Abomination – Leviticus 18:22 is the verse that is used to prove that homosexuality is a sin or “abomination”.  Homosexuality was not a term used in English until the late 1800s and there is no Hebrew word for homosexual, how the translators of the original bible came to the conclusion to use this term I suppose will never be known. The Hebrew text also only refers to male to male, not female to female relations. Does this mean that lesbians are not abominations? Or maybe that’s just inferred… Recently, there is mounting evidence that the Holiness Code was to prohibit Pagan ritual behavior, which included men having sex with each other as ritualistic behavior, unrelated to lust or love. This is understandable from a Christian point of view, since these types of rituals would usually be performed as worship to another god, and this would be in direct violation of God’s top rule “Thou shall have no other God’s before me” and “Do not worship false idols”. The Hebrew word for abomination (to’ebah) is defined as “ritually unclean”, I suppose this would go along with the former statements. A word for word translation also seems to point to a separate meaning, prohibiting where gay sex may occur (not in a womans bed) not so much that it shouldn’t be with each other. All is only applicable under Mosaic Law, though, which is only to be followed by the ancient Israelites and inhabitants of Israel (Jewish) since the release of the New Testament. This is also backed up by the verses quoted below. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh5.htm

Romans 6:14 – For sin will have no mastery over you, because you are not under law but under grace.

Romans 7:1 – Or do you not know, brothers and sisters (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law is lord over a person as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of the marriage. 3 So then, if she is joined to another man while her husband is alive, she will be called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she is joined to another man, she is not an adulteress. 4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you could be joined to another, to the one who was raised from the dead, to bear fruit to God. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful desires, aroused by the law, were active in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the law, because we have died to what controlled us, so that we may serve in the new life of the Spirit and not under the old written code. 7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” 8 But sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of wrong desires. For apart from the law, sin is dead. 9 And I was once alive apart from the law, but with the coming of the commandment sin became alive 10 and I died. So I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life brought death! 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it I died. 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good. 13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? Absolutely not! But sin, so that it would be shown to be sin, produced death in me through what is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual – but I am nonspiritual, sold into slavery to sin.

Galatians 3:10 – For all who rely on doing the works of the law are under a curse, because it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not keep on doing everything written in the book of the law.” 11 Now it is clear no one is justified before God by the law, because the righteous one will live by faith. 12 But the law is not based on faith, but the one who does the works of the law will live by them. 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (because it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”)

Romans 10:4 – For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes.

http://bible.org/article/mosaic-law-its-function-and-purpose-new-testament

Ordained by God – Many argue that marriage was ordained by God to be between a man and a woman. The main purpose for this union is for procreation. This would exclude infertile couples, atheists, Muslims and every other non Judeo-oriented religion from being allowed to marry under this idea since those people would either be unable to procreate or would not accept the idea that their marriage was ordained by the Christian God. But that is beside the fact, gays are not arguing for religious recognition, only civil rights and other applicable rights that would be bestowed upon a married straight couple, so that their relationship would be protected from the state from discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_marriage

Choice - That gay is a choice, so making marriage between a man and a woman isn’t actually violating their rights because they can choose to be with a woman as well. Though, the only group of people that are so adamant about this fact are short of entirely made up of heterosexuals and Christians. How a straight male can decide something that should and is only an available determination by homosexual people, is absolutely beyond me. I can be one to say without a sliver of a doubt, that the burden of the homosexual lifestyle is the furthest thing from a “choice”. Why would an individual make a concerted decision to be associated with one of the most hated, harassed and shamed groups of people humankind may ever know? Do these people find pleasure in the constant taunting they experience in high school, and pathetically, sometimes from their own family? With people actively assaulting and even murdering gays, do these people believe that they are honest about their sexuality for some type of rush? There is too much research to even begin to reference all the studies that have been done that undoubtedly link homosexuality to a mix of genetics and environment. Therefore, persecuting these people only further solidifies your outcome when Judgment Day rolls around.

Christian Nation – This can easily be dismissed by multiple documents written by several of the founders including the one man who drafted the paper that declared our independence. Thomas Jefferson’s dismissal of Christianity in its general form is clearly evident when he created the Jefferson Bible, Jefferson did believe in the teachings of Jesus, but was more or less a Deist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible The constitution is a secular document, and no where does it ever reference “God”. Though the Constitution does specifically state that the government may not make any law respecting one religion over another, stated clearly in the very first amendment. Why, if the founders were vehemently devout Christians, would they create equality among religion as far as the government is concerned. Christians use the reference of Common Law in the Constitution to justify the fact of our Christian roots, though Thomas Jefferson himself clarified that the Common Law they are referring to is in relation to what was established by the Saxons.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the “wall of separation between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. We have solved … the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.

- Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808). This is his second use of the term “wall of separation,” here quoting his own use in the Danbury Baptist letter. This wording was several times upheld by the Supreme Court as an accurate description of the Establishment Clause: Reynolds (98 US at 164, 1879); Everson (330 US at 59, 1947); McCollum (333 US at 232, 1948)”

Majority Rule – The argument that what occurred in California reflects “majority rule” and that the decision is final as well as constitutional. But, luckily we don’t operate under a democracy in this country. We were founded as a Representative Republic, and under this form of government the minority is protected from abuses of the majority. Therefore, regardless of how the citizens of California voted, if their decision infringes on the rights of a particular group of people than their decision is null and void. Seen as how Proposition 8′s passage violated several Amendments of the U.S. Constitution then it’s over turning is not only valid, but necessary. Watch this video for a more clear and concise explanation of this from the actual conservative constitutional lawyer that argued the lawsuit against Proposition 8.

From a libertarian standpoint, unless gay marriage were to in some way affect the prosperity or liberty of another person just because it was taking place in the private lives of separate people, that would be basis to restrict such an institution. But the fact stands, gay marriage in no way, shape or form has the ability to alter any single persons ability to lead a happy and prosperous life. Why is what an individual does in their private life, in their own home, something that attracts the attention of so many as something that must be stopped and destroyed? This question will forever baffle me. Leave each other alone, let everyone and anyone lead a life that they see fit for themselves. As long as you are not infringing on my rights as a person, then I have no reason to make any attempt whatsoever to do the same to you. When will this country just realize that one simple fact?

Possibly never…

There aren’t many levels that are as pathetic as when the governor of a state, specifically a bankrupt one, serenades a basketball player. Regardless of the fact he should be politically lynched for taking advantage of the citizens of Ohio, where is his human decency? How about his pride and his manhood? To plead with an individual that means NOTHING in terms of the bigger picture, seriously?

So, while millions were glued to the television waiting on bated breath, what could possibly have gone on in REALITY?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i-yfHJzPLDeBIhG5JDEF6VbaPR8QD9GQDPI05

Here is just a brief overview of what has gone on with the MASSIVE oil spill that was caused by BP. I guess all the oil that’s washing up on shore mixed with dispersant (which is at least 5x more deadly than the oil itself) and all the fumes blowing inland isn’t that big of a deal, I mean, we need to know which team to be dedicated to next year.

http://www.thestar.com/business/article/833510–new-eco-fees-catching-consumers-by-surprise?bn=1

In Canada a secretive new “eco fee” has been added to thousands of products. Done discreetly under the nose of their citizens, and all their government has to say is they didn’t feel like wasting the money warning people. Don’t think something like this could happen in the U.S.? Think again… Yet, what does this matter?

If we don’t start waking up and stop revolving our lives around a box that is no better than a brainwashing device, it will be too late. Without vigilance and constant checks against the federal government, they grow and take your rights. How secure are we now with the TSA that has so far let through TWO bombers. The best they can come up with to avoid this in the future is to further invade our privacy. In the times of the Roman Empire, the government spent a very large sum of money to build a stadium better known as The Colosseum. Here, they staged shows, mock battles and extremely gory exhibitions between slaves and prisoners of war. And what does history tell us about why they did this? To distract the public while they expanded the empire and passed treasonous legislation. While they bankrupted the nation and eventually caused the entire collapse of their kingdom. History repeats itself if we do not learn from earlier mistakes. In the U.S. alone there are close to 2000 stadiums across the country. These seat 10′s of thousands of people a piece. You don’t think that this many people are distracted in unison for a reason?

Think about it folks.

But while we’re on the subject, lets look at the facts surrounding this piece of legislation and what the media is deciding to withhold from us.

First of all the bill was approximately 2,000 pages, give or take a few hundred. I can guarantee with 90% certainty that not a single congressman has read this entire bill, not even John Stingell, the sponsor of this bill.

Then the hype that insurance companies are “critical” of this legislation when in reality, THEY WROTE IT! Who to benefit most then these corporations when having health insurance is MANDATORY and if you opt not to get it, you are taxed as a penalty.

Speaking of penalties… During Obama’s campaign during the 2008 election season, the now President repeatedly promised that the American people making $250,000 per year or less wouldn’t see an increase of a single penny in their taxes. They may not be direct, but when a company or an employer faces increased taxes and regulations that restrict business, those reduced profits become a burden upon the employees and customers.  For example:

Employer Mandate Excise Tax (Page 275): If an employer does not pay 72.5 percent of a single employee’s health premium (65 percent of a family employee), the employer must pay an excise tax equal to 8 percent of average wages. Small employers (measured by payroll size) have smaller payroll tax rates of 0 percent (<$500,000), 2 percent ($500,000-$585,000), 4 percent ($585,000-$670,000), and 6 percent ($670,000-$750,000).

Individual Mandate Surtax (Page 296): If an individual fails to obtain qualifying coverage, he must pay an income surtax equal to the lesser of 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) or the average premium. MAGI adds back in the foreign earned income exclusion and municipal bond interest.

Excise Tax on Medical Devices (Page 339): Imposes a new excise tax on medical device manufacturers equal to 2.5 percent of the wholesale price. It excludes retail sales and unspecified medical devices sold to the general public.

Just because these taxes aren’t listed underneath Federal Income Tax and Social Security on your paycheck doesn’t mean they aren’t being passed on to you eventually. So much for promises, right?

Then there’s the public option. Oh yes, the new bureaucracy that an aide for a representative in Arizona told me personally had “majority support.” An option, that even if it was remotely a positive thing, is actually unavailable to 200 million Americans. Wow. Great. And the confusion of funding doesn’t make it any more appealing, the politicians can’t even come to a consensus on whether abortions are covered under this plan.

And is anyone aware of how this bill infringes on our liberties? Does anyone care that Congress has no authority what so ever to manage health care? According to James Clyburn, Congress is well aware that most of what they do is not authorized by the Constitution. Is anyone really surprised by their ever-increasing cocky attitudes?

I agree that health reform is needed on a monumental scale in this country. A hospital stay shouldn’t cost anywhere near $100/hour, especially with the poor quality of their food. But the answer isn’t government intervention. More control by Washington will be a medical disaster. Look at the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). How well does the government handle that fiasco? Or how about nationalizing Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and AIG? Look how successful those companies are doing today (or not). Or maybe the most helpful, the bailout packages. Remember how we were told the economy would collapse and the stock market would plunge if we didn’t pass the bill? Well… it’s a year later and unemployment has only increased ever since (government says 10.2%, other sources say 17+%).

I beg the public not to panic and support a bill that no one has read nor anyone truly understands. This massive bill is the complete wrong direction for us to take. If we’re ever going to get medical prices under control and limit the power insurance companies have over us we must eliminate the insurance companies in question. They are the cause of the inflated medical costs and premiums. This problem started with the creation of HMO’s (which happened to be by the government) and it will end when they do.

Think before we act. That should be common sense, the very fact that it must be stressed is appalling.

- Jeff

That said, it’s mandatory to look at the facts of what took place.

Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman, was a psychiatrist but what the media doesn’t share is that he was also suffering from psychological problems himself.

Now that’s interesting. According to the news this is a “gun control” issue. How, if guns were illegal, this would have never happened. I’m sure it had nothing to do with antidepressants. But wait, didn’t this same scenario play out at Virginia Tech? Wasn’t that publicized as a gun control issue? Then later, come to find out, he was psychologically ill and was taking SSRI’s. But I’m sure there’s no connection whatsoever and a very clear explanation for it all.

Also, the gunman chose the very site for his rampage because he had prior knowledge that that particular area was a “Gun Free Zone”, knowing no one else would be armed and he would go unchallenged. But wait… we need to ban guns because they are to blame for this tragedy, but it occurred in a government designated area that is strictly gun free? How does that even remotely make any sense?

The other tactic the media is using is that this was a “Muslim extremist” on a mission from Allah. It doesn’t take a scholar to know that this is completely ridiculous. First off, he ran around screaming “Allah Akbar” which means “God is great”. This is not what a Muslim extremist shouts as he is “attacking the infidel.” It’s no coincidence that Afghanistan is suffering from all time low approval ratings. What better way to increase support in a war in the Middle East, then a Muslim attacking one of our largest, if not the largest, military bases in the U.S. I’m not making any accusations but there’s definitely something to give attention to there. Also, now that evidence has come out that mere hours before the massacre he was laughing and joking around at a convenience store, it must be part of their methods for mentally preparing for a mission from Allah. Give me a break.

And what happened to the “three shooters” story that was being reported to begin with? Why was it then changed to just one?

There are many more questions that remain to be answered and understood, some that may never be clear, but one that is for sure: this wasn’t normal, this wasn’t an act of “Jihad” and the media isn’t telling us an ounce of truth. Any surprise there?

There’s no doubt that thirteen lives were lost for no good reason, but are we going to settle for the media’s version? Or will we demand the truth? You decide.

- Jeff

After much deliberation I have decided to begin blogging. I know I’m late in the blogosphere but better late than never. To give an idea of what to expect from me it’s very simple, the truth.

Topics can range from current events, “politics” (though exposing the treachery of the government isn’t what I would classify as politics), and anything else that seems to be relevant. I’m blunt, opinionated and I read A LOT so if any of the previous is a problem, then this isn’t the blog for you.

I hope many of you will decide to follow me and comment regularly.

P.S. If you’re curious what Verum + Libertas means, well my school isn’t offering Latin 101 this semester so my latin is very basic, but my understanding is that it means “Truth + Liberty” which I think is a successful equation for a prosperous society.

- Jeff