For some reason, this line stood out and made me think of a few Freepers I've debated with on these types of threads.
I commend the Strib; the adjectives liberal and pro-life seldom appear on its pages. Actually, pro-life never appears, so it's interesting to have a rare sighting of the "l" word, a sort of Halley's Comet occasion for the Strib.
The question of whether Robinson should be a bishop is -- and probably will remain for some time -- an issue for the Episcopal Church.
The Apostle Paul noted as much in 1 Corinthians 11:18-19:
First of all, I hear that there are divisions among you when you meet as a church, and to some extent I believe it. (19) But, of course, there must be divisions among you so that those of you who are right will be recognized!
Sure they did. A whole 14 minute "investigation." Clarence Thomas or the Florida Election should have take that long.
Amazing how fast the wheels of "justice" turn if you are a Liberal and your aim is to destroy God's law.
He admits he abandoned his family. He proudly boasts that he has a sexual relationship with another man. That's A-OK.
Someone alleges (maybe falsely) that he patted a man on the behind and looks at naked pictures. That's a smear.
Not surprising.
Generally, deluded promoters of The Agenda only think they're debating. It's usually a once sided affair as pro-agenda people are incapable of hearing the other side in their breathless pauses before hammering away their perverted logic.
Imagine a "close" vote in the Republican Party about whether Hillary Clinton and her historical slant should represent the GOP. Wouldn't you be wondering about whether the Republican Party had lost it's way? In such an example, smearing Hillary in order to avoid Republican Party collective suicide seems to be attacking the symptoms and not the cause.
Whatever the episcopalian institution was at one time, it has clearly lost it's way.
I suppose it means something positive that porno sites and "touching" might be considered a smear in episcopalian circles. The thought that it might even influence somebody's thinking is almost encouraging until I begin to wonder: did it discourage or encourage voters in the final vote. :P
If that is indeed the case, why, pray-tell haven't we seen details of this "clearing" action? They say this website "was easy to track down" yet provide no supportive details. I mean, I may quote the Minn. Red Star when it supports what I think as well, but I'm going to have some degree of guilt since they have little credability.
The speed with which the Episcopal Church confirmed this guy after this "smear" came up, less than 24 hours, real or manufactured also speaks volumns on the agenda of the Episcopal Church.
You may feel victimized that "the debate is going against you", which you are correct, but I sense something entirely different.
A cover-up.
Do you really believe that this matter is now at rest and there will be no other alligations against this adulterer/sodomite?
Even the accuser regrets his wording:
When Bishop Scruton called Mr. Lewis on Monday, Mr. Lewis said he "regretted having used the word `harassment' in his e-mail," Bishop Scruton said. Mr. Lewis described two conversations with Bishop-elect Robinson at the conference, Bishop Scruton said. Mr. Lewis said the bishop-elect had touched him on the arm and upper back during the talks, which were in front of other people.Mr. Lewis said that the gestures struck him as too familiar and that they "made him feel uncomfortable," said Bishop Scruton. But he acknowledged that other people might view the exchange as normal and natural and told Bishop Scruton two times that he did not want to pursue the matter further, Bishop Scruton said.