Posted on 05/02/2006 1:10:54 PM PDT by meandog
New York, N.Y. – In her new memoir, NOW IT'S MY TURN(Simon & Schuster/Threshold Editions, 2006), Mary Cheney writes that when she told her parents she was gay, the first words out of her father’s mouth “were exactly the ones that I wanted to hear: ‘You’re my daughter, and I love you, and I just want you to be happy.’”
VANITY FAIR editor Todd Purdum reports that Mary Cheney tells her story in a voice very much like her father’s, and that she came out to her parents when she was a junior in high school, on a day when, after breaking up with her first girlfriend, she skipped school, ran a red light, and crashed the family car. Cheney writes that her mother hugged her, but then burst into tears, worried that she would face a life of pain and prejudice.
When Purdum asks the vice president whether he thinks gay people are born that way, Cheney scrunches up his mouth, fixes him with a look that says “Nice try,” then says: “I’m not going to get into that. Those are deeply personal questions. You can ask.”
Mary Cheney tells Purdum that her father “has very little tolerance for bullshit, pardon my French.” She also says that one common reaction from people who have read the manuscript of her book is “‘Wow, you guys really have this close-knit, loving family,’ and it always strikes me as ‘Yeah, of course we do.’ It was very surprising to me that people would think we didn’t.”
When Purdum asks Cheney if he is fatalistic about his heart disease, Cheney says, “I am. I don’t even think about it most of the time. You do those things a prudent man would do, and I live with it.” Asked what he would have for breakfast at Nora’s Fish Creek Inn, his favorite pre-fishing spot in Wilson, Wyoming, Cheney responds without missing a beat: “I’d probably have two eggs over easy, sausage and hash browns,” then hastens to add that that is not his normal breakfast. “The day I go fishing, I get off my diet,” he says.” At a roundtable lunch with reporters a couple of years ago, two who were present tell Purdum that Cheney cut his buffalo steak in bite-size pieces the moment it arrived, then proceeded to salt each side of each piece.
Cheney tells Purdum that he has not changed over the years, but perhaps many of his contemporaries think he has “because of my associations over the years, or because I came across as a reasonable guy, people have one view of me that was not necessarily an accurate reflection of my philosophy or my view of the world.”
Purdum asks Cheney if, during his “darkest night,” he has even “a little doubt” about the administration’s course. “No,” he tells Purdum. “I think we’ve done what needed to be done.” Of the debate over whether or not the administration hyped the pre-war intelligence, Cheney says, “In the end, you can argue about the quality of the intelligence and so forth, but ... I look at that whole spectrum of possibilities and options, and I think we did the right thing.”
Cheney rejects the caricature of him as the power behind the throne, insisting, “I think we have created a system that works for this president and for me, in terms of my ability to be able to contribute and participate in the process.” When Purdum says that the cartoon characterization of him must not be accurate, Cheney says, “My image might be better out there, this caricature you talk about might be avoided, if I spent more time as a public figure trying to improve my image, but that’s not why I’m here.”
Purdum reports that Cheney travels with a chemical-biological suit at all times. When he gave his friend Robin West and his twin children a ride to the White House a couple of years ago, West commented on the fact that Cheney’s motorcade varied its daily path. “And he said, ‘Yeah, we take different routes so that “The Jackal” can’t get me,’” West tells Purdum. “And then there was this big duffel bag in the middle of the backseat, and I said, ‘What’s that? It’s not very roomy in here.’ And [Cheney] said, ‘No, because it’s a chemical-biological suit,’ and he looked at it and said, ‘Robin, there’s only one. You lose.’”
Purdum talks with former New York Times reporter and former executive editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, James Naughton, who asks of Cheney: “Does he acknowledge that he is not as pleasant as he used to be?” Naughton knew Cheney as a fellow prankster during the 1976 campaign, and all but sighs in search of an explanation as to why he is so different now. “I guess I would like to believe,” he says, “without any evidence to support it, that coming very close to death has somehow compelled him to act as though he only has so much breath and so much life, that he’s only got so much time to accomplish what he has to do. But the public figure is nothing like the private one that I remember.”
Gerald Ford tells Purdum: “He may have changed a bit, but that was required for the change of circumstances.” Ford, who will turn 93 in July, adds, “Times change, and people change as a result of that.”
“If you’re looking for a change from one point to another, being vice president is sui generis,” Lynne Cheney tells Purdum. “It’s not quite like any other job.”
The June issue of Vanity Fair hits newsstands in New York and L.A. on May 3 and nationally on May 9.
Your attention is directed back to your post 321 where you quote with authority the words of Jesus from the PEN of Matthew. In the passage you utilized Jesus quotes a passage from the PEN of the prophet Isaiah. Yet by your following comment you give heed as if to the word of God.
Again in your post 381 you quote words of Jesus recorded for us by the PEN of Matthew, again noting that they were the words of God.
It's clear, but it does not address the matter of salvation/damnation in a fundamental way.
Ummm... if you really believe that, you really have missed it. Jesus said what he meant and meant what He said. You might want to ponder the meaning of the word 'condemned' as used by Jesus (by the way, in case you missed it, Jesus did say "I and the Father are one". You want to take an excursion through the 'ego imi' passages in John, or do you believe Him?)
You are replying to a post where I asked you: "Your attention is again directed to 2 Tim 3:16 Please explain for me the meaning of the word ALL..." and you replied "All means all. The passage doesn't mean you can pick and choose as suits your purpose. In this post, you do correctly acknowledge, in reply to my question, that all means all, and therefore eliminates your desire (and your practice) of picking and choosing what is and what is not THE WORD OF GOD.
You do understand that everything we have in the Scripture is the work of a human author? Yet you discount quotes as being the words of the man who wrote the book. Where then is your source for the words of God that you say you only heed while discounting the words of man? Either the ENTIRE book is the inspired, God-breathed, infallable Word of God, or none of it is (by your own admission.)
Or do you have some extra-biblical source for your 'words of God' that you only pay attention to? In that case, maybe you would be willing to publish such an inspiring volume so the rest of us can be enlightened.
You say: "God came here to teach. In order to know what He taught, who He is and what He is about, I'll go to the source. Whatever anyone else has to say, I'll reference back to the source. If you learn from God, then you can understand the word of God. There is no other way." This is not a quote from the Bible, so it must be from your own source of wisdom literature. Since you discount the Bible as the Word of God in its entirety, where do you then find these words of God that you state are your source? What is your source to learn from God, as you say you do? Everything we have in written form today has a human author.... (God did not take pen in hand, He either spoke through the authors of Holy Writ as the Scripture says, or He did not.)
Again, it is either ALL (as it says) the WORD OF GOD, or NONE of it is.... ALL is reliable and useful for teaching, correcting, instructing, and all that, or NONE of it is...
Paul Schrader, right?
yep.
"Few would suggest"
Many have already suggested it, unfortunately.
The rest of your post I agree with.
"Do you make this up as you go along?"
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
The image would not be complete if man was incapable of creating and caring for life. Eve wasn't Adam's plaything.
Which post numbers are those?
Perhaps CBS also employs the "garbage in garbage out" tactics?
Marcel-Keyes told the Post her parents have thrown her out of the house, stopped speaking to her and refuse to pay for college because she is gay. She said she loves her parents
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/13/politics/main673732.shtml
Sorry but you're wrong. The Word says what it says. You can't "love away" consequences. You can share consequences lovingly but not discussing them condemns people to spiritual death and separation from God. Your attempted "Gotcha" didn't work. And I suppose you think the 10 Comandments are 10 suggestions. God says the wages of sin is death. I would condemn no one to that because I was AFRAID to share the truth of sin and salvation with someone. Excusing sin will cost people eternity.
Yes.
Umm... Who is speaking in this passage (in case yoiu forgot, the passage is John 3:16 and following)
Your characterization isn't logical, especially after I've explained and laid out the relevant scripture.
The characterization is entirely logical. (It's called the principle of non-contradiction...) It either speaks from itself as THE source of Truth, or you (and others of your persuasion) set themselves up as the arbitrator of what is and what is not true...
So, when did you become God? (Shirley McClain will be proud of you...)
Don't play games. Many posts indicate that they supported Keyes when they thought he publicly denounced his daughter - and critisized Cheney because he did not.
You are a wise man
John Paul II said in an encyclical called "Fides et Ratio" that "Faith and Reason were like two wings carrying us to Truth,(God). He goes on to say that there will be no contradiction even though at times the knowledge or understanding of one or the other might seem in conflict. However,since God designed it all,ultimately there would not be a conflict between Revelation and Science/Faith and Reason.
Alan Keyes is probably more capable than any other in making the Pope's point clear and demonstrating how the more abstract words of John Paul II apply to everyday issues.
The link to Mary Mossart's column quoting Alan is wonderful. As she says it should be required reading in all sex education classes. After scanning this thread,it seems it should be required reading for almost every poster here,believers and non-believers alike.
You're right, "there". Thanks.
Are you saying that God left work undone and that the death of Christ wasn't enough? On the cross, Christ said "It is finished". Are you saying He lied?
You prove my point. Those who are at the level of suckling have no understanding or often even awareness of the greatness of God's love. They are at the level of "rules". That's all they can understand.
God can certainly love away any consequences. God is Love.
Btw, I am not attempting a gotcha - I am making a point - those who live by "rules" and focus on "sin" are not aware of the possibilities available in a life based on love and forgiveness. It has nothing to do with accepting or encouraging or tolerating sin. It is about being loving and forgiving. Jesus' teaching is about love and forgiveness. That is what He taught. Some people are not ready to live at that level. And they, like the Islamists - worship "rules" and focus on sin.
Do you have the Cheney pic in post #9 in your collection?
With all due respect, if you don't mind my jumping in here.....I just came out of a relationship with a woman whose family were hardcore Wesleyan Armenians, and they were some of the most condemning, judgemental people I have ever met.
Matt quotes God and God quotes Isaiah with authority. The authority of the passages I gave you is greater than any of the passages you gave me. They are God's words right out of God's mouth. The "all" of 2Tim 3:16 does allow you to pick and choose passages which, by themselves would overrule the words of God Himself. All scripture must conform to the words of God. That is a logical requirement for coherence and truth.
"Jesus said what he meant and meant what He said."
You haven't found what Jesus said, so you don't know what He said. You found what Paul and John said.
Re:"God came here to teach. In order to know what He taught, who He is and what He is about, I'll go to the source. Whatever anyone else has to say, I'll reference back to the source. If you learn from God, then you can understand the word of God. There is no other way."
"This is not a quote from the Bible, so it must be from your own source of wisdom literature."
It's required for rationality. God is rational.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.