Saturday, September 29, 2007

Reason for Hope

This is how it can happen. A Republican looks into the face of those he's hurting, and buckles.

20 Comments:

Blogger thepaintman said...

I knew there was a hidden agenda. His daughter is gay.If he was a christian he wouldn't of been wrestling with this problem?

Gay marriages and Illegal immigrants. What's next?

9/29/2007 10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If he was a christian he wouldn't of been wrestling with this problem?"

What a sad statement about being a christian.

9/29/2007 11:12 PM  
Anonymous Deb said...

Thanks so much for posting this. Just when I was certain that politians are hardly human, I see something like this. Reason for hope, indeed. I didn't even know I needed to see something like that, but I did.

9/29/2007 11:26 PM  
Anonymous Brooksider said...

I would be curious to hear VP & Mrs VP's reaction to this gentleman's thoughtful change of heart.

9/30/2007 10:44 AM  
Blogger Waldo Oiseau said...

That was quite moving! Thanks for sharing it, Dan.

9/30/2007 3:34 PM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

Let me make myself clearer to Anon 11:12.
If he had a relationship with Jesus he wouldn't be wrestling with this problem.
I keep forgetting alot of you's dont go to church.

this video was very disturbing.

9/30/2007 4:54 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

Paintman -

How so? I was in church this morning, but somehow this video didn't come up. (Tulips on Troost did, though!)

I'm really curious as to what you are trying to say. If he understood Jesus, he would be supportive of equality for all? Or, if he understood Jesus, he would be opposed to gay rights because they are sinners? Both your comments are ambiguous.

Personally, I don't feel qualified to judge his relationship with Jesus, but since you are, I'd love to hear your perspective.

9/30/2007 5:02 PM  
Blogger Stephen Bough said...

Paintman is right, if he had a relationship with Jesus, if this mayor was striving to be like Christ, then this isn't a hard one.

Love God; love your neighbor. If society casts someone out, you welcome him or her in. If they are your hated enemy lying on the side of the road, help your enemy (the good Samaritan story). If society says judges the person committing adultery, the stop the stone throwing.

Truly, Paintman is correct. Jesus would reach out to the sickest, the poorest, the most picked on and treat all with love.

9/30/2007 7:05 PM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

Dan I didn't say understood. Apparently you don't understand.

If you have a relationship with Jesus YOU should know what I mean. You're a smart person.

What kind of church do you go to?

9/30/2007 11:19 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

You did say he "wouldn't of" (sic) so I thought you would appreciate my attempt to rephrase your thoughts into English.

I go to a Catholic Church, though I'm not sure why that should matter to you.

Now, state clearly, what makes you judge his Christianity insufficient?

9/30/2007 11:24 PM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

Dan are you a born again christian?

10/01/2007 1:57 PM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

I don't know if he is a christian. Thats why I said, "If he was a christian".

Once again, I wouldn't judge him but instead correcting him. If someone does wrong you should correct them.

People have a tougher time with life, if they don't have Jesus. The Bible is like, a book of life. It shows you what to do and how to do it. Whats wrong and what's right. What is bad and what is good.
Thats why people should constantly read their Bible. If you read it once, read it agian and again and again.

10/01/2007 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Paintman - he said he is Catholic - most Catholics I know don't use that "born again" terminology.

Why don't you just answer his question? WTF do you mean when you say he "wouldn't of" been wrestling with this problem if he was a Christian?

Quit stalling and state what you mean.

10/01/2007 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oops - Paintman, sorry - our posts crossed in the internets tubes.

But I still don't get it. What would have happened if he read the Bible? Would he still be doing the right thing, or would he be vetoing the legislation?

10/01/2007 2:12 PM  
Blogger les said...

While, in a way, I'd like to give this guy some credit, I find the whole "conversion" pretty stomach turning. He was perfectly happy to impose his beliefs on others (whether sincerely held or politically convenient) so long as he wasn't effected; and flips when he is. Nice cross between IOKIYAR and "government is bad unless the earmark's for me."

10/01/2007 4:46 PM  
Blogger Xavier Onassis said...

"People have a tougher time with life, if they don't have Jesus. The Bible is like, a book of life. It shows you what to do and how to do it. Whats wrong and what's right. What is bad and what is good.
Thats why people should constantly read their Bible. If you read it once, read it agian and again and again."

What a steaming load of crap!

People have a "tougher time with life" if they have to use a bunch of ancient superstitions and fairytales as a crutch to inform their thought process instead of facing life head on and reaching rational decisions based on ACTUAL FACTS.

Faith is belief without evidence.

I can have "faith" that Middle Earth really exists and that Gandalf was a real wizard. Faith does not require me to have any evidence that this is true.

But I would be an idiot to consult "The Two Towers" as a resource for my decision process when deciding how to vote on a 21st century, real-world political issue.

If you want to believe in Jeebus, fine. Go drink the Kool Aid, eat the crackers and do the Holy Calisthenics (sit, stand, sit, bow, stand, kneel, bow, stand, bow, sit).

But don't you dare impose your fantasies on my life by passing legislation requiring me to abide by your beliefs. Because I will sic a Balrog on you faster than you can throw a ballot switch! Don't MAKE ME call Shelob!

10/01/2007 7:06 PM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

Paintman - he said he is Catholic - most Catholics I know don't use that "born again" terminology.

"Dan this is in the Bible: John3:3
Ever of changing to evangelisic?"

when you say he "wouldn't of" been wrestling with this problem if he was a Christian?

"He would of stand by saying no to gay marriages if he had a relationship with Jesus. Because Jesus says we should marry a person in the opposite sex and multiply."


Xavier Onassis and Cate

"Their lost and hasn't found their way to Jesus. So instead of trying to understand it, he makes fun of it. Not just him but there's alot of people like him. We just forgive him and love him. Maybe one day he'll see who Jesus really is. If you mention or talk about the Bible to him or any other people they react as, you are imposing your beliefs on me."

10/02/2007 11:43 PM  
Blogger les said...

Paintman says "If you mention or talk about the Bible to him or any other people they react as, you are imposing your beliefs on me."

Wrong again, o tinted one. YOu can mention, quote, spout passages to your heart's content--I may not listen, but the only imposition is the rudeness factor. When you and your fellows pass laws that ban equal treatment for people different than you, or mandate actions and behaviors from others, based on your interpretation of the 4,000 year old maunderings of goat herders, then you are imposing your beliefs. And then some of us will push back.

10/03/2007 8:55 AM  
Blogger thepaintman said...

Les you are such a Fool.

If you read all the post and not just one you would of know it was directed towards Xavier Onassis.

One word describes you: Moron

10/04/2007 9:27 AM  
Blogger les said...

Thanks for making ma a cap "F" fool, P'man. My comment was directed at the quoted words--that means I was responding to your actual statement, something you said. It really had nothing to do with who you might have been directing it to; although it's never easy to tell with you, thanks for the heads up. I simply meant to point out that when the christianists start their whiny persecuted crapola about "we can't talk about the bible," they really mean "we can't legislate our peculiar moral prejudices." It's an important distinction.

10/04/2007 10:03 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home