not sharing it's wealth when yes, He did. It's right there - go pick up the Bible and open it to the verse! How can you deny that it is there? Seriously?!

What don't you understand about that? What, in that statement, was Biblically incorrect? Or am I only allowed to quote the few lines of the Bible you've actually read?

Christians like you are the ones that don't actually bother to read anything more than the flash cards they see in Sunday school. You know, we're supposed to read the whole book. You realize Jesus was a Jew, right? And you realize that Adam and Even could not have, by definition, been white because we're less than 5% of the population and have only existed in Northern Europe for a few thousand years.

No, you are the type of Christian that give us a bad name. You never actually read the Bible, make up what you want, and assume that anyone who disagrees with you has an ulterior motive. Sorry - I realize ulterior is probably a big word for you. Should have gone with something smaller.

41 posted on 11/01/2009 4:47:24 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
...you are the type of Christian that give us a bad name.

I'm an atheist.

42 posted on 11/01/2009 4:49:33 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
Hobbes wrote about your brand or religionists... The false prophets like Bishop Gene Robinson...

LIARS!

Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness

[1] Besides these sovereign powers, divine and human, of which I have hitherto discoursed, there is mention in Scripture of another power, namely, that of “the rulers of the darkness of this world,” [Ephesians, 6. 12] “the kingdom of Satan,” [Matthew, 12. 26] and “the principality of Beelzebub over demons,” [Ibid., 9. 34] that is to say, over phantasms that appear in the air: for which cause Satan is also called “the prince of the power of the air”; [Ephesians, 2. 2] and, because he ruleth in the darkness of this world, “the prince of this world”:[John, 16. 11] and in consequence hereunto, they who are under his dominion, in opposition to the faithful, who are the “children of the light,” are called the “children of darkness.” For seeing Beelzebub is prince of phantasms, inhabitants of his dominion of air and darkness, the children of darkness, and these demons, phantasms, or spirits of illusion, signify allegorically the same thing. This considered, the kingdom of darkness, as it is set forth in these and other places of the Scripture, is nothing else but a confederacy of deceivers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by dark and erroneous doctrines, to extinguish in them the light, both of nature and of the gospel; and so to disprepare them for the kingdom of God to come.

43 posted on 11/01/2009 4:55:31 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
You're an atheist? Then this was a pointless conversation because my world view cannot be separated from my Christianity. And you have no right to tell me what I'm supposed to believe according to your definition of Christianity.

And dude, seriously - you have way too much emotional energy invested in this thing to be arguing with me over whether or not things exist in the Bible, especially since you don't believe in anything.

The fact that you've gone from telling me verses don't exist in the Bible to telling me that I'm not a Christian makes no sense in light of the fact you don't believe there is a God and clearly have zero knowledge of scripture. You're probably a 14 year old kid. I'm not wasting my time on this anyone because you haven't made one useful observation about how the conservatives can take back over the government in light of the demographic challenges that are presenting themselves right now.

We can sit in an echo chamber and scream all day but I have one interest and one interest only: To get conservatives back in control of the government so that we can limit government involvement in the day-to-day lives of citizens. Your positions have no theoretical or practical foundation. I have just as much contempt for that sort of worthless screaming at the wind as I do the union supporters that talk about how they deserve $100,000 per year health care benefits. It's just a pointless conversation to have.

44 posted on 11/01/2009 4:57:37 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
...my world view cannot be separated from my Christianity.

http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html

45 posted on 11/01/2009 4:59:56 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
...my world view cannot be separated from my Christianity.
"When the fairies are displeased with anybody, they are said to send their elves to pinch them. The ecclesiastics, when they are displeased with any civil state, make also their elves, that is, superstitious, enchanted subjects, to pinch their princes, by preaching sedition; or one prince, enchanted with promises, to pinch another." (Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan 1651)

http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html


46 posted on 11/01/2009 5:00:50 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Again, I have no desire to discuss the mindless rantings of an atheist who is foolish enough to attempt to use theologians to discredit a position in which he himself does not believe.

You're an atheist. You don't believe God exists. You don't believe in Jesus Christ. I have absolutely no interest in your opinion on the matter. You're wasting your time.

Someone else who actually believes in Christ, who wants to come along and say, "Hey - but what about [insert verse here]. You need to think of it this way." is useful. As a Christian, I value that input because if I'm wrong on something, I want to know.

But I don't want an atheist telling me what is or is not in the Bible when I can open for myself and find the verse.

47 posted on 11/01/2009 5:01:05 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist

Hobbes nailed you fake religionists to the wall in 1651 for the less educated readers of the Bible.


48 posted on 11/01/2009 5:03:43 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist
Your positions have no theoretical or practical foundation.

The evidence in nature is powerful enough.

Now, if I have to explain the "birds and bees" with colorful crayon drawings and how getting the government out of the tax deduction/gay marriage/social engineering scam is practical, you are the hopelessly lost false prophet of filth...

Silly faggot, marriage is for kids...

49 posted on 11/01/2009 5:10:10 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Of course marriage is for kids; that's my belief as Christian. Unlike you, I don't think we need to string people up, call them things like "sheet heads", use racial epithets or point to self-serving "it's common sense" arguments that have no rational or theological basis.

But you, of course, think the big "G" government will solve all of our problems. Heck, let's use it like a stick, just like the liberal left does. Why not? That philosophy served us so well over the past decade. While we're at it, let's tell blacks they can't married, force women to work back at home, and since you're an atheist, we can use the government to ban religion altogether - surely you'd support that? People like me, with our silly Christian beliefs are certainly an impediment to your idea of a religion-free world.

Your very existence is the reason I believe in limited government. The idea of other people being able to tell me, or my family, or my friends, or my church how to live is repulsive. It makes me thank God (yes - GOD) that I was born and raised in the United States.

50 posted on 11/01/2009 5:21:46 PM PST by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson