New Flight 93 Rolling Stone Article-Mark Bingham 9/11 Hero Described as 'Proud, Gay &..REPUBLICAN!!'

…get your knickers so completely wadded up over what someone else is doing, and allows you to put your focus on, well, let's just say for starters, yourself.

This is such an old used up argument, shoot the messenger instead of addressing the problem. We as a society have and need laws that worry about “what someone else is doing” for the betterment of our civilization, pandering, narcotics and obscenity just to name a few. Without these laws we would be forced to live in the Liberaltarians “ideal” society, the basest of existences amongst the filth and repugnance that is perversion. You’re welcome to it; just get your own country first. If we don’t worry about “what someone else is doing” there is no reason to have laws against incest and bestiality. NONE!

gnip

Well, I can't do THAT backwards.

I agree with both of you. I don't give a rat's a$$ if Mark was gay or not. He was an America. And he died just like everyone else on that plane- preventing the deaths of potentially hundreds more. And yes, I do believe he is being used as a poster child for some left-wing gay activists. The fact that he was a log cabin Republican should shut them up quick.

Well said.

The terrorists DO know what they've wrought and will continue to bring to these shores. It amazes me how many cars I see now with "flags" and stickers after 9/11. These people were nowhere to be found prior. Patriotism is now fashionable. Your assessment of "heroes" is dead on (pun intended). They were nothing more than frightened people fighting for their lives in a case of too little, too late.

The real heroes are the men who are now overseas having to clean up the mess this nations civilians have ignored for the past decade. They were too absorbed in their stock portfolios or watching WWF instead of paying attention to what their elected leaders and government were doing, and too lazy or spineless to take a stand on the issues of moral decay of this country.

But hey, stick a flag on your car and jump up and down shouting "Let's Roll" and you've done your duty. Funny, if you check the recruitment numbers post 9/11, you'll see very little rise in military numbers. It's politics as usual just six short months after 9/11 and the public is back to watching b*tt pirate issues on "Friends", wondering where their next "entitlement" is coming from. Let the next guy spill his blood while I enjoy my entitled life that I am owed by this country.

You know, as much as I despise the terrorists and their mindset, I'll give them this. They are brilliant tacticians. They know exactly where and how we are weak and they know this nation as a whole is too ignorant and self absorbed to do anything about it. Just watch and recall the events that have unfolded in this country in the last six months. Liberties disappearing, political obstructionism, increasing moral decay, public indecision. And the sheeple sit back and keep letting it happen, all the while taking three seconds out of their day to yell "Let's Roll". Oh, there are a few Americans left who understand the difference, but not enough anymore. We know the sad fact is it won't take invading armies to bring us down. This country is no longer spiritual or moral, it's material and self absorbed. The Muslims, Chinese and all other regimes with an agenda know this and are brilliantly exploiting it.

Yep Tracer, prayers are definitely needed. But in a country that denies God, a country and people that has pushed Him out of every aspect of what used to be considered normal life, who could blame Him if he wasn't listening anymore. We put more creedence into Madison Avenue media catch phrases like "Let's Roll" than "In God We Trust".

Maybe you could just chill, I'm not the one who started the Thomas Jefferson/Libertarian slant, nor am I the one who told you to get a new hobby. Actually I didn't mention any of those, so why your laying into me for it, well your rage has blinded you I guess.

You did at some point reply to the right person (me), so maybe you were just shaking uncontrollably and thought I posted 4 or 5 times in a row and couldn't see straight.

It is a sin that is Forbidden in the Old and New Testaments.

As is it a sin to wear mixed-material clothing, eat pork, eat fish, for women to wear men's clothing, etc. The laws pertaining to homosexuality are right in middle of everything else. God did not give any special treatment to how bad homosexuality was, if you actually read the Old Testament.

All Old Testament Jewish Law is not required to be carried on after The Sacrifice that Almighty God provided for Us with his Son.
Laws that protect the moral fabric of society are to be applied however.

I like how you can pick and choose which laws/commandments can be followed - the Ten Commandments, any laws pertaining to homosexuality, but not the ones like the eating of pork/shrimp, women wearing men's clothes, etc. You do know the Ten Commandments came out of Old Testament Jewish Law, right?

I wouldn't be picking Alabama as a shining example of how the law system should work btw.

And you never answered how homosexuality hurts society (your attempts to were kind of rambling to be honest) and how it affects you or I.

Are you so weak in your beliefs and your sexuality, that what people do behind their closed doors, or on TV (which you can change the channel btw) are threats to you? Are you going to catch homosexuality, because somewhere in America or on TV (which you can change the..oh, I mentioned that) two men or two women share a kiss?

I am quite confident of my standing with God, and quite confident in my sexuality. When I look at the problems with society, the biggest ones that crop up are not homosexuality, but are drugs, things like welfare that encourage laziness, a legal system that does not work, a 'war' on drugs that does not work. Politicians that lie to you and I. Law Enforcement agencies that do not believe you or I have any rights.

You are not a conservative, now just crawl back down that Liberaltarian hole from which you exist.

I'm quite conservative, probably moreso than you. I'm conservative enough that I believe the government has no right snooping in peoples' homes. which leads to this :

Why haven’t you addressed the fact that the US still has sodomy laws and always has?

I addressed that in a round about way. The US does not enforce them for the most part (and some are being overturned here and there), and you very rarely hear them enforced.

I'd like you to answer this: How can the US enforce those laws currently on the books, when to do so would mean they would have to monitor every individual 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and to monitor what goes on everywhere 24 hours a day, 7 days week.

We are all pretty set in what we believe on homosexuality. Let's turn the discussion over to how could the US enforce any law against homosexuality and still be the US and still follow the Constitution?

He's Gay and a Republican? That'll torque a few people here.

I wonder what is tougher for a gay Republican, to come out as a homosexual to straight people or to come out as a Republican to fellow gays?

Your assessment of "heroes" is dead on (pun intended). They were nothing more than frightened people fighting for their lives in a case of too little, too late.

How dare you try and demean what those on Flight 93 did. Up until 9/11, the normal thing that the FAA and FBI and others said in case of a hijacking, was to go along with the hijackers, and at some point you'll be rescued. It was the safest for all concerned, because up until 9/11, most airliners that were hijacked, the hijackers had motives that had nothing to do with the airplane or the hostages themselves (think freeing political prisoners in elbonia, or making a statement about some perceived wrong)

Those on Flight 93, once they realized what had happened elsewhere, realized they could die like sheep and perhaps allow 1000s more to die, or they could stand up and do something. And they did. And they weren't too late, they prevented thousands more from being killed, how you can say that's "too little, too late" is beyond me.

We know the sad fact is it won't take invading armies to bring us down. This country is no longer spiritual or moral, it's material and self absorbed

I will agree with you there.

We see this everyday in the papers, people abusing animals, people ignoring nutty spouses who end up killing their kids, people who get away with murder and then are patted on the back (God will punish OJ and others, I'm sure of it, it may not be in this world, but it will be in the next). People are doing more and more horrible things everyday. We are becoming immune to it.

I'll tell you how I think this country will go down, it will be because of balkanization. We are being turned into Yugoslavia as we speak. We have liberals who say every race should be treated seperately, that we should have all of these cuckoo holidays, and yet ignore the holidays that a majority believe in. We have liberals who are saying that certain races should be treated differently. They want the streetsigns and ballots and textooks to be in a zillion different languages. In other words, we have people who want to split this country apart.

The white and black racists who want the country divided into various territories for various races are going to get their wish, only it's not going to be through their actions, it'll be through the actions of politicians and school boards.

I'm not going to spend the time obsessing over this issue like you apparently are, but you statement are all too easy to refute. I'll make just a few comments.

The Puritans had a good standard of laws. For that matter The laws that were in place in 1789 would make our country a better place today.

No surprise to hear you say this. We'll examine if that's the case. Keep reading.

The Sharpless case you cited. Wrong on two points. First, it was obvious, the defendants pleadings notwithstanding, that his behavior was not private, whether it was in his private property or not. He was allowing public access and charging admission. That's a completely ridiculous analogy.

Secondly, your reliance on this one case to support your claims paints you into a corner. Are you saying that you we as a nation should embrace and abide by what the courts decide, no matter what? If so, I'd like to hear your opinion on Roe vs. Wade, legalizing abortion, or Plessy vs. Ferguson, permitting racial discrimination in public facilities.

God intended Sex to be something to be shared between one man and one woman who were Married.

You right to worship God and adibe by His teachings as guidance in your life is without question. But in a nation of 280 million there are those who don't share your beliefs. Are you asserting you have the authority to dictate your religious beliefs to them through the force of government? If so I'll refer you to the 1st Amendment which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

For Example, Alabama uses a phrase that harkens back to the natural law -- "crime against nature" -- to refer to homosexuality.

Interracial marriage (miscegeny) was also considered a crime against nature in Alabama until November 2000! In fact, the vote to overturn the law failed in some counties. Alabama is probably not the best place to be looking for case law.

It is the nature of the act itself, and not its legislative characterization or punishment which must be the test in determining whether or not it involves moral turpitude. Homosexuality Fits this definition, it always has and always will. Every Civilized society has accepted this fact.

It seems to be you're arguing against yourself. Public opinion has been trending toward accepting homosexuality and it's merely the legislative (and Biblical) prohibition that many conservatives fall back on now. And you're incorrect in your historical analysis. Homosexuality was not only not condemned in some cultures, it was looked upon favorably in ancient Greece.

I am sure you are also aware that For years Homosexuality was classified as a mental illness.

I'm sure you're aware that for centuries, the earth was classified as the center of the universe. Of course we now know that's not true. However there are still those who argue otherwise, despite the best scientific evidence available.

noting that nearly one-half of all young homosexuals have been arrested, placed in juvenile detention or arraigned in juvenile court on at least one occasion

Conveniently ignoring that gay kids kicked out of the house by parents who disown them upon finding out, might tend to have a little rougher existence.

Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard's famous study of twins is one such attempt.

You just mentioned this without any kind of comment. That study shows quite a correlation. In 50+% cases both twins are gay. That drops to about 21% if the twins are fraternal, and drops to about 10% between non-twin brothers. Seems like a correlation to me.

"This is such an old used up argument, shoot the messenger instead of addressing the problem. We as a society have and need laws that worry about “what someone else is doing” for the betterment of our civilization, pandering, narcotics and obscenity just to name a few. Without these laws we would be forced to live in the Liberaltarians “ideal” society, the basest of existences amongst the filth and repugnance that is perversion. You’re welcome to it; just get your own country first. If we don’t worry about “what someone else is doing” there is no reason to have laws against incest and bestiality. NONE!" Wow, so much drivel, so little time. First and foremost, it IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS what ANYONE does in their bedroom. Sorry Pal, but that's a fact, no matter how much you and your fellow Puritan Big Government Types want to make it your business.

As for your "old used up argument" bringing up Incest and beastiality, and such, that isn't even close to the argument at hand, so please, with all due respect, stick to the topic. By the Way, just so we're clear, You Want Big Brother Government, is that right? Am I misinterpreting your diatribe??

Lastly as for your "get your own country first." line, Frankly, with your Hardline viewpoints, you already have a country that would have welcomed you and those like you with open arms, Afganistan.

Here's an idea Clint, if you don't approve of homosexuals, don't be one.

You seem to be suggesting that I felt these people deserved it. My comments on the people of Flight 93 were never to demean them personally. I am truly saddened they lost their lives. Take a breath and stand back and look at the bigger picture. We're making heroes out of people who shouldn't have been in that situation in the first place due to the reasons I stated that this country is in. Hence, too little, too late. It's degenerated to the fact that civilians are now fighting battles on our own shores and over the homeland. They as well as the rest of us are responsible for the mess we're in. I'm sorry you disagree but the fact remains that if the population of this country had it's priorities straight, 9/11 quite possibly wouldn't have happened.

I think the balkanization has been occuring since the sixties. In fact, I'd be willing to bet a months pay, that the liberal mindset, media and sheeple in this country will hail Taliban Johnny as a hero within a year or two. The media and lawyers are already pounding that process into the minds of the public. And I've seen signs they are already accepting it. Chatting at my local firing range and sportsmans club today (insert liberal politically correct gasp here), we agreed in twenty lightning fast years we (I) have become a bigoted narrow minded, religious right wing zealot according to popular leftist lore and democratic party standards of today. I used to simply be a normal average citizen at one time in this country, who was allowed the freedoms this country and our constitution protected. Now I can be condemned for my beliefs (i.e. anti gun control, right to life) or not conforming to a simple mindset.

As Tracer stated, I love my country too. And I pray for it daily these days. We are in a fight for our lives and way of life. Let's Roll? That one doesn't bother me as much as it did Tracer. The one that gets me is "United We Stand". Now there's a laugh. One look at the way the House, Senate and U.S. Civil Government are conducting themselves and that the people of this nation put up with it, well it puts a little irony into that statement doesn't it? God bless and God help our troops overseas, especially since they have to take orders from these people, and worse yet spill blood for the sheeple who don't even give them a second thought when they turn in at night. Being a former member of that fraternity I know they do it proudly and unquestioningly and for all the right reasons. They are the heroes my friend.

Actually I agree a lot, they shouldn't have been put there in a situation like that. I put more of the blame for this on clinton, he chose to ignore warning after warning, attack after attack, against us. Actually, for OBL, I put the complete blame on clinton, this was on his watch, and his administration chose to ignore it.

I still think that what those on Flight 93 did, was quite commendable, it's unfortunate that it was forced on them, but when they realized what was actually happening, they did the best anybody could do.

How can the US enforce … what goes on everywhere 24 hours a day, 7 days week.

Umm… I thought this was a state's interests issue and not the federal governments concern, or would you and your “conservativeness” deny states rights? But let’s say ole tex is King and it is a federal issue for the moment, if a law is unenforceable because we can’t be watched 24/7 all the time we would have to throw out a lot of laws. Drug use laws, bestiality laws, incest laws, pandering laws, polygamy/polyandry laws, voluntary euthanasia laws, surrogate mother laws, jaywalking laws, etc. So King tex, which ones do we keep or throw out, either way your decision would be arbitrary.

Let's turn the discussion over to how could the US enforce any law against homosexuality and still be the US and still follow the Constitution?

Aside from that it’s a states issue, sodomy laws and the like forestall same-sex marriage, gay adoption and the embezzlement from non-relation health insurance benefits. I assume you being the good “conservative” that you are don’t want to see these things unlegislatable, right?

Face it, your Liberaltarianism is showing, pull up the back of them britches please.

bringing up Incest and beastiality, and such, that isn't even close to the argument at hand, so please, with all due respect, stick to the topic.

Hehehe…On one hand you say

IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS what ANYONE does in their bedroom

and on the other hand you say what someone does in their own bedroom

isn't even close to the argument

, so which is it my morally challenged friend? I see, you want it both ways, one perversion is OK and the other isn’t? You and your double standards are as irrelevant as your argument; perhaps you should meditate for a while.

You Want Big Brother Government, is that right?

Nope, just a conservative one, not your Liberaltarian version thank you.

Umm… I thought this was a state's interests issue and not the federal governments concern

You are excellent at dodging issues on technicalities.

States' rights then:

How does a state go about enforcing something that would require them to monitor everybody in that state and every location in that state, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

(you knew exactly what I meant, about how would any law like that be enforced, you chose to dodge it by saying it's not the federal government, well, try to dodge this one).

Let's see how strong your conservative roots are, would you support something that would require the state/local governments to monitor you and your family and your house 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

'Libertarians believe Thomas Jefferson would be a libertarian if he were alive today' and that's not what I was saying, although it's probably true. What I was saying was this: The values and beliefs that Thomas Jefferson held are consistent with those of libertarians today.

Except for his views on perversion.

Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy* with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least.

How does a state go about enforcing something that would require them to monitor everybody in that state and every location in that state, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

Asked and answered. Further, the state only has to enforce it when it has probable cause and not in violation of that fourth amendment thingy.

(you knew exactly what I meant, about how would any law like that be enforced, you chose to dodge it by saying it's not the federal government, well, try to dodge this one).

I did address it, did you bother reading my post? There are many laws that can’t be enforced without probable cause, do you have a point you want to make or are you going to just keep asking the same question over and over. Now how about being a good sport and answer some of my questions?

Let's see how strong your conservative roots are, would you support something that would require the state/local governments to monitor you and your family and your house 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

This just in from The Redundancy Office for the Department of Redundancy: NO, irrelevant to whether sodomy laws, drug laws, pandering laws…are good and necessary for society.