The Ellen DeGeneres Interview That Will Haunt President Obama

Fox News ^ | February 1, 2011 | Staff

[lbryce]

Long before his administration went into federal court to fight 27 states that are now challenging the constitutionality of the federal government forcing people to buy health insurance, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama told Ellen DeGeneres that

[BigSkyFreeper]

She vocally supported Obama for president and has pushed for Prop 8’s passage in California.

[21twelve]

Not sure it has been mentioned, but Hannity was talking about the Florida judge’s judgement, and the judge had Obama’s quote in the statement!

That said, the real plan is not to destroy the insurance industry. Although that will happen as a matter of course. The real goal is to destroy private doctors. The socialist’s goal is not to have “National Insurance”. It is to have “National Health Care”.

National insurance is a step. But, when it becomes SO expensive (have to insure everyone regardless of risk, no competition, etc.), they will then blame the greedy doctors. “National health insurance WOULD have worked if it weren’t for the greedy doctors. So the doctors can work only if they submit to Federal pricing guidlines and technology. It is not fair that the rich get the best treatment and the women and children are hardest hit....”

[sargon]

Who she [Ellen] sleeps with is her business, not mine.

Indeed.

[AbolishCSEU]

the Bible says sexual relations should only be between a husband and wife

I think it also says that the sole "reason" for divorce should be adultery proven by at least two witnesses. And then if that cannot be proven, the couple should remain together or else remain celibate separately. It also eludes that any sexual relations after the accusation of adultery is a sign of forgiveness. Now how many Christians follow that to the letter? Make divorce harder to get with the threat of 50/50 joint custody for any children from the union and you'll see divorce rates plummet and marriage (and childbearing) increase. And I like that "facial mole" analogy with the constant oppresive "activism" of the liberal, gay left.

[Catsrus]

I’m sure she did since she has an agenda. However, she isn’t on the air shoving it down everyone’s throat.

I never said I agree with her lifestyle, but, I do like her as a person. There’s a difference.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I have plenty of gay friends also. Homosexuality is a sin. I hate the sin, not the sinner, because I am a sinner like you and everyone else on this Earth.

[sargon]

The big concern as a nation - The United States of America - when we start having our government change it's laws to actually condone sin then our nation is in serious trouble.

I also think there's a problem when we have our government making laws which criminalize sin.

Murder, robbery, assault, fraud, and the like are, of course, sinful, but they have the added characteristic of being sins which involve infringing upon the rights of others.

While certain sins may be abhorrent to some, outlawing those which don't violate others' rights, thus making a criminal out of the sinner, is Tyranny, plain and simple.

America should not be a nation of arbitrary law. Too many embrace such Tyranny because it overlaps with their worldview. The problem is, eventually something you do will be outlawed because of some real or imagined consensus of the People.

Majority Tyranny is still Tyranny...

[Catsrus]

I have no disagreement with your post.

[LowOiL]

But the haters on this forum are too much.

Not called for. He pointed out what was a Captain Obvious point and then you and 14 other people pile on.

But if you makes you feel better I will provide you a new target, Ellen makes me sick. Homosexuals are disgusting and perverted. They are against nature. The list goes on and on, and it that makes me a hater, well kiss my grits.

[LowOiL]

We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism--- JIM

[TigersEye]

...well kiss my grits.

No thanks, ya pervert!

[LowOiL]

I hate the sin, not the sinner

Biblically can you show anyone where it says that.

“Hate the sin, but love the sinner,” is a quote from Mahatma Ghandi not Jesus.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I never said it was not in the Bible, you did.

[LowOiL]

I never said it was not in the Bible, you did.

Lets be clear, I without a doubt say it is not in the Bible.

But this is..

"Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil"

Hypocritical love is what your quote teaches.

[PieterCasparzen]

Now how many Christians follow that to the letter?

I hope we all remember that the Bible does not contain an exception for the unrepentent sinner from God's wrath; even if everyone around him is sinning. God's mercy and love towards sinners is revealed in what the Apostle Paul describes as being "born again"; we must accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, by the Grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ we are saved. And the old man within us will die, God's Holy Spirit will dwell within the Believer, which will allow us to overcome sin. No human can resist the temptation to sin without the assistance of the Holy Spirit. I know this from experience. People are often misguided about "backsliding". God being the Creator certainly means that the Holy Spirit would have enough power to stop me from commiting a sin. Every time Jesus forgave there was an understanding of not sinning any more, e.g., go and sin no more. Forgiveness was for past sins, not a "get out of jail free card" for the future. If a person continues to sin they are not saved at that point. They may eventually come to Christ; even unto their deathbed this is possible.

The Apostle Paul writes of being in bondage to Christ and was joyful about being bought with a price; the Christian who has repented and is saved has a duty to obey Christ and this is very emphatically stated in the New Testament. Truly, many are called but few are chosen.

Scriptural marriage guidelines are rarely followed; as far as the "modern" way of our legal system and current social mores, it's so far off it's lost. With many people, it's not a binding contract which involves God any more, it's just the status of a contract between two people. When the Believer marries, they become subject to all scriptural marriage guidelines which elminate most of the difficulties most couples have.

[PieterCasparzen]

I also think there's a problem when we have our government making laws which criminalize sin. Murder, robbery, assault, fraud, and the like are, of course, sinful, but they have the added characteristic of being sins which involve infringing upon the rights of others.

Well, sin means crime. The Bible is the laws of God, our laws are the laws of man. Sins can be against God or against man. The libertarian view tends to be if it's not hurting anyone else it's ok. However many libertarians only look at very direct consequences. With drug use, they say it doesn't matter to anyone else if they get high, but that's not the entire story; they don't admit the effects on society of the use of hard drugs, i.e., the existence of a hard drug industry, the fact that other people's young children are drawn to experiment and that some people can handle a lot of drugs and some can't handle them at all.

The fact that the whole Bible is not in our laws is a very astute point. We have no laws regarding idolatry, honoring parents, etc. While the Christian must live according to all the Bible, our laws are restricted to more of a minimalist interpretation: what people of all faiths as well as atheists would need to live peaceably in civil society. As you said, no killing, stealing, etc., but we can legally lie to each other as long as doing it does not break any laws that we do have.

I assume by "infringing upon rights of others" you're including "causes damages to others".

I was focusing more on the word condone, though. It certainly benefits us to not structure laws to condone idolatry, which would be a fairly nutty thing - like having a skull you worship in the backyard. While we don't need to outlaw idolatry to have a "bare-bones" framework for society, it certainly would not provide any benefit to pass laws encouraging idolatry while it would be encouraging behavior consistent with that which winds up causing harm.

The same with honoring parents; I would not want laws that make it more profitable for me to dishonor my parents than to honor them. Covetousness - we don't have laws against it, but I would not want laws that encourage it.

That's where our sodomy laws come in. Our laws now actually condone sodomy. They make it a crime to bring anything up in conversation with a coworker which might make them uncomfortable if they commit these acts. There are some particularly gruesome parades and festivals around the country, all condoned by our governments. And now the age limits... well, it depends on what state you're in, how old the "offender" is as to whether this a broken law or just good old fun - regardless of gender. Not a comforting feeling for parents desiring grandchildren instead of questionmarks and symbols on their family tree. We all know of the groups that are lobbying for legalization and encouragement of all sorts of debauchery. And what does the sodomy gain for us - really what is the gain ?

And to top it all off, our young children are propagandized into "partying" and accepting alternate "families" and "lifestyles" from the day they set foot in school. This is the law of the United States. It use to restrict deviancy, and now, instead of simply repealing that law so it is not addressed, it goes so far as to condone and even require acceptance of a deviancy which the Bible specifically commands us to refrain from.

The first settlers struggled to come here to escape burning at the stake for the sake of their faith and now it's come to this; God help us to turn to back to him.

[Moorings]

You know, I’m not a huge fan of homosexuality.

Doesn't that statement make you a "hater" too? I believe it does according to the gay activists. Now off to the re-education camp.

[AFreeBird]

I'll say one thing, she got herself a looker.

[airborne]

You know, I’m not a huge fan of homosexuality. But the haters on this forum are too much.

And most are dead set in their opinions. Don't take it too personally. There's nothing to be gained by arguing the point too long with some.

That's just one of FreeRepublics quirks. Know when to end the conversation, and don't let it get you down.

8^)

[USARightSide]

‘Then pray for her.’ Indeed.

I have enjoyed Ellen's humor for many, many years. In the early days, I suppose I may have wondered her orientation, but it didn't interfere with enjoying her. Back then, I really didn't know.

Don't think shes unattractive, either. I actually don't watch her show, but see her occasionally here and there.