AP coverage kicks up media firestorm nationwide

You know what drives me nuts, Mikey?  People make this hard when it is so simple.   Just picture that same scenario with a copy of another religion’s holy book in a museum display or on a poster instead of your personal Holy book and ask yourself, is this unsettling?  If the answer is yes, it should be omitted even if it is my Holy book in the exhibit.   In my Holy book, we are instructed to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.  We should agree to render to the our society reasonable behavior and abandon reason only when we are spoiling our grandchildren.

(name withheld)

Share this page:

Commenter Account Access

  • Register for a commenter account
    (Not required to post comments, but will save you time if you're a regular commenter)
  • Log in using your existing account
  • Click here to edit your profile and change your password
  • All comments are subject to our Terms of Use


  1. Rev Bob

    I just love it when someone takes a verse out of context when it has nothing to do with what they are talking about. Render under Caesar what is Caesars has nothing to do with rendering reasonable behavior in our society. That verse purely refers to money!!

  2. Connie

    I just love it when the preacher man uses the “that’s not what that verse means” chapter out of his make the bible say what you need it to say play book.

  3. Rev Bob

    Oh Connie,

    I interpret scripture for what it is truly saying in it’s context and cultural settings.

  4. MarkB

    Sure, Rev, sure; YOU are the one who gets to decide what that book says when it speaks garbage. The worst, lamest, and most easily debunked claim you people make is “out of context”.

    I would ask you to explain these examples, but I know better than to give someone like you the false legitimacy of the soapbox. Just PONDER these, EVERYONE ELSE, without expecting this pious con man to elaborate of become “expository” about it:

    “God” accepted a human sacrifice. Judges 11
    “God” established slavery, and the text was used to justify the horrors of the American South for 250 years. Exodus 21 and Leviticus 25
    “God’s” penalty for rape. Rapist marries his victim, and pays Dad 50 shekels. Deuteronomy 22

    BTW — “Jesus” amends NONE of these in the N.T.

  5. Rev Bob

    Mark B,

    When interpreting scripture, you must always interpret it within the context of what comes before the verse and what comes behind it as well as what the cultural context as well. So, it is never lame excuse to say that was taken out of its context.

    Regarding God “accepting” a human sacrifice, He made a rash vow that if God delivered Ammon into his hands he would sacrifice unto Him whatever came out of the door of his house to meet him on his victorious return. Leaving God to choose the victim, Jephthah likely thought one of the slaves would come out to greet him and be the burnt offering. God took Jephthah at his word, but he was stunned when he saw his precious daughter crossing the threshold to greet him. God answered his prayer and punished him through its answer. Jephthah’s daughter asked to leave for two months to mourn her virginity and I am sure that during that time she would not return so that he would not have to keep his vow he made.

    Human sacrifice is an abomination to Jewish people, why do you think that Jews today do not accept Christ as their Messiah, because their Messiah would not become a human sacrifice for them on a Roman cross.

    Regarding slavery, God never established slavery and slavery back in the OT was not like slavery was during the Civil War. Slavery during the Civil War era as a chattel system while slavery in the OT was not. Also, after six years the slave was allowed to go free in the OT,never in the Civil War era.

    Do you ever see slavery mentioned again outside of the first five books of the OT? No, why, because the first five books describes the Mosaic Law which was in effect while the Israelites were in the desert. The Mosaic Law was to keep the Israelites separate from the heathen nations that were around them. The same goes for “God’s penalty for rape” in Deut 22, this took place under the Mosaic Law while in the desert. The Jews today are no longer under the Mosaic Law so they are not doing today what they did while in the Sinai desert.

    While yes there were some Christians during the Civil War who mis-interpreted scripture regarding slavery, there were hundreds more who did interpret it correctly and they are credited with seeing that slavery was abolished. The same in England, William Wilberforce, and evangelical Christian, saw that slave trading in England was abolished for good. There is even an all black college today named Wilberforce University, named after the while evangelical Christian years ago who got slavery and slave trading abolished in the English colonies.

    If you want to read more about slavery during OT times just click on this link here-

    Regarding Jesus not amending any of these, He did not need to since the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect and they were now under the Davidic Covenant. Also Jesus said that He was bringing a new and better covenant and that all the Law and the Prophets were now fulfilled in Him. There was no human sacrifice during the time of Jesus, there was no slavery during the time of Jesus!

  6. Connie


    Blah blah blah – the book says what I say it says. That’s what I got from your many paragraphs.

    Note: Your attempt to prove the Bible doesn’t support slavery…. History remembers the story differently.

    I am correct. You believe your book says what you say it does and the book itself is so filled with contridoctions that you can get away with it.

  7. Rev Bob


    The bible doe not support slavery, if it did, wouldn’t there still be slavery today?? It was Christians who got slavery abolished here in the US and in England, what don’t you understand about that?? Just remember who supported slavery here in the US, it was the Democrats! Lincoln, a Christian, fought to abolish slavery.

    Sorry there are no contradictions in the bible, otherwise God would be contradicting Himself which He cannot do because He is God. However, since you are a heathen you can never understand the bible since it takes a person filled with the Holy Spirit to understand scripture.

    I believe if I told you the sky was blue, you would probably argue with about that.

  8. Connie


    You wrote the following:

    “Regarding Jesus not amending any of these, He did not need to since the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect and they were now under the Davidic Covenant. Also Jesus said that He was bringing a new and better covenant and that all the Law and the Prophets were now fulfilled in Him. There was no human sacrifice during the time of Jesus, there was no slavery during the time of Jesus!”

    Based on your words the rules in the OT were replaced, so my question is why are you so vehement about persecuting the LGBTQA community? Jesus said nothing about homosexuality being a sin. Shouldn’t you follow your Lord and Savior?

    As for your assertion that there are no contradictions in the bible, there are websites dedicated to identifying and annotating every chapter and verse that disagrees with another chapter and verse. I don’t want to pop your bubble of belief RevHolYesh as faith is important to you. However, if you continue to use the bible as a weapon I will use logic and facts as a sheild against your discriminatory words.

    Up to you RevHolYesh

  9. Rev Bob


    This is why transsexuals should not be allowed in women’s bathroom’s and locker rooms-




    I am sure there are a lot more instances than this.

    It is just common sense, if you have a biological penis, you use the men’s room, if you have a biological vagina, you use the women’s room!

  10. Rev Bob

    Have you ever thought that those so called websites could be wrong, since it is unregenerate men who are trying to interpret scripture, instead of Spirit-filled men?

    I am not persecuting the LBGTQ community, I am not advocating that they be killed for being homosexual, and I am against any violence done to them, but they do not need any more special rights than what are given to them by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Case in point, they wanting rights to use the bathroom of the gender they feel they are, violates the rights of biological women and children to being safe within their own bathroom. Why should biological women have to be imposed upon and feel unsafe within their own bathroom and locker room? It is absolute madness and insanity to allow transgender women to use a biological woman’s restroom.

    Your comment that Jesus never talked about homosexuality, that is one of the oldest talking points by the LBGT community. Your right He did not, he also did not say anything about domestic violence of beastiality, however, He did explain what He and His Father’s intent was for marriage, was to be between one man and one woman for life. Your comment is an argument from silence which is a mute point!

    Because Christ did not mention domestic violence or rape or beastiality does not mean it is right, right?

  11. Tom O

    Does Rev Bob want to point out a specific entry on one of the websites dedicated to identifying and annotating every chapter and verse that disagrees with another chapter and verse which he thinks is not valid? No, his response is “Have you ever thought that those so called websites could be wrong, since it is unregenerate men who are trying to interpret scripture, instead of Spirit-filled men?”
    A classic example of the authoritarian mindset, which tends to judge the validity of an idea by how much “authority” the person voicing the idea possesses, rather than by the logical/factual validity of the idea itself..

  12. Connie

    Oh RHY, your false equivelncy is showing. Again!!! Please get that checked as it seems to be spreading. Perhaps you can get a cream?

    In the interest of being fair I read two of the three links “proving” transgendered men are just heterosexual men who want to ogle the girlz. Why two and not three? Yeah, I’ll never click on a link to Breibart (where the motto is ‘hate is great’).

    It is no surprise that the issue in the first story was resolved with privacy curtains – why the gym did not have them in the first place is my question. The second story is of a heterosexual cis gendered male who is openly breaking the law. The perp wasn’t even transgendered so I’m not sure how it applied to your point.

    I’ve asked before when you called yourself YW but I’ll ask again – what ‘special’ rights are the LGBTQA community requesting? Because I thought the whole fight was because LGBTQA folk were tired of being treated like second class citizens. It will be interesting to read your answer (but not holding my breath).

    As for your comment that the only people who can ‘correctly’ interpret scripture are spirit filled…. Is that what it’s called these days? Spirit? OK. If you say so. LOL

  13. Rev Bob

    How are homosexuals being treated as second class citizens? They cannot fired for being like that, they cannot not hired because of that, they cannot be denied housing because of that. The problem lies where they are coming out of the closet but now they want to push Christians into the closet.

    Christ may have not addressed homosexuality but his disciples did like the Apostle Paul and his words were just as authoritative as Christ’s because he was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead.

    Regarding correctly interpreting scripture – 1 Corinthians 2:14
    The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. (NIV)

  14. Connie

    Oh preacher man… You said the LGBTQA community asked for “special rights”. Still waiting for a reply as to what special rights you are talking about. As for your assertion that a person can’t be fired or lose housing due to their sexuality – do you ever get tired of being wrong?

    Personally I think you are jealous how the LGBTQA community is persecuted. After all, you Christian supremacists are all about being persecuted, going so far as to invent episodes to confirm your bias (looking at you Todd Starnes). Google it if you don’t believe me.

    So – this leads me to what you said about Jesus and I’ve tried to wrap my head around this for hours. You said:
    “Christ may have not addressed homosexuality but his disciples did like the Apostle Paul and his words were just as authoritative as Christ’s because he was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead.”

    You ignore the teachings your savior Jesus Christ, who said to love one another, in order to follow the words of a human who preaches all your favorite ‘hate the other’ ideals. And in order to make ignoring Jesus for a humans words work in your theology, you retro fit the human with special wisdom sauce from God.

    How do you keep your brain from exploding?

  15. Rev Bob


    You asked what special rights to the LGBT community want, how about health care benefits for same sex partners for one. Wanting to use the bathroom of your choice depending on if you may feel like a woman any given day. Marriage between two men or two women which only cheapens what real marriage is supposed to be, between one man and one woman.

    I can have love for homosexuals while not tolerating their sinful behavior. Yes Jesus said to love one another but He never said we have to tolerate their sin, whether be homosexuality, adultery, pedophilia, beastiality, domestic violence. rape etc.

  16. Mark Sebree

    Rev Bob,

    I have not seen you name any “special rights” that the LGBT community wants. “Marriage between two men or two women” means that they want the same rights to marry the person that that love as heterosexuals have. Which means that they want marriage to STOP being a special right for heterosexuals. Besides, homosexuals getting the right to marry does not lessen the rights of heterosexuals to get married, nor does it lessen the rights they have as a married couple, nor does it affect heterosexual marriage at all. Therefore, there is no valid reason to deny homosexual couples the same right to get married as heterosexual couples take for granted.

    “Health benefits for same sex partners” originated from people like you denying them the right to marry their life partners. They still needed and wanted to care for their life partners and children, but people like you created laws and insurance regulations which prevented them from doing so. Now that they can marry the ones that they love, the LBGT spouses are entitles to the same health benefits on the same terms as heterosexual spouses. So again, it is not a “special right”, but the same right as heterosexual married couples have.

    “Wanting to use the bathroom that [conforms to their gender identity]”. If someone is a transgender, it has nothing to do with “how much [s/he] feels like a woman today”. That is the voice of willful ignorance. I assume that you would have no problem with a buff and bearded transman using the women’s restroom because you do not want him to use the woman’s restroom? Or how about an obviously female transwoman using the men’s restroom because you would not allow her to use the woman’s restroom?

    There is nothing sinful about homosexuals living their lives and loving their romantic partners, any more than heterosexuals doing the exact same thing. “Sin” is nothing more than a religious based OPINION about other people’s behavior, and thus does not apply to anyone else except you. If they do not find their actions “sinful”, then they are not sinful.

    You also have tried to mix homosexuality with actions that do cause harm to others as a dishonest way to imply that homosexuality is somehow harmful to other people. Adultery, pedophilia, domestic violence, and rape all cause physical and/or psychological harm to other people. Bestiality often harms animals. Homosexuality harms nobody, and thus does not belong in the list.

  17. Connie

    Thank you Mark for answering Rev Bob’s comment. Your command of the subject is impressive. 🙂


    I asked for special. You provided rights that I currently have so where is the special? Still waiting…

    (I had several impassioned paragraphs on consent and who can enter into a consensual relationship – be it personal or business. Then I remembered my audience and deleted it all. Suffice it to say I practice Yes means Yes, meaning if I’ve not made it clear to you that I’m very interested you’d best not touch. I did live with an old Marine for 15 years. Sneaky devils, Marines. )

  18. Connie

    Welp, that was as clear as mud.

    When I said my audience I meant Rev Bob aka Holy Rebel aka Yeshua Warrior (RevHolYesh).

  19. Rev Bob


    The moment you want to reinvent the meaning of marriage, it ceases to be important it.

    Homosexuals should not be allowed to get married because God did not create Adam and Allen or Eve and Ellen. He created the male and female, in essence marriage was created only for a man and a woman. Homosexual marriage plain and simple is sin, and sin is no religion based, God called it sin because sin is missing His mark of perfection and it is rebellion against him. So Mark and Connie, you guys are sinners, the same with the rest of humanity and so am I, the only difference is that I have been washed in the blood of Christ and made clean, so Christ sees me as pure and holy, while He still sees you and millions of others as wicked and His enemy.

    Regarding the whole bathroom thing. For hundreds of years it has been common sense, if you have a penis you use the men’s room and if you have a vagina you use the ladies room, that is the way it always has been and the way it always should be.

    Again, it is sinful for homosexuals to love their sinful partners. I feel sorry for homosexuals, because they have allowed Satan to deceive them and blind their minds into thinking they are something what they are not. They need to be healed and delivered and set free.

  20. Connie


    You are entitled to your opinion and belief. You are not entitled to your own facts.

    You said at the beginning of this thread you interpret scripture within culture and context. Well, your culture is over 2000 years ago preacher man and humans have evolved since then.

    2000 years ago the Earth was the center of the Universe. We know better now. 2000 years ago your lord and savior had a really good idea. What you’ve done with his message since then has not impressed me.

    Your unreasoning hatred is noted.

  21. Rev Bob


    Well, not only am entitled to my opinions but also my own facts especially when the facts come from the Word of God!

    Word of God always comes before the Constitution as God always comes before country.

    God’s divine order is that He always comes first before anything else, family, country, spouse, children, job! Jesus did say that I am the Truth and He cannot tell a lie!

    Have a blessed day!

  22. Tom O

    Rev Bob, you wrote above at 8:14AM 4/17 “Marriage between two men or two women which only cheapens what real marriage is supposed to be.” In that sentence, what does “cheapens what real marriage is supposed to be” mean?
    I doubt it refers to the literal meaning of reducing the financial costs of marriage, so what DOES it mean?
    “Well, not only am entitled to my opinions but also my own facts especially when the facts come from the Word of God!” (And the Word of God is whatever MY holy book says it is, because everyone around me when I was a child pounded that into my head.) Thanks, Rev Bob, for admitting you’re only tenuously tenuously connected to reality.

  23. Rev Bob

    Tom O,

    Marriage other than between a man and a woman ceases to be marriage for the last wo many hundreds of years and what the bible considers marriage as well. Marriage between two men or two women cannot be called marriage, but it can be called a perversion of what God intended marriage to be. Now a days you have had a man who wanted to be married to his car, and a woman who wanted to marry herself, and woman who wanted to marry her dog, is that marriage, simply NO! You have had three gay men who all got married to each other in a threesome same with three women who married each other. God does not consider that marriage and will never bless that kind of marriage or bless the marriage between two men or two women. Also, any church that performs that kind of marriage will never have the blessing of God but will face the condemnation and judgment of God sooner or later!

    Tom, you do not know me, I did not have the bible pounded into me when I was a child, I hardly even attended church when I was a child, I accepted Christ the summer before my junior year of high school at a christian high school camp, and nobody forced me to do that either. My hand without even thinking about it shot up when asked does anyone here want to accept Christ and have eternal life. It was the conviction of the Holy Spirit that I was a sinner and needed Christ in my life, which God does not pound into anyone’s head.

    I came a lot to my conclusions by reading the Word of God and listening to what God said as well as being challenged by godly professors in college to correctly interpret the scriptures.

    What does marriage mean, it is a holy covenant between one man and one woman, there is nothing holy between two men or two women!

  24. Tom O

    You wrote “Marriage between two men or two women which only cheapens what real marriage is supposed to be, between one man and one woman.” That says that same-sex marriage has some kind of negative effect on marriage between one man and one woman.
    What does that “cheapening” consist of? How does allowing same-sex marriage affect heterosexual marriages in a negative way? How can allowing same-sex marriage affect heterosexual marriages in ANY way?
    Will heterosexual couples decide not to get married because homosexual couples are also allowed to get married?
    Will heterosexual couples not get along as well with each other because homosexual couples are also allowed to get married?
    Will heterosexual couples who would otherwise stay married get divorced because homosexual couples are also allowed to get married?
    Some states have had same-sex marriage for 8 years: when are its negative effects on heterosexual marriages going to start appearing, and what will they be?
    The way by which you came to believe that you’re entitled to your own facts, and those facts are whatever YOUR holy book says they are, doesn’t make you any less disconnected from reality.

  25. Rev Bob

    I live in reality just fine Tom O, it is is you that does not. Just remember, while you spend eternity in torment, just repeat this words, I am not here it is not hot, I am not here it is not hot, sad to say.

    The Word of God is reality, not because I say it is, because God said it is.

  26. Mark Sebree

    Rev Bob,

    The “meaning of marriage” has been changed, expanded, and contracted many times across countless civilizations, and predates when Hebrews invented their deity and wrote down their first laws and myths. It is mentioned in the oldest known writings, the Codes of Hammurabi, and is estimated to have formed around the time of the discovery of agriculture.

    Your deity was created by men, and did not create anything. That is the simplest explanation for its existence, so to speak. Your personal religious beliefs do not apply to anyone else, no matter what your arrogance and delusions think. And if the people who are homosexuals do not think that it is a sin, then it is not a sin and your opinions do not change that fact. Or are you willing to accept that you are as subject to everyone else’s religious beliefs as you seem to believe that everyone else is subject to your’s? You cannot have it both ways in this country after all. Note that I have never claimed that anyone else is subject to my religious beliefs, and I have never used those beliefs in any argument that I can remember. I have always relied on objective facts that can be independently verified.

    I even told you that the concept of sin could not exist outside a religious framework. You disagreed, and then used a religious framework to “support” your claim, proving that I was correct. If the concept of “sin” does not require a religious framework to exist, then you cannot reference any subjective items like deities and religious beliefs to support it. Additionally, an atheist cannot “sin” because s/he holds no religious framework in which “sin” can exist. Your beliefs are not applicable to him or anyone else, and thus cannot change that fact.

    By the way “the word of god” is not reality. It is your opinion and personal interpretation of what your mythology states. You make such claims in a vain effort to keep other people from questioning your personal opinions or examining them too closely. It also does not work.

    YOU are the one that is trying to force transmen and transwomen to use public restrooms counter to their gender identity, not me. A transwoman was assigned a gender of “male” at birth, but identifies as female. If she is post-op, she has a surgically created vagina, and you are the one that wants to force her to use the men’s room. I just gave the results of your desires, as well as that justly infamous NC law. You just cannot accept the facts and the results of your desire to force your opinion onto others to their detriment.

    Your words show that you want homosexuals to be afraid, lonely, unloved, unwelcome, and ostracized just because they are homosexuals and YOU cannot accept that. I find that attitude quite hateful and vicious, and definitely not one that comes from the Gospel. And it is one of the many reasons why I reject your beliefs and your interpretation of your mythology.

    You have also shown that you do not belong in any military leadership position, nor in any government position of authority. You cannot accept that your religion comes second, at best, when you are on the job with the government or in the military. Your duty is to your country first, and your religion second. I CERTAINLY was NOT fighting your deity when I was in the service, and most service men and women aren’t either. They are serving their country first, as their oaths demand. Unlike you, we will fight for your right to worship as you see fit, but we will fight against your objective to force your beliefs onto everyone else.

    You are living in a delusional world, not reality. You are trying to pass your personal opinions off as facts, and nobody is buying what you are selling. They see through your lies and delusions. You do not have any facts to relate, all you have are personal opinions, many of which disagree with reality and the objective facts. That is why you lose every time you post.

  27. Connie

    Rev Bob,

    Regarding Hell, pix or it didn’t happen.

    As for marriage – you keep saying the Bible defines marriage as one man one woman. Where EXACTLY does it say this? I’ve found a boatload of information but nothing saying one man, one woman. I’m beginning to think you don’t know your holy book as well as you say you do preacher man.

    Mark and Tom – you gentleman really have an amazing array of information in your brains. Doing my best here not to have too big of a geek crush on you. 🙂

  28. Tom O

    Notice that Rev Bob’s response to my last comment doesn’t answer ANY of the questions I’ve asked about how same-sex marriage “cheapens” heterosexual marriage.
    Instead, he writes “The Word of God is reality, not because I say it is, because God said it is,” And how do we know what God says? Oh, I forgot, the Bible is the Word of God because people like Rev Bob say it is.

  29. J

    Interesting exchange of words…. So frustrated one side sounds, as if their desire is what must come above what is good or real in life.

  30. Tom O

    Can J explain what his/her previous comment means?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *