[brite750]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,148167,00.html

This article appeared in the Fox news site today, its being framed like its some sort of “got you” article. I’m reading it and thinking yeah, good answers, now, George Bush has certainly not done everything in a way that makes me happy, and lord knows I’m not alone, he’s pretty much ticked off liberals and conservatives alike with some of his decisions as president, but this article might give you some insight as why most Americans voted for him. This is from the article, <<On one tape, Bush explains that he told one prominent evangelical that he would not "kick gays, because I'm a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?">>, Beautiful answer, also from the article <<"I wouldn't answer the marijuana questions," he said, according to the Times. "You know why? Because I don't want some little kid doing what I tried.">> Ok, simply the best, most honest answers I think I’ve have heard from a politician in recent memory. Put that next to a Clinton answer, “ it depends on what the meaning of the word “is, is, whaaaaaat???, maybe a lot of people were just sick to death of answers like that from our leaders, so say what you want all you Bush bashers, and I’m sure you will, this is not a scandal.

[linskyjack]

How dare this man call homosexuals sinners!

[iltos]

Originally Posted by brite750

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,148167,00.html

This article appeared in the Fox news site today, its being framed like its some sort of “got you” article. I’m reading it and thinking yeah, good answers, now, George Bush has certainly not done everything in a way that makes me happy, and lord knows I’m not alone, he’s pretty much ticked off liberals and conservatives alike with some of his decisions as president, but this article might give you some insight as why most Americans voted for him. This is from the article, <<On one tape, Bush explains that he told one prominent evangelical that he would not "kick gays, because I'm a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?">>, Beautiful answer, also from the article <<"I wouldn't answer the marijuana questions," he said, according to the Times. "You know why? Because I don't want some little kid doing what I tried.">> Ok, simply the best, most honest answers I think I’ve have heard from a politician in recent memory. Put that next to a Clinton answer, “ it depends on what the meaning of the word “is, is, whaaaaaat???, maybe a lot of people were just sick to death of answers like that from our leaders, so say what you want all you Bush bashers, and I’m sure you will, this is not a scandal.

i love it when the media is able to reveal how human we really all are, underneath the trappings of wealth and power or criminal behavior....whatever....who knows why the guy taped the interviews....but he did....and i agree, brite, they reveal to me, that bush the politician is not so much different than bush, the man.....a guy you might have coffee with at the diner

i too have problems with a lot of his policies, but the thing i have realized about good politicians lately (dunno why, but i have seen or heard at least parts of a half a dozen candid, relaxed, and low key interviews with the likes of both bushes, clinton, carther, and others in the last month or so) is that most are very capable of, for the most part, separating "politics" from "life"....it's kind of a good/bad thing to me....on one hand it provides a pool of people who imagine they are capable of leading...on the other, while they are able to go freely from life to politics and back again, much of their "politicking" effects other people's lives

[alex_holker]

Linsky: He called himself a sinner, too. Also, he was apparently talking to some one who held strong religious beliefs, and giving a reason why he wouldn't attack homosexuals. Look at the Evolution vs. Creation thread, sometimes you must explain that, even if their assumptions were correct (that homosexuals are sinners), there are other reasons why they would be wrong (because even if homosexuals were sinners, Bush would not attack them when he felt he was a sinner too). It is possible that GW does feel that homosexuals are sinners, but that one statement isn't very good evidence for this.

Alex

[iltos]

Originally Posted by alex_holker

Linsky: He called himself a sinner, too. Also, he was apparently talking to some one who held strong religious beliefs, and giving a reason why he wouldn't attack homosexuals. Look at the Evolution vs. Creation thread, sometimes you must explain that, even if their assumptions were correct (that homosexuals are sinners), there are other reasons why they would be wrong (because even if homosexuals were sinners, Bush would not attack them when he felt he was a sinner too).

Alex

i think this is the point, alex

regardless of my feelings about bush, i have to repect him for making that distinction

now...about the gay marriage ban .....does it come from bush the politician, or bush, the man?

[linskyjack]

Originally Posted by alex_holker

Linsky: He called himself a sinner, too. Also, he was apparently talking to some one who held strong religious beliefs, and giving a reason why he wouldn't attack homosexuals. Look at the Evolution vs. Creation thread, sometimes you must explain that, even if their assumptions were correct (that homosexuals are sinners), there are other reasons why they would be wrong (because even if homosexuals were sinners, Bush would not attack them when he felt he was a sinner too). It is possible that GW does feel that homosexuals are sinners, but that one statement isn't very good evidence for this.

Alex

Good points Alex

[jd_957]

so what else is new. politicians are corrupt and bend the rules to suit their needs.

[brite750]

Originally Posted by iltos

i think this is the point, alex

regardless of my feelings about bush, i have to repect him for making that distinction

now...about the gay marriage ban .....does it come from bush the politician, or bush, the man?

I dont see these things connected exactly, i think he feels that homosexuality is a sin according to his faith, and in many religions marriage is a spiritual ritual, between a man and a woman, so to sanction a sin would not be in keeping with his faith, and the beliefs of the majority of Americans as well. I think if you took a flat vote on gay marriage, it would lose, but civil unions would be allowed. In ny i'm pretty sure its a mute point gay marriage will be allowed, Rochester is basically the San Francisco of the east, in the 70's & 80's I had to start wearing an ear ring on the left side because my butt was getting sore from all the pinching, men are animals, and there is nothing more embarassing than a guy trying to pick you up in a steam room, hi my name is Bruce, my a$$.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by brite750

I dont see these things connected exactly, i think he feels that homosexuality is a sin according to his faith, and in many religions marriage is a spiritual ritual, between a man and a woman, so to sanction a sin would not be in keeping with his faith, and the beliefs of the majority of Americans as well. I think if you took a flat vote on gay marriage, it would lose, but civil unions would be allowed.

it's an excellent point, and i understand it...it's also where my lack of belief in the whole sin thing separates us....

but that's ok i DO agree in the idea of it being more than an economic contract, and the word spritual suits me just fine

on the pinching issue...exactly why is it ok for a man in this country to pinch another man, but if a man does it to a woman, its harrassment? we heterosexuals have some rights, too, if memory serves !!!

[Wet Chicken]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

How dare this man call homosexuals sinners!

Don't worry, I'm sure bush will get an 'out of jail' card (again)

[brite750]

Originally Posted by iltos

it's an excellent point, and i understand it...it's also where my lack of belief in the whole sin thing separates us....

but that's ok i DO agree in the idea of it being more than an economic contract, and the word spritual suits me just fine

on the pinching issue...exactly why is it ok for a man in this country to pinch another man, but if a man does it to a woman, its harrassment? we heterosexuals have some rights, too, if memory serves !!!

us refering to who?, i dont believe in the bible, and i dont believe in sin, i believe in good and evil, and i dont believe that being gay is evil any more or less than being straight is. Ive had a few male friends and neighbors that were gay and they were fine people, i just dont want my a$$ pinched the marriage thing i would rather gays not use that term but i dont have any logical reason why they should not since government involved themselves in marriage, its free game now, they should have left marriage a church/religion issue, i think its because i was brought up Catholic, and still have some leftover feelings from that, its certainly not an issue that keeps me up at night. I just thought that the comment made by George was a very honest and humble answer, after all let he who is without sin cast the first stone, that was Jesus BTW for all you fundies.

[brite750]

Originally Posted by Wet Chicken

Don't worry, I'm sure bush will get an 'out of jail' card (again)

man, i wouldnt use the card for this one, if it was me I would make sure these comments get plastered all over the news, i think overall it makes Bush look good. now the illeagal imagrant thing, the no WMD thing, the N Korea thing, etc, etc, I mean keep that card handy.

[linskyjack]

Brite why is it that all these gay guys are constantly pinching your a**. Are you possibly giving them some kind of signal?

[brite750]

Originally Posted by jd_957

so what else is new. politicians are corrupt and bend the rules to suit their needs.

bend what rules???

[Wet Chicken]

Originally Posted by brite750

man, i wouldnt use the card for this one

Apparently, the bush administration has quit a few get out of jail cards to use. I think they own the printing press