7 Responses to “April 17, 2009”

1. min.r.g.Askew
   April 17th, 2009 @ 8:26 pm

   This response is to the question , will allowing gay marriage open the door for other unorthodox marriages ? Marrige is a union between one man and one woman when you start messing with something thats not broken so to speak , that’s when the ole slippery slope forms because it’s all down hill from. If God’s way isnt good enough then name someone more perfect than God to better his way. I truly believe if gay marriages become legal and excepted nationally ,then watch out below because we also have poligomy and whatever you call marrying animals are waiting down the slippery slope of immorality, who would’ve thought years ago that gay marriage would ever been an issue but it is , so don’t count out the others. May the Lord Jesus save us all.

2. Konstantin
   April 19th, 2009 @ 2:56 am

   Murder of a transgender person is pretty tragic, sad, and to some extent upleasant case.
   First of all, I aminclined to take a position that defense took. Human sexuality is pretty fragile, and attraction itself is pretty tied to very emotional feelings.
   (1) For isntance, if a person comes home and finds out that his wife is in bed with someone else, he may be emotionally triggered to do some violent crime. I do NOT defend that. But this seems to be pretty positive reaction from human nature. This is due, in my humble opinion, to the fact that sexuality involves trust, confidentiality, and mutual respect.
   (2) Consider, also a person divorses his wife, and later finds out that she published online [say on YouTube] some private sexual data about their previous life to make fun of him. This too may lead to very emotionally painful experience, and may lead to some physical revenge. People simply liket thier provite life to stay private, and they expect confidenciality.
   Again, I do not advocate any violence here.
   (3) So, now consider a male person meeting other person as female, and during some ‘private’ time it turns out that ‘she’ is really a ‘he’. This is a very emotionally negative experience. A person may feel as being deceived, played with, betrayed, etc. And in the passion of the moment may even do some violent crime. And this is exactly what happened.
   This story does not surpirses me. It is unpleasant, and I hope nothing like that would happen. But I’m certainly not surprised.

   If a person would come home to find out a lover being in the bed with his wife, and he would murder them both, I would not be surprised. I certainly would not like that, but would not be surprised.

   Here of course I was talking of secular examples. But while actions/reactions should be different for believers, the emotional pain would pretty much be the same.

3. Konstantin
   April 19th, 2009 @ 3:30 am

   when it comes to plygamy, I do think that if homosexuals gain rights to ‘marry’ there would be a posibility for polygamy. The jump to make homosexuality ‘normal’ is in my mind is far greater than to jump from homosexuality to polygamy or even pedophilia.
   Honestly, in my own opinion, first case of polygamy would not be to make a “happy polygamic family”, but to trigger an anger and discomphort for conservatives. It is more about politics than anything else. It in a sense would be like immersing crusifix in the urine and call it an art (“Piss Christ” by Andres Serrano), or for that matter chaining a dog and starving it to death on display, be an art (done by Guillermo Habacuc Vargas). These are the examples of how people simply want to make you angry and play the law to do immoral/disguisitng things. There is no art there.
   Similarly, polygamy (with mulriple whatever ‘orientation’) persons would be more like another battle won over traditional Christian values than the pursuit of ‘love’, or something of that matter.

   I also have listened to Dr. Brown’s participation in secular radio interview. The host was not against incest, beastiality, and polygamy. He was rude and not very civil (insted of provideing civilized arguments, a guy simply called oponents names).
   I also encountered similar view somewhere. I’m not sure if that helps, but I asked a guy [who accepted all those perversions on the basis that they are done by adult people, and did not harm others] what about eating aborted fetuses? This was pretty hypothetic question, but think about that..
   If a woman chooses to do an abortion, does she not have a right to the ‘body part’ that was removed from her. After all, America is about rights. So, if she chooses to have that aborted fetus being cooked and eaten [to make conservatives angry], would that harm anyone? If abortion itself does not harm anyone [by today's definition], why would eating a fetus instead of throwing it away would be more different. After all it is a part [if not a 'parasite' by what some feminists say] of her body, and shouldn’t she have rights to it?
   I know this sound pretty barbaric, but since (1) there was a real story some time ago about some doctor who ate aborted fetuses, and (2) some of those peopel who like to go to extremes want to argue, why not give them more food for thought, so that they see how good their morality is.
   My point in all this story was – “if it doesn’t harm anyone, you should be allowed to legaly do it” simply very narrow requirement and not enough.

4. Erika
   April 19th, 2009 @ 4:31 am

   Where is the first hour?

5. Michael
   April 19th, 2009 @ 9:46 pm

   For some reason, the first hour broadcast is playing “Power in the Blood” from Good Friday.

6. Joel Santiago
   April 20th, 2009 @ 9:28 am

   yeah, where we can hear hour one?

7. Yoo Hoo
   April 22nd, 2009 @ 1:32 am

   Ditto, I’d like to hear hr 1….. possible?

Leave a Reply