Thursday, June 23, 2011


If it's wrong to fire someone for being gay or for their support of same-sex marriage, isn't it also wrong to fire someone for their support of true marriage?
This man was fired for his support of true marriage.

"..."The guy who saw the book never read it -- he just didn't like the fact that I was against same-sex marriage," Turek tells OneNewsNow. "And he told the in-charge director there about it and they fired me within hours, without ever even looking at the book or even ever asking me a question. They just fired me without ever talking to me."

Turek says he challenged Nagel about how he could be fired for embracing a conservative worldview which was never discussed in the workplace, but contends he was only given platitudes about the "inclusive" work environment of Cisco.

"She wouldn't recognize the fact that there is a systemic problem in the culture -- it's not inclusive and diverse," Turek argues. "'Inclusion and diversity' only means if you agree with us, you'll be included. That's not inclusion -- and it's certainly not diversity." ..."

Story about anti-Christ bigotry here.


  1. The guy was a consultant - basically a vendor. Any company has the right to not use a vendor that promotes views contrary to the culture of the company. If the guy had written a book about how great the KKK was, or applauding the actions of the 9/11 hijackers, Timothy McVey or the Unibomber should they be forced to use him as a vendor? No they shouldn't. No differnt here, but, OMG, because gay people are involved, its suddenly "Anti-Christian" Bigotry. Spare me... The link below spells out completely the truth of "anti-Christian bigotry". You, sir, are a deluded idiot. "Anti-Christian bigotry". Please. To you Jews, Muslims, Buhdist and atheists are "anti-Christian biogts". Sorry, a big FAIL to that, but keep trying....

  2. So you think that a man who thinks that a marriage is between one man and one woman is in the same catagory as klansman or a domestic terrorist? Wow. And you call ME a deluded idiot? Do you know where the concept of marriage comes from?

  3. Did I say that they were in the same CATEGORY? No. All I said was that a company is free to discontinue using a vendor if they find out that they are proporting values that are contrary to the companies. I simply used the KKK to illustrate the point in terms that even a God-Squadder like you would understand. WOW, you couldn't grasp that? I guess you're a bigger idiot than I thought.

    So, Matthew is the basis for marriage now? Well Matthew was likely written between 30 and 70 AD. Sophocles, however, was commenting about marriage 400 - 500 years prior. The concept of marriage did not come from Matthew. Failed again!

  4. If you don’t stop your snarky little insults, I’m not going to continue posting your comments. I’m not going to put up with you bratty behavior.

    Did I say Matthew was the basis for marriage? No I didn’t. The first marriage was performed by God himself and it was in the garden of Eden. Adam and Eve were married by God himself. You’re referring to Matt. 19:4-6 where the disciple Matthew simply recorded the words of Jesus Christ, who defined marriage as being between one man and one woman.

    You’re fighting against God when you support the redefining of marriage. There’s a great disaster in your future when you fight God or ignore his commandments.

  5. I guess that is between me and God. Too bad everyone must suffer his deciples.

    Your noted passage says a lot of interesting things. In the begining God created a man & a woman and wed them. Of couse it was OSM, as there were only 2 people on the planet, who were of opposite sex. I don't think the bible actully says anything about SSM, just SS intercorce, so the Bible doesn't really prohibit SSM, just the sex part. The passage also says that there shouldn't be divorce. That certainly has gone by the wayside.

    Why should we obey the Bible anyways? It's full of contradictions, on one hand it prohibits a bunch of things, but on the other lets the exact same things happen without any judgement at all. Take incest for example. The bible says no incest, but it sure seemed to happen a lot. Abraham married his sister, no condemnation. Lot got his daughters pregnant, and no complaints about that. Since Adam & Eve were the first 2 people on the planet, in order for the poplulation to increase their sons must have been having children with their mother or their sisters. After the flood, it was only Noah, his sons and their wives. Must have been some incest there to repopulate the earth, although I'm not sure that 1st cousins is truely "incest", but you get where I'm going with this. Christians claim that the Bible is the only legitimate moral guide, but really, the Bible is full of completely immoral actions by both God & his followers. Why should our laws, or even our rights be based upon such a flawed and morally bankrupt book? In reality, it shouldn't. Now you are free to belive in it all you want, ignoring all the immoral parts. But civil law, including civil marriage, should have absolutly no basis in biblical law period.

  6. The, “...let no man separate.” part of Matt. 19:4-6, also applies to the redefinition of marriage which effectively rules out polygamy and same-sex marriage.

    The Bible seems to have contradictions because it has been translated from the language that it was written in to our language. In it’s original language, there are no contradictions in the Bible.

    Some parts of the Bible simply tell what humans actually did. Abraham married his half-sister; they didn’t have the same Father which, if memory serves, is some kind of different circumstance than incest. Lot’s daughters intentionally got him drunk and got pregnant by him because they thought that they were going to be the last of their race if they didn’t. Lot did not intentionally impregnate his daughters and may have never even known that he was the father of their children. Also, they had grown up in Sodom, where sexual boundaries were cast aside by the people of that city/area, so the idea wasn’t so repulsive to them.

    The children of Adam and Eve did procreate with each other. It was not a sin at that time since Mosaic law had not yet been given to humanity. They were genetically pure also so there was no danger of birth defects in their offspring. The effects of the sin of (and in) Adam and Eve, which would go on to produce disease and death in humanity, were not really up and running yet. Adam and Eve lived for over nine hundred years after they sinned. Such life spans don’t exist today because of sin.

    All of Noah’s sons had children with their wives that boarded the arc with them. If there were subsequent cousins making babies together, it was still before Mosaic law which defines and forbids incest.

    God is not capable of an immoral act. His true followers make mistakes sometimes and have the option of repenting and getting back in line with the commandments of Jesus Christ. You show me someone who CALLS them self a Christian, but who is misbehaving, and I’ll show you the exact verse that condemns their behavior. The Bible even tells true servants of Christ to shun chinos (CHristians In Name Only).

    ALL civil law comes from the Ten Commandments, which comes from God. Before the Ten Commandments, no group of humans came up with such a noble set of rules. And even Godless cultures shun homosexuality.

  7. Well it's nice that you have answers for these mysteries, even if they are biologically impossible (living past 900, genetically pure so no bith defects). But you are wrong when you state that God is incapable of immoral acts. If murder is wrong, was it not immoral to kill the innocent 1st born of Egypt? Was it not immoral for God to tell the children of Isreal to kill the people who already living there so they could take their land, even after prohibiting it in the 10 commandments given to Moses. All civil law does not come from the 10 commandments. There is only 2 in the US, not stealing & not murdering, and these would be wrong with or without the 10 commandments, and they were wrong before the 10 commandments were given to Moses. There are no civil laws (in the US at least) based upon the remaining 8, all are legal under civil law.

    You seem to be such a literalist when it comes to the Bible. I'm sure there are many things in the old Testimate that you don't follow (wearing mixed fibers, not killing errant children or adulturors, etc..). Shouldn't we all be stoning people, cuttting off their hands when the steal and not wearing cotton-polly blends (I know you've got a few)?

    Since you seem to know everything about the world, perhaps you can tell me why there are so many other cultures that belive in multiple gods (37 in Greece, 14 major and 21 minor in Rome, at least 21 in Egypt, tens of thousands in Hinduism, Budists may have as many as they want, etc..). If we all are descendants of Noah, who whitnessed the power of a SINGLE god, why do so many now belive in many? They could have opted for none, or changed the name of the one god, but they did not. What would inspire them to go from a single one which could do everything, to multiple but speciallized gods? Surely they would have had cultural stories and tales about only a single god. Why the split? What is the motivation? Where is the logic?

  8. God reversed Pharaoh’s decision to kill all of the firstborn sons of the Hebrews back upon his own people, AFTER He gave Pharaoh two chances to repent of his evil. And the Egyptians had been murdering first-born Hebrew boys for hundreds of years and throwing their little bodies into the Nile, this is why God turned the Nile into blood through Moses. (You’ve probably seen The Ten Commandments with Charleton Heston.)

    The children of Israel did fight with people that were already there, but that’s how every country on this planet was founded. When one soldier kills another it is not a murder. The Bible says that humans can not murder, meaning that I cannot kill another human out of nothing but my own anger.

    All civil law is based on, “Love your neighbor...”, which comes from the 10 commandments which come from God.

    All, payment-for-sin laws were fulfilled by the death of The Lord Jesus Christ. As his servant, I am covered by his atoning sacrifice. The New Testament allows me to wear “mixed fibers,” but still prevents me from killing stoning someone to death for their sin. According to The New Testament, my government has that authority through laws and fair trials. I have the right to call the police on a thief, but not to cut off their hand.

    The belief in multiple Gods stems from the rejection of God’s Word. Those who reject the Word of God/Jesus Christ, whether it be a single person or an entire culture, are automatically cursed by God to believe in a powerful delusion.

    God is above “logic” because he can operate outside of the laws of time, physics, and nature that we humans are bound by. He’s God. That’s how He “rolls.” Only God can speak matter into existence.

  9. "Those who reject the Word of God/Jesus Christ, whether it be a single person or an entire culture, are automatically cursed by God to believe in a powerful delusion" So Hindus, Buhdists and others are then automatically cursed? Even those in the most farthest reaches of the planet where they have not even heard of Jesus? What kind of morality is that? "You are cursed even if you have never had the chance to learn about me!"...and let me get this straight; it is moral to kill infant children, but only in retaliation for the killing of Hebrews (regardless of whether they had participated or even if they believed it wrong). It is also immoral to murder someone out of anger, but it IS moral to murder them if you want their land or simply because everyone else does it? Are you sure God is incapable of immorality? These things still seem pretty immoral to me.

    "Love thy neighbor", is that the 11th commandment? I couldn't find it in 1 through 10.

  10. Those who REJECT the Word of God. If a person lives and dies without ever hearing the Word of God they are judged by their own words and their own behavior towards others.

    None of the Hebrews murdered anybody when the firstborn sons of the Egyptians died. One of God’s angels did the killings. And I’m a firstborn, but I’m not an infant. The Bible doesn't say that infants died. Are you going to simply reject everything that the Bible teaches? Do you think that every soldier is guilty of murder?

    As for loving thy neighbor, the 10 commandments derive from two commandments.

  11. "The belief in multiple Gods stems from the rejection of God’s Word. Those who reject the Word of God/Jesus Christ, whether it be a single person or an entire culture, are automatically cursed by God to believe in a powerful delusion." - So which is it? Is the Hindo the automatically cursed, as you claim here, or are they saved as you say here: "If a person lives and dies without ever hearing the Word of God they are judged by their own words and their own behavior towards others." You are contradicting yourself.

    I never claimed the Hebrews murdered anybody during passover. This was God's doing, even if angels did the actual killing. Tell me, where does it exactly say "only 1st born ADULTS will die" in the text:

    “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD" -

    Hint: It doesn't. 1st born = man, woman & CHILD, senior citizen and infant. A soldier who kills innocent children IS guilty of murder. A soldier that goes into a home and slaughters an unarmed family IS guilty of murder. It is morrally WRONG to kill innocent children in retibution and it is morrally WRONG to kill innocent children because you want to take their land away from them. Was it not wrong for the early settlers in this country to take away Native American's land, round them up & put them on reservations? Or was it OK because they tried to fight back?

    So the Old Testement law are nul and void. So then homosexuality must be ok, since the new testement doesn't condemn it, right? Or does that only work for things you don't want?

  12. God sent his Angel of Death to do to the Egyptians what Pharaoh ordered done to the Hebrews. It was Pharaoh’s evil that caused the deaths, not God. The Bible never says that children died.

    If you don’t want to accept that the New Testament and Revelations show that the glbt lifestyle is a deal-breaker with God, then don’t.

  13. You are completely in denial to think that "Egypt's 1st born" excludes defensless women & children. Do you think that there were no children in Egypt at that time? How likely is that? Do you think God had the angels sit around and wait to kill the 1st born as they became of age? No. The bible said it occured on passover (1 evening). Pharoah may have been evil, but the children (and yes there were children) were INNOCENT. I'm sorry your God is a vile monster, but deluding yourself is not going to erase the history YOU believe in. God had his angles kill INNOCENT EGYPTION CHILDREN, just as he had the Isrealites kill the INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN of the original occupants. It's all in the Bible. I suggest you read it again. Your God is IMMORAL. It is all there in black & white, no matter how hard you try to ignore it. If you want to base you whole world view on the killer of innocent children, by all means do it. But how dare you judge others.

  14. God sent his Angel of Death to do to the Egyptians what Pharaoh ordered done to the Hebrews.

    I'm not judging you until I'm actually throwing stones at you. Blogging isn't throwing stones. I've even denounced violence against gays on this blog.


Debate and discussion are welcome here, but attitude and ad hominem attacks will get you banned.