Thursday, November 16, 2006

 

Oklahoma Southern Baathists -- oops, Baptists -- vote to cause harm to children and other living things

The Baathist General Convention of Oklahoma -- oops, the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma -- apparently in Jesus's name, has voted to encourage businesses not to provide benefits to same-sex couples and other nontraditional families.

Read about it here.

Unless I'm mistaken, there is no rush by Oklahoma businesses to provide benefits to same-sex couples and other nontraditional families. So the Baathists, I mean Baptists, are taking a cue from Focus on Everybody Else's Family and are stirring up s--t just to be stirring up s--t.

What the Baathists, I mean Baptists are doing is asking people to deny benefits to children based on their parents' sexual orientation. That's just wrong. Strictly speaking, it's biblical (nod to the few verses that mention licentious homosexual behavior but say *nothing* about homosexual orientation) -- but it is nothing close to Christian, in the sense that the word means "Christlike."

Oklahoma Baathists, I mean Baptists should be ashamed of the messengers they sent to convention. Myself, while I love the little Southern Baptist church I grew up in, I have never been happier to have shaken the fundamentalist dust of mean intolerance off my cowboy boots.

Jesus loves all. The UCC lets him.

--ER

Comments:
Truly sad that a church would seek to punish people for being who and what God made them. Not just them, but their children as well. I guess all that love stuff is too technical for us non-Baptists to understand.
 
"Strictly speaking, it's biblical"

I think it would be better said, "Strictly speaking, it's marginally biblical to oppose homosexuality, if one chooses to interpret the Bible that way..."
 
I won't even give them that. The Bible says nothing about homosexuality, and very little about homosexual acts -- and most of that in the innocent-children-stoning, angry-God-rampaging O.T.
 
the bible says we are all sinners all the time. let he who is without sin withhold benefits first.

KEvron
 
Yep.
 
Hey, you ever gonna turn that flag right side up, now that, hopefully, the worst of the Repubs riding roughshod over the country is behind us? I guess you might consider the country in trouble until we're able to right the wrongs they've done ...
 
Because I do not disagree with you, I must say that UCC is not the only church that does not agree with the OSB folks. We of the United Methodist church are a church of Open Minds, Open Hearts and Open Doors and invite all to BELIEVE that God calls us into ministry, encourages us to BELONG to His community of believers, and strive to BECOME all that He desire us to be.
 
Absolutely! I knew that. :-)
 
God loves oriented strand board! (Hee hee).
 
OK, so I have short-term memory loss and forgot what I was talking about...
 
Hey, E.R., I am SHOCKED that you have made no mention about what day today is, Mr. Historian.
 
Ah, OSB = Oklahoma Soutyhern Baptist. Der.
 
Let's see, Nov. 16 ...

STATEHOOD DAY in Oklahoma. :-)

99 years young!
 
Sigh. The thing about Baptists is like what Foxworthy says about Southerners:

"If we can just keep the least amnongst us off the TV!"

If we could just keep more than a couple of hundred Southern Baptists from getting together at the same time where there's a microphone! And the press watching! Seems like they always have to show their heinies.
 
as long as the chimp craps in the oval office, the flag stays inverted.

KEvron
 
Well now, to be fair, they're not just picking on homosexuals this time, ER. According to the article, nontraditional families also includes nonmarried, heterosexual couples. That's a lot of kids doing without benefits. (sigh) I'm not sure why it's okay, according to them, to be a single parent and receive benefits for your kids, though. Maybe they're taking into account some single parent's might be widowed, and therefore, shouldn't be stripped of benefits. I'm not sure. It's hard to follow their logic.

My son's reading a pretty interesting book right now, titled, "religiously transmitted diseases". I highly recommend it.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?