The RNC & McCain’s Speech

You have got to be kidding me; I fell asleep due to being bored. Same old spill — nothing new. Good luck McCain. I am not even motivated to write about this.

'Fight with me'

I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open…

I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them.

I will cut government spending. He will increase it.

My tax cuts will create jobs; his tax increases will eliminate them

Advertisements

61 thoughts on “The RNC & McCain’s Speech

  1. I’ve got to disagree with you completely. It was exactly the speech he needed. I just finished writing about it so I don’t feel like going to deep. Suffice it to say he he re-earned his Maverick moniker, got away from the jabs taken the night before, and effectively addressed the important issues, not to mention taking some time to pull at our heartstrings.

  2. The Marxist issue earlier really ties well into your latest post Mr. Carson. It works well in explaining how outdated your current beliefs really are.

    Group dynamics isn’t as big of an issue now as it was back in the 40s or even the 80s. If it were, there would not be a black man on the ballot for Democratic Presidency, and there wouldn’t be a woman as his runner up for office, and there wouldn’t be a woman on the ballot for Republican Vice-Presidency. The fact is, Race and Sex are now only problems if you want them to be. The issue would be completely over and done with by now if it weren’t for every liberal man and liberal woman in America still thinking that the country still owed them something. America is a country in which you can still make it without the tiniest ounce of skill. There is just one thing that is left out of the equation today and that is Work Ethic. If more people were willing to put in a good days work and stop thinking that the American Dream is to be given all of your wealth for free, then we wouldn’t have problems like welfare fraud and embezzlement (or even gambling for that matter). On the Homosexuality issue, I’m a bit old fashioned, I believe that marriage should be between a MAN and WOMAN. I know, I know “No one can choose who they will fall in love with.” Spare me, I don’t really care if you feel obliged to forsake your salvation all because you think that you are saved through “no one sin being greater than another.” If that was true, why would the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy be full of what punishments are to be given for what crimes. Also, why would Jesus have said to Pilate, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin” (John 19:11) if all sins were the same; clearly there are degrees of sin and you should take a gander at your bible before you start quoting it for your own excuses.

    Oh, and a response to Magiera for his last comment too, The Capital Gains Tax is a tax on, guess what, Capital Gains on non-inventory items that gained more money than they were bought for. You have to look at it in comparison to time as well. Capital Gains Tax is always supposed to be lower than that on general income to encourage Capital investors to invest rather than take up a traditional job. HOWEVER, the reason that the Capital Tax was so high when Reagan took office was because of the crappy condition that Carter left our country in when he left office. Our military was suffering so drastically that we wouldn’t have even been able to occupy Paris. Reagan fixed all of those problems so that when Bush took office, the US economy was at an all time high that CONTINUED through Clinton’s failed presidency. Oh, and a budget surplus is a bad thing when that money doesn’t get redistributed back to the people that money was taken from.

    And finally Jon, you got your quote wrong. While he does own 8 properties in the United States, they are all owned by Cindy McCain, her dependent children, and the trusts and companies that they manage. In reality, the real question was of his carpetbagger history. His response, “As a matter of fact, now that I think about it, the place that I lived longest in my life was Hanoi.” Do a little research before you come trying to put me in my place. (you’ll sound smarter)

  3. Actually, come to think of it, i would like to pose a question to all the liberals who visit this blog page. Name three things that qualify Obama to be President of the United States. Oh, And don’t repose a question about Palin because you will be soundly defeated.

  4. I did like the fact that he (McCain) is saying that he is not the typical party man. I will admit that I am just being biased here. I like the fact that he was picking on his party. I found much of what he said to be way too close to a “W” speech. He did not address much on the economic issue. I heard nothing about helping poor people (Health Care). Palin shined more than McCain.

    My conservative student (1 of most on campus): I promise I will respond to your question.

  5. It is pure Ronald Reagan philosophy. Obama spent his entire speech time bashing the policies of Bush while never explaining how he planned to fix the problems in America. Reagan’s 1980 and 1984 speeches never once bashed his political rivals but rather gave his visions of a better America and how he planned to enact them. It was no longer required of McCain to make known his animosity towards Obama because Palin really achieved that goal for him.

  6. Hey Anonymous, what about those liberal men and women with master’s degrees that can’t get jobs because of the economy? Do those people have no skill? What about children who haven’t been given the chance to prove whether or not they have skill? Should they just be left alone to starve and suffer because they haven’t proven themselves yet? I don’t think the system owes me anything because I’m a woman. I think they system owes me something because I work at a dead end job, despite the fact that I am educated, because I can’t get hired anywhere else, and at that dead end job, they take 21% of my pay and put into things that I don’t qualify for, like Medicaid for the simple fact that I’m still a student. The job market is horrific right now as is apparent by the fact that unemployment rates, even among educated people WITH the tiniest amounts of skill, are astronomical. Be careful when you use words like “always” and “never.” I’m a liberal and yet I’m a Christian and I have work ethic. So does my father and my sister and a great many other people I could name. Also, if you’re going to write what you write, at least have the balls to attach your name to it. You seem bright, even if you and I don’t agree, so at least man or woman up and own your opinions.

    And incidentally, if you’d like to read my thoughts about how qualified Obama is, you can meander over to my blog. I wrote about it there, so I won’t bore everyone with it here.

  7. I like your comment Kristi. Well stated. Carson, does your entire school think the way your student does? If so, either you stop rejecting our job offers and come to freedom or help save the souls of the unknowing on that campus of yours. How do they keep you? Why do you stay? Let me guess, the money. Regardless, you must feel suffocated.

    Love ya still

  8. McCain is certainly substance over style when it comes to speeches. 🙂

    Eddie, what did you think of his statement that the state of education is the current civil rights issue, and must be fixed?

    I thought McCain did a good job of laying out an alternate view of changing things and how it is plausible for the previous Republican administration to be replaced by a better Republican one…not throwing the baby out with the bath water, as it were. McCain is probably the ONLY guy that could pull this off, and the Palin pick enhances the strategy. We’ll see if it works.

    Kristi, I read your blog about how much experience is necessary to be President. Interesting. I agree with you to the extent that talent can make up for experience in some ways. One thing that experience helps the voter with, however, is show what a candidate might do in the future. This is where the fog rolls in on Obama. He says he will change a lot of things and buck the system…without a shred of evidence he has ever originated a bill or fought his own party over a matter of conscience. McCain has done both. Does this guarantee either man to be a good or bad President? No, but experiences and decisions made earlier in life are not without merit.

    Hopefully the debates will be illuminating as the candidates are forced to take public stands on issues.

  9. Obama is qualified to be president for 3 reasons.
    1- he’s a natural born citizen of the United States.
    2- – he’s over 35 years old
    3 – he’s been a resident of the United States for 14 years.
    Art. 2 sec 1 US Constitution.
    It turns out I’m as qualified tobe President as Barack Obama!!

    Carson – You really want to pay more in taxes?? Where do you think all that money Obama wants to spend comes from??

  10. I’m watching the McCain speech now because I was working last night and could not watch it live. It does seem a fairly standard political speech–long on platitudes and inaccuracies framed in such as way as to resist fact-checking along with a few gross distortions of fact (Sarah Palin raised taxes on oil companies, but McCain says she cut taxes–also true).

    Palin’s speech was better in that is had clearer focus and smoother delivery. She proved adept at the sort of sarcasm that gets its point across without making the speaker seem like a cynic. She demonstrated that she is an effective speaker. She threw in subtle qualifiers that made egregious falsehoods into half truths. Take the word “major” out of “this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform” and there’s not a shred of truth in her assertion. With the word “major” it becomes a matter of opinion.

    It is interesting that McCain’s claim to tell us about “pork”–I will make them famous, and you will know their names. You will know their names–is already law thanks to the Coburn-Obama Transparency Act, which McCain signed on as a cosponsor.

    McCain-Palin are gonna try to get elected by promising what Obama has already delivered while accusing him of writing only memoirs.

  11. Kristi, as long as Mr. Carson holds jurisdiction over my grade in his class, you will not know what my name is (another conservative value :)). Rest assured that by the end of the year, you will know what my name is. Just expect a conservative view on this blog from now on. Oh, and if you think that Obama is going to create more jobs, your pitifully mistaken. The only people who will benefit from his job creations are scientists and they already have a monopoly on that market. Anyways, Obama can not force company owners to create more jobs. The only thing that he can do is place those jobs under the legislation of the state which would raise taxes which is your main objection with your job right now in the first place. It is a bit of a loop that you pulled yourself into though. It was kinda cute actually.

  12. very correct, so humor me and tell me, if you know the answer, Patrick is in a lot of trouble with me

  13. “McCain-Palin are gonna try to get elected by promising what Obama has already delivered while accusing him of writing only memoirs.”

    What has Obama delivered? I am very fascinated at how people are projecting their expectations for the next four years on Obama. I read an article where the author talked to some young soldiers at the DNC that were supporting Obama. This group of soldiers believed Bush had short-sheeted them on the war, and that Obama would *increase* military supplies and men to the battlefront! People see what they want to see in the candidate, and he takes advantage of it with the nebulous “change” mantra—another opportunity for people to fill in the blank.

  14. It galls me to write something clear and to the point and then to see the last paragraph quoted with a question that had been answered in the previous paragraph. Perhaps you needed more. Here’s a start:

    Obama Helped Pass The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The “Most Sweeping Since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travelon corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” – that is, collect or arrange – for members of Congress, candidates, and partycommittees. In January 2007, the Washington Post wrote in aneditorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bushsigned a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades…Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundlingprovisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “themost sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.” [S. 230, 110thCongress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07;TheWashington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]

    Obama Passed Illinois State Gift Ban Act “Heralded As the MostSweeping Good-Government Legislation in Decades.” In 1998, Obama passed the Illinois Gift Ban that prohibited legislators, state officers and employees, and judges from soliciting or receiving gifts from a person or entity with interests affected by government. The Chicago Tribune wrote, “Gov. Jim Edgar signed into law Wednesday anethics and campaign finance package heralded as the most sweeping good-government legislation in decades.” The law also required greater campaign finance disclosure and limited the uses for which raisedmoney could be spent. Obama said, “I have seen a general cynicism from taxpayers about government. They believe they have no influence on the process since they don’t have the money of special interest groups. With the gift ban and the ban on Springfield fund-raisers that are contained in this legislation, I think at least some of thisconfidence will be restored.” [HB672, 3R P 52-4-1, 5/22/98; PA90-0737, 8/12/98; Chicago Tribune, 8/13/98; Chicago Independent Bulletin, 6/4/98]

    Ø Illinois Ethics Bill Most Far Reaching Since Watergate,Product Of Bipartisan Work. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote ofObama’s bill, “The ethics restrictions would be the most far-reaching since the Watergate-era campaign financial disclosure law. They are the product of months of negotiations among two lawmakers of each party, other state officials and Mike Lawrence. He is an aide toformer Sen. Paul Simon, a Democrat, and used to be an aide to Edgar, a Republican.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24/98]

    Obama And Lugar Passed Law Boosting U.S. Efforts To Keep WMDs AndOther Dangerous Weapons Out Of The Hands Of Terrorists. In 2006,Obama and Lugar introduced The Cooperative Proliferation DetectionAct, which was passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committeeunanimously on May 26, 2006 and was eventually incorporated into the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006 and signed into law onJanuary 11, 2007. According to a Senate Foreign Relations Committeereport on its legislative activity in the 109th Congress, “The committee passed S. 2566, The Cooperative Proliferation Detection,Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006by unanimous consent on May 26, 2006. The legislation authored by Chairman Lugar and Senator Obama enhances: (1) U.S. cooperation with foreign governments to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles aroundthe world; and (2) the United States’ ability to provide assistance to foreign governments aimed at helping them detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation, which garnered 26 co-sponsors (including 8 committee members), sought to energize U.S.programs to secure lightweight anti-aircraft missiles…The initiative was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program that focuses on weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. The legislation was signed into law on January 11, 2007, as a part of H.R. 6060, theDepartment of State Authorities Act of 2006.” [P.L. 109-472, 1/11/07;House Report 109-706, 9/3/06; S. 2566, 109th Congress; S.1949, 109th Congress; Senate Report 110-40, 3/29/07]

    Ø Lugar Said It Was Accurate That Said Obama Reached Out To HimAnd They Passed Legislation To Lock Down Loose Nuclear Weapons.“Republican Sen. Dick Lugar (IN) today said an Obama campaign ad which features him is ‘accurate.’ The ad makes the point the Obama previously ‘reached out’ to Lugar to ‘help lock down loose nuclear weapons.’ Lugar is widely considered one of the most knowledgeable in the area of nuclear weapons proliferation and the coauthored of the1991 Nunn-Lugar Act on cooperative threat reduction. ‘He did’ reachout, Lugar said. He explained that in 2005, Obama asked if he couldjoin Lugar on a trip to Russia and other countries to visit sitesunder the Nunn-Lugar program. ‘After that, we had legislation that we cosponsored together which passed’ dealing with dangerous missiles.‘So I am pleased we had that opportunity to work together,’ Lugarsaid. ‘I’m pleased we had the association Sen. Obama describes.’ But Lugar made clear up front that while the ad was accurate, and he’s comfortable with the association, ‘There is no chance I will consider running with Barack Obama.’” [MSNBC, 7/15/08]

    Obama and Coburn Passed A Bill Creating A “Google-like” Database ForThe Public To Search Details About Federal Funding Awards. In 2006,Obama and Coburn co-authored a bill to create a “Google-like” database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB byJanuary 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, freewebsite that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3)funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification Systemcode or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) programsource; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each fundingaction; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants,loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent,9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06]

    Obama Passed Law Ensuring That Wounded Veterans Recovering In Military Hospitals Do Not Have To Pay For Their Meals Or Phone Calls To FamilyMembers. In 2005, Obama sponsored and passed an amendment that to the2005 emergency supplemental appropriations act ensuring that wounded veterans recovering in military hospitals do not have to pay for theirown meals or phone calls to family members. The amendment was then passed in each of the following Congresses. Prior to passage of the amendment, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals. Obama’s amendment required the military to provide free meals for service members in militaryhospitals undergoing recuperation or therapy as a result of wounds sustained in Iraq or Afghanistan. The amendment was retroactive toJanuary 1, 2005 in an effort to provide those injured service memberswho received bills for their meals with some relief from those costs.The amendment became law. [S. Amdt. 390, Passed by unanimous consent,4/14/05 to H.R.1268, Signed by the President, 5/11/05, Became PublicLaw No: 109-013; Obama Press Release, 5/11/05]

    Obama Proposals Providing Improvements In Health Care For RecoveringSoldiers Were Passed Into Law, Including Requirements For Post-Deployment Mental Health Screenings And National Study On The Needs OfIraq War Veterans. H.R. 976, passed by the Senate on August 2, 2007,includes several provisions from bills originally sponsored by Senators Obama and McCaskill. The provisions would improve healthcare services and health care tracking for service members, and would require post-deployment, face to face mental health screenings for returning service members within 30 days. The bill also adopts other Obama-McCaskill legislation, the HERO Act, which would launch a major national research endeavor into the readjustment needs of returningservice members, veterans and their families. The bill also included measures to improve and reform the disability rating process. [Vote307, H.R. 976, Passed, 68-31, 8/2/07; S. 713, 110th Congress; S. 1271,110th Congress; Obama Press Release, 7/25/07; H.R. 4986, Became PublicLaw No: 110-181, 1/28/08]

    Obama Worked With Republicans To Pass Legislation, Which Became Law, Improving And Increasing Services For Homeless Veterans. In 2006,Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which includedseveral provisions originating in Obama’s SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homesfor Heroes Act (S. 3475). “The legislation…includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers tohomeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to providing treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs.And it permanently extends VA’s ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters.” Obama worked with VA Committee RepublicansCraig and Burr on the committee legislation that eventually became law. [S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109thCongress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06]

    Obama Passed Bipartisan Legislation That Expanded Health Care CoverageTo 154,000 Residents, Including 70,000 Children. As a state senator,Barack Obama sponsored and helped pass legislation that expanded andmade permanent Illinois’ KidCare program by raising eligibility from 185% to 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation provided coverage for an additional 20,000 children and 65,000 more Illinois adults in the first year, and by 2007 had expanded health care to70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In its endorsement for his Senate race,the State Journal-Register wrote, “Obama brings similar common-senseviews to improving health care in America – for example, as a state senator he championed the successful KidCare program that assiststhousands of children of the working poor.” The bill was sponsored inthe state House by Sandra Pihos, a Republican and passed 42-13. [93rdGA, SB 130, 3R P 42-13-2; Signed into law 6/30/03, PA 93-0063; ChicagoDaily Herald, 7/2/03; Blagojevich release, 1/9/07; Blagojevich release, 4/13/07; Kaiser family report, 5/07; State Journal-Register,10/29/04]

    Obama Passed A Bill Creating $100 Million Earned Income Tax Credit AsA Member Of The Minority Party In The Illinois Senate. In 1999, Obamawas the lead sponsor of a bill making Illinois the 11th state to adoptan earned income-tax credit. The bill provided that each individualtaxpayer is entitled to a credit against the tax imposed by the Act inan amount equal to 5% of the federal earned income tax credit allowed.Then-Gov. George Ryan opposed the move, but an unlikely politicalalliance – including Republicans and Democrats – formed to reduce thetax burden on working poor families. The AP wrote, “The new law, whichoffers about $105 million in tax breaks over the next three years,gives a state income tax credit equal to 5 percent of a similarfederal tax credit. For the average working family making less than$30,580, that amounts to about $55 a year, or 15 cents a day. Themaximum credit for families with two or more children is $191 ayear.” [91st GA, HB 3939; 4/14/00, 3R P; 59-0-0; P.A. 91-0700,5/11/00; Chicago Tribune, 4/10/99]

    Obama Passed Near-Unanimous Death Penalty Overhaul Package. Obama wasthe chief co-sponsor and voted for bill creating the CapitalPunishment Reform Study Committee Act. The proposal, which wasapproved on a 57-1 vote, was virtually identical to reforms pushed in2002 by then-Gov. George Ryan. If passed by the House and signed intolaw by the governor, the bill would let judges rule out a deathsentence for someone convicted solely on the testimony of a jailhouseinformant, accomplice or single witness; let the state Supreme Courtoverturn a death sentence that was “fundamentally unjust.; Reduce thecrimes eligible for the death penalty by focusing on “inherentlyviolent” offenses; Expand defendants’ access to genetic evidence usedagainst them; Ban police officers from the police force if theycommitted perjury in a murder case; and Require juries to consider adefendant’s history of abuse or mental illness when deciding whether to impose the death sentence. Obama said, “As far as the Bill goes, it doesn’t address whether the death penalty is applied fairly to allraces and in all regions of the state. And it doesn’t appease those who want capital punishment eliminated.” [93rd GA, SB 0472; 4/3/03,3R P; 57-1-0; 5/29/03, HA1 SC; 56-3-0; 11/5/03, OAV P; 58-0-0; P.A.93-0605, 11/25/03; Pantagraph, 4/4/03; Associated Press, 4/24/03]

  15. By the way, anonymous, that’s great that scientists are going to have more jobs, cause I have chemistry degrees. Unless I’ve missed something and that’s not a science anymore?

  16. James –

    Obama hasn’t really “delivered” any legislation that was controversial. Reviewing the list, most of those bills are no-brainers passed with strong support from both parties. As Senator Tom Coburn put it (as mentioned, he Obama co-sponsored the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act):

    “It’s easy to work across the aisle on consensus items. It’s when you demonstrate that you’ll stand in between — in no man’s land between the two trenches of the Democratic and Republican base, and you’ll take the heat,” he said. “We haven’t seen that from Barack. As much as I like him, he’s not ever rejected anything of his party to be able to stand in the middle.”

    I would quibble with Coburn on one example where Obama took a stand on tough ethics reform. First though, Obama’s involvement in the Illinois ethics reform bill is a joke. He had pretty much zero involvement with it until his name was inserted as a co-sponsor the day the final vote was taken to make it law (apparently done as a political maneuver). Obama’s efforts in the U.S. Senate for ethics reform, however, is much more bonafide. While it was another no-brainer bill in the wake of the Abramoff scandal (it passed 96-2-2) some of the fights over its amendments were much closer battles. Obama held firm on certain amendments to keep the bill from being watered down, while two other Senators voted the other way: Clinton and Biden (doh!).

    In football terms, Obama has run a lot of out-patterns to the sideline and moved the chains, but is he willing to go across the middle and take hits from the safeties? Would he deliver a veto on a pork-laden spending bill from a Democratic-controlled Congress? Would he deliver a rejection of private campaign donations and accept public financing for the Presidential election as a further show of support for ethics and reform in govern…WHOOPS! I guess not. 😉

  17. An Anonymous Conservative Student of Mr. Carson,

    I am sure you will tell me who you are in the future. I would hate for you to always if at all agree with me or readers of this blog. Always feel free to disagree. That is what makes life interesting. The reality of the American executive office is that it is one of the weakest in the world. We have so many checks that the the president of the U.S. does not impact most American lives as much as we think. Now, state and local governments tend to do so. I suspect Obama might be like all of the rest; I hope not. I like him because I did not grow up to attend a nice private school (though I went to one on much needed support) with parents who could give me a nice comfortable life.

    The reality about the school we are both at is that we (Carson too) do not know what it means to be poor or to struggle everyday; I do not mean deciding if we should take a vaction to Europe or Florida this year. I think Obama will really work to help the poor. That is what I care about the most. I hate the war, but wars will be here.

  18. As one who has read a number of Mr. Carson’s posts and who has seen the “intellectual” banter that has gone back and forth between himself and others who would visit his blog, I would like to see a little more spiritual backbone exibited by Mr. Carson. Many of the topics covered in this blog are innocent in their nature and in the way they effect those who read and respond. Other topics, on the other hand, cause me great concern as I witness no stance for truth taken by Mr. Carson who is supposed to be a believer in Jesus Christ teaching at a Christian school. Particularly the comment above by your anonymous student concerning homosexuality was rather overwhelming in its truth and courage. I read the previous blog concerning homosexuality and was amazed at the lack of backbone by Mr. Carson to stand for truth. In reality, your anonymous student exibited more faith and courage than you did. Also, the fact that one of your students would be afraid of reprisal should tell you something of your character. My prayer is that you will allow God to use you in your position as teacher and mentor to be a more Christlike influence on your students and other who might be reading. If your passion for Christ was as great as your passion for politics, who knows what God might do through you in the position you hold. May God bless you.

  19. Anonymous:

    As one who knows Carson from his academic work, travels, conferences, and blog, I must disagree. I will defend Carson for the fact that he loves and cares about people. He loves life and is most passionate about getting the most out of his students. I often fear what students might miss if he were not there. Although he will down play this point, he is pretty elite. Your school is passed lucky. The world knows that. I suspect most on campus are not like him. So, why ask him to be like the rest. Intellectual diversity is a good thing.

    Carson does a nice job allowing many of us to express our views here. That is why so many of us read it and continue to visit. What is the big deal that he did not reference one point or comment. That is not unusual. I feel sorry for you. I think you have missed the boat. I defend Carson because he lives for his students in everything that he does. You have not given him that credit.

    Oh, I have a problem with people who can make a point but cannot support it with their name.

  20. Dear Anonymous,

    The fact that the student refuses to use his real name says nothing about Carson’s character. Instead it shows that that student has the lack of courage to actually stand up in public for what he seems to stand so feverishly for.

    A passion for Christ, at the expense of his passion for politics (something that’s…hmm let’s see… actually practical), will help his position grow?
    Two hands hard at work will do far more than a thousand clasped in prayer. Any day, anytime, and in any situation.

    I have nothing against most peoples personal beliefs, but when they begin to infringe upon the civil liberties of others, I hold no qualms about insulting them to your face. I for one am glad that Carson is dedicated not only to politics but also to his students, and that he does not try to force his beliefs onto others like you would so much enjoy.

  21. Mr. Carson and all,

    As I am quite sure a certain girlfriend of mine has probably already confided in you, I am the one who has been posting as anonymous. If anything that I have said has offended you in any way, I am heartily sorry for it. You are one of my most respected associates and mentors and I would be lying if I didn’t admit that this has been an enjoyable experience for me. The main reason that I have been posting here is out of sheer boredom with trying to converse with students my own age who know little to nothing about the candidate or belief that they are trying to defend. Maybe I took it a little far by offending others on this web log. I really apologize to everyone for anything I said that may have offended you. You are all very intelligent (and justly opinionated :)) and I have enjoyed the time we have spent conversing even if you couldn’t stand the sight of my posts. Oh, and Mr. Carson, I can understand your animosity towards kids at Houston Christian knowing nothing of what it is like to live in the “ghetto” as they call it today but rest assured, I am not one of those kids. For the first eleven years of my life, I lived in a household that made less than sixty-thousand dollars a year combined in the community right next door to acres homes. Through a miraculous shift in our finances, I am able to attend Houston Christian but I have not always been so fortunate as some others at our school. I say that not so that you feel pity towards me but so that you may understand that I was once in the same boat as many are in my generation. None the less, I respect you highly as an educator and hope that nothing that I have stated has tainted your views towards me as an academic. And to all others who have posted, I am sorry that I kept my identity towards you a secret and hope that you can forgive me for anything that I may have said that has offended you.

    God Bless and have a restful weekend,

    Patrick C. Ryan

  22. It was not so much as your friend as it was something you stated in class then re-stated here. I had you on my short list. I hope you will continue to disagree with me here and in class. I like that about you and the number of great students I teach. I hold no animosity what so ever. It is important though that we understand that not all people have it as easy as we do, even when things seem tough at times. That is what we must understand. To be like Christ is to be compassionate and to understand that people often times need help. That help just might have to come from our pockets in the form of taxes.

    You are right in that you are more advanced than many of your peers. Ask Jon what he thinks. He and I were trying to figure out who you were. Jon kept saying “this person is really bright.” That is a mighty comment coming from Jon.

    Please join our conversations here and please do not feel as if you must agree. Stand by your belief and defend it; however, keep an open ear. Cannot wait to get your thoughts on the past Howard Zinn reading.

  23. Why thank you Mr. Carson. But don’t you think that help for the needy should be coming from charitable foundations rather than tax revenue? I feel much safer knowing that my money is going to directly be received by Young Life or End Hunger Network (two charities that i religiously endorse) rather than run the chance that my money is being put into the pockets of welfare frauds or politicians who feel obliged to pay themselves more in a year than most people in America will see in their entire lives. I have never seen a politician or government official giving food bags to the 34th street bum or any other homeless patrons of America. Rather it is charitable foundations that provide these services (many of which generate most if not all revenue from the endowments of private investors rather than the government).

    The National Government was created for the protection of it’s citizens from outside dangers and to create national laws. It was not put in place to have jurisdiction over what charitable services my tax money goes towards. That is one of my main disagreements with Obama’s, “Let’s help everybody,” philosophy. It really isn’t helping the needy but in reality is only helping government officials maintain higher paychecks than the rest of America.

  24. I am a former student who took Carson’s class for 2 years. Firstly, I want to point out Carson is an EXCEPTIONAL teacher. It is said the best teachers seek to make themselves obsolete. What this means is a great teacher instills a student with a desire to learn and the analytical and intellectual skills to teach his or her self- an incredibly valuable skill. I can honestly say that even though i am not majoring in history in college, i not only enjoyed Carson’s class immensely but find the ability to think freely, explore opposing viewpoints intellectually without compromising my own, and solve and articulate complex problems has served me immeasurably well.
    Secondly, as a Christian, i have to disagree with some of the other religious viewpoints on this blog, especially regarding Carson’s character and teaching style. In a way, its great that some students have chosen to represent their religious beliefs on this blog, although i think the aggressive tone really undermines the message. But Carson is always kind and open minded towards his students- he never ridicules but always encourages his students to think and challenge. He always does this out of a sense of love- Carson is less concerned about “correcting” his students that letting them discover for themselves what they believe. Isn’t this the kind of servants God wants? We have free will- Carson teaches us to exercise it. St. Francis of Assisi once said we should “preach the gospel at all times; if necessary use words.” There are different types of spiritual mentors- some teach us to use language to articulate beliefs and help us with out spiritual issues. That’s great, but that’s not the singular example of how to represent faith. My experience with Carson has been filled with nothing but patience, kindness, gentleness etc. – Carson really preaches the gospel in the way he lives- not in the way he posts things on a blog. I don’t think “blogging” Christianity in this manner- aggressively and in a headstrong manner- is going to change minds. If you do that you are going to draw praise from those who think the same as you and criticism from those who don’t (I’m going to go out on a limb and extend that comment to say, legislating morality). Christianity believes in a personal God- literally one that became a person and has the power to change human beings into “sons of God”. If this is the kind of Christianity you believe in, then it starts with your friends, your family, and your coworkers and your case is the way you live your life- with joy and perseverance in the face of hardship. In a way, the fact that Carson persists to teach at a place that doesn’t value his incredible contributions the way is should is such evidence. Am i right in recollecting you were never once voted teacher of the year at Houston Christian? Of course, not that it makes any difference- good teaching is good teaching whether it is awarded or not and i think Carson is a big enough man to recognize that. Even though Carson claims to be “elite”, he never beats his chest over his own accomplishments (like KILLER AP passing rates, rivaled perhaps only by the Dox). Lastly, i also am going to pray for Mr. Carson to be a better teacher and mentor- not that he isn’t but that he goes on to do even greater things. God bless Mr Carson and keep up the good work!

  25. Welfare fraud is not as prevalent as you think. From our standards- attending a private school, owning cars for everyone in the family, living in a comfortable house- it’s easy to think that anyone can break through the poverty line and start a successful life. But let me ask you this- how many accounts like that have you heard of? Do you really hear of people attaining middle class status from a previous, lowly one? Don’t get me wrong, it does happen, just not as often as you may think. In Texas, welfare recipients receive a check for $180 for a family of three. Do you really think it is easy to live off of a welfare check? And without a decent education, you can forget about getting a stable, well paying job in today’s world.
    Regarding homosexuality, I will say this- it should be a non- issue. The government, or anyone else for that matter, has any right to say who can and can’t marry. Marriage isn’t even a Christian idea; it pre-dates Christianity. Not everyone believes in God- or the Bible for that matter- ergo forcing what you stand by on someone else is just plain wrong. Besides, a God creating homosexual humans and telling them they cannot engage in any kind of union would be, in a my opinion, quite a cruel God.
    It is a little more complicated than “you don’t choose who you love.”

  26. Homosexuality is a perversion of a god given gift to man kind. If I were trying to force my beliefs on others, I would be a dictator would I not? I am merely stating biblical evidence for what I and, to a certain extent, you believe. If God were tolerant of homosexuality and perversion, would he have destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in his rage? No. He would have let them live in their sinful lifestyle for the rest of their lives. I agree that ceremonial marriage is a Christian philosophy but pure marriage where a woman is recognized as the wife of a man is noted as early as Genesis 2.

    While $180 dollars is quite a meager sum of money, this money is in addition to food stamps, government provided services, and whatever money that is being provided by the jobs that the family are working. While I admit that welfare fraud is not quite as prevalent as general theft, the United Council on Welfare Fraud states:

    Eighteen states had not been keeping statistics on child care fraud, but of them, several responded that the local county agencies administering the services did maintained fraud databases. In those states that did maintain detailed statistics, fraud was discovered in upwards of 69 percent of the investigations conducted with total annual discovered fraud amounts ranging from $10,000 to over $1 million.

    A Rochester woman stole an acquaintance’s social security card, established a vendor account using the acquaintance’s social security number and her own mother’s address. Twenty-seven thousand dollars in child care payments were sent to her mother who signed the checks and gave them to the recipient over a two year period. Free care for five children was provided by the client’s mother and her 85 year old grandmother.

    In Wyoming, two sisters claimed a third was providing day care for their children when, in fact, the third sister was fully employed and they were not. This resulted in a loss of $6,700 over a period of 14 months.

    Similarly, two Virginia clients, employed by the same company, claimed each provided services for the other when, in fact, they worked the same hours. A claim of $36,474.00was established.

    Another Virginia woman failed to report that she had lost her job on three separate occasions, yet continued to send her children to child care each time. The overpayments totaled nearly $4000.

    Providers can commit fraud by claiming children who aren’t being watched, by misrepresenting the number of hours that services were provided or by charging more to care for government funded children than private pay children. They also engage in collusion with recipients and split payments to which they are not entitled.

    A Wyoming provider got $41,600 over 1 ½ years claiming services for children who were not there and padding the hours for those that were there.

    A Colorado provider billed $6,685 for children who had not been in his care for 4 months.

    Another Wyoming provider filed claims for children who were not in attendance at a rate higher than that charged to non-child care assistance covered children; a claim was established for $112,800.for a three year period of fraud.

    A Minnesota couple is under investigation for taking kickbacks from a child care center that billed the system for over $41,000 from November 2001 through December 2002 under the pretense of caring for the couple’s five children.

    A California client sent her children to a free child care center and claimed that the services were provided by a family member. The two split $15,900 in illegal child care payments.

    Cheats can take both forms. In a particularly egregious case, a Minnesota woman applied for child care assistance, claiming to support four children on an income of $3,100 a month. In another county, however, she operated an in-home day care center and was paid $854,000 over six years. She pleaded guilty to receiving more than $134,000 in fraudulently received child care reimbursements.

    That is millions of dollars of tax payer money going down the drain to pay for people who aren’t willing to earn an honest living. Now I know that not everyone falls under the generalization of welfare frauders, but there would be no need for tax payer money to go towards political entities, welfare fraud (and welfare fraud investigations for that matter) if all assistance came from charitable foundations like it should.

  27. Thanks for the love folks. I enjoy sharing my views and thoughts on this blog even though some of what I post might not be very popular with some. Whoever the former student is, thanks for thinking and giving your thoughts on your experience with me. It is always great to hear that I have made such a positive impact. You are correct in that I am not sure all of my work is highly valued at HCHS or if they really know what I do and why I do it, but I am excited knowing that it is home and that I work with some of the best people around. I actually have a blog piece on this very topic coming that will address much of what you have stated. You do seem to know me well, which means you must have been one of my favorites (yes I do play and have favorites — why lie).

    I life philosophy is this: Love all people even if they are different or just do not love you back. If that means spending more $, so be it.

  28. Not everyone believes Biblical teaching. You can’t tell someone who has no belief in God that “in Genesis chapter 2…” because they’ll just dismiss you right away.
    Let me ask you this- do you really believe love, true love, is ever a perversion? Man or woman, man or man, woman or woman, whatever the case… the fact is that these people love each other, and it is because of government legislation that they cannot be together like they intend to be.

    While all of the examples you posted do portray welfare fraud, there is a much much greater percentage benefiting from the program. I am not, however, saying it is a perfect plan. There is always room for improvement, for reform. Charities, though, are not the answer. The problem with charities is that their funding pales in comparison to that of the federal government/state governments. There is no way charities could provide for such a large number of people.

    And Carson, this is a HuffPo comment I saw and I figured you’d appreciate it-

    Only in Republican America would a black man with Bachelors degree in
    International Relations from Columbia University, a law degree from
    Harvard Law School, 10 years as a professor of Constitutional Law at
    the University of Chicago, 12 years in politics, four years on the U.S.
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee and manager of one of the most
    impressively flawless and forward thinking presidential campaigns ever
    not be ready for the presidency while a white female evangelical with
    19 months in politics and a bachelors in journalism is considered
    “ready on day one.”

  29. And a noble philosophy that is Carson. Jon, while you do bring up some appreciable points, you must also consider that we are going to be putting a mildly experienced person in a secondary office. Not the presidents chair. And really, how can you expect Obama to organize any military offensive or withdrawal when he hasn’t even had the slightest bit of service experience. And you’re right, I don’t believe that a pot smoking and cocaine sniffing peace brigadier will ever be more successful than a pot smoking draft dodger was. I agree 100% with Matt S. in his above statement that Obama hasn’t passed any law that was controversial to any bipartisan side. And it does take more skill to run a state than it does to twiddle your thumbs in the senate. Obama has never made one state budget or had to delegate to anyone other than his campaign runners. On a different note, think back ten years. Do you remember an offensive called Operation Infinite Reach? In 1998, Clinton launched numerous cruise missiles into the Sudan in a counter offensive to an Kenyan Embassy attack by Osama Bin-Laden’s cohorts. One of the targets was a pharmaceutical factory that provided over 90% of all anti-malaria medicines to all people of the Sudan. It was later found that there was no solid evidence to support the claim that that pharmaceutical factory was in any way tied with Al-Qaeda. However, no official apology has been made by the Clinton administration and this failed attack has resulted in the death’s of tens of thousands of civilians who could not get proper medical help because of Clinton’s bull-headed attack. Yet when Bush goes into a country that was clearly in need of liberation from militant Islams, He is bashed on the news for five and a half years because there wasn’t “ample” evidence that middle-eastern countries were housing weapons of mass destruction. How many attacks on American soil will there have to be for Liberal America to agree that there is a problem in the Middle-East that needs to be addressed by the U.S.? Oh, and yes homosexual love is a perversion of a god given gift to mankind. If it were a tolerable act to him, he would not have killed the countless thousands in Sodom and Gomorrah. He never intended for man to be with man or woman to be with woman. If he had, they would have been placed that way in the garden of eden would they not? Now there is a growing minority of other religions in Houston Christian, but does that mean that we as a school should abandon our Christian ideals because there are a few that do not believe as we do? No, of course not. Houston Christian was created as a Christian school that would cater to all religions but would only practice Christianity. How is that any different than how a country should work?

    I will address your charity question in a later post.

    God Bless and have a great week.

    Patrick C. Ryan

  30. I challenge you to provide the versus that states that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for homosexuality. And how convenient is it that both of those ancient cities lie on a major fault…

    Our country should work differently because we were not founded as a Christian nation. Please tell me you don’t actually believe that we were/are…
    If you really want to get down to it, our country was founded as a sexist, racist, imperialistic, white nation. Do you think it should have stayed that way? I’m not saying our school should abandon it’s principals, but our school is most definitely not comparable to a country.

    And last I checked, it wasn’t the presidents sole responsibility to organize military campaigns. I believe we have generals for that.

  31. So tired of the “Is Obama qualified” question. The man’s been in the Illinois state legislature with arguably more complex problems than the Alaskan Legislature has to confront. Plus his six years in the US Senate. I don’t why his community organizer status is a dis. The organizational abilities he would need for that job certainly would be comparable to that of a small business owner and I don’t think that running the Harvard Law Review is without its political dimension.

    Lincoln’s experience: Served four terms in the Illinois House of Representatives, One term in the US House. He sank his career by speaking out against the Mexican War. He was then elected a US Senator in 1858.

    Oddly, it was the Lincoln-Douglas debates and his SPEECHES against the interests of slavery which gave him national prominence. He only won the nomination because a number of Republican delegates at the convention were divided (polarized?) among more experienced candidates: William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, and Edward Bates.

    I read a biography of Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin called “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln” that was great. I wish I could remember it in more detail.

    I don’t expect Obama to be another Abraham Lincoln. However, I don’t think Lincoln or any of his contemporaries expected of him what he delivered. Just think, he was hit with the Civil War only five months after his election. And lots of folks hated his decisions during the Civil War, too.

  32. I just read Patrick Ryan’s comment that Obama is at a loss because since he didn’t get into the military, he won’t be able to handle his duties as Commander-in-Chief. Wait, the phrase used said Obama hasn’t “the slightest bit of service experience.” Ah, that must mean that the SLIGHT bit of experience on the part of Bush (22 months of flight performance out of the 60 he committed to with the Texas Air National Guard) puts his performance above question related to the worth of previous military experience on the part of a Presidential candidate. See: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lechliter.pdf as a source regarding Bush’s military performance.

  33. Hi Edward, My sister and Mom are kicking my hind end because I support Obama. We all re-registered this year. Mom and sis went Independent, and I went D to vote for Barack.

    Your students and peers are gonna rake you over the coals if they disagree, but so what?

    I hate the buzzword “resonate,” but whatever your choice of leaders says, if it harmonizes with your hopes and beliefs, support it, support them. His “O-Ness” rings my bell this season, and I’ve sent him a few bucks to boot. 🙂

  34. Question. As a historian what is one of the most important viewpoints to examine when looking at any conflict? Why am I asking this? Have you ever studied Confederate General Robert E. Lee? Very few have, but his viewpoint on the war is one of the most unique because he really agreed with neither side of the conflict. As for the Northerners, he felt that their view of a rapid emancipation would lead to nothing but chaos (an observation that would prove very true for the next 100 years). As for the Southerners, he was appalled by the practice of slavery and had even released his own slaves from their duties. The only reason that he fought was because he felt a loyalty to the state of Virginia and it’s citizens. In his final memorandums, he still states his belief that emancipation happened in a rushed manner and his belief that a gradual emancipation would have made people more respectful towards the African race if they had been gradually thrust into society. I am not sure if this belief would have proven true and please don’t get me wrong, I don’t by any means think that the African American race should have suffered further indignation. But one of Lee’s analysis still rings true, a rushed emancipation did lead to many more decades of war. As such, I cannot quite concur with your deduction that Abraham Lincoln was a great president because he was a rather lousy tactician. Who proved right in this instance, none other than Robert E. Lee who was both more experienced politically and militarily. And besides, he wasn’t thrust into the Civil War. He was the one who declared war on his own country and attacked his own citizens.

    In response to your second quote, when exactly did I praise Bush for his military suave? I think that Bush has been rather lousy as a military Commander-in-Chief. I like to think of myself as a hybrid between General Bernard Montgomery and General Heinz Guderian. Montgomery rarely ever attacked when he didn’t have a numbers advantage while Guderian emphasized quick and efficient attacks that would quickly scatter enemy forces. I feel that Bush gave in to public sentiment too quickly by sending increasingly less troops to the middle east. If anything, more soldiers were needed for the initial push because it would indefinitely led to less casualties in the initial phases of the war and later on. A funny thing, a group of soldiers were shown during the DNC showing support for Obama because they thought that he was the candidate who would be sending more troops to the front lines. That is one of the reasons I support McCain, he has the military experience that neither Clinton nor Bush nor Obama have. I, for one, refuse to let the War on Terror end in defeat like Vietnam did. I care about our soldiers and our citizens too much.

  35. I definitely agree with Patrick that an important voice that is not heard enough about the war is that of the soldier who wants to stay and finish the fight. That’s not why I’m posting though.

    I hate to excavate a buried hatchet, but I have an answer to mediamuddler’s challenge about Sodom and Gomorra. Genesis 19:4-7, “Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom- both young and old- surrounded the house. They called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out so that we can have sex with them.’ Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, ‘No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing.'” That’s not to say that homosexuality was the only sin for which the great cities were demolished, but to discount it altogether is to defy the only historical document I know, at least, that documents the account.

    To further illustrate mine and -I believe- Patrick’s point, I quote Romans 1:24-28, “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.”

    That is not to say that our government should be run by the Law of Moses, nor that my beliefs should be imposed on anyone else. My point is that homosexuality is Biblically wrong, not that it should be legally forbidden any more than the consumption of pork should be illegal.

  36. An excellent point Biar and yes that was my argument all along. However, I feel that I must clarify my point about a Christian foundation to America. While I do agree the Americas were not founded on Christian beliefs or ideals but rather on economics, the early basis of our U.S. legal code and our constitution is Christian Theology. In the same way that HCHS will not relinquish it’s Christian faith and values, I see no reason to do the same with our country.

    God Bless

  37. General Montgomery was a military retard. He only attacked when he vastly outnumbered the under funded Germans.

    Wait so you want us to continue this mistake of war unlike the smart decision to stop fighting Vietnam which was another mistake of a war?

    And Biar, the “men” were angels. They were trying to have sex with angels… and even if you take them to be the same thing, it still doesn’t prove anything. The Bible says plenty of absurd things.
    Wearing a shirt made of two types of material is Biblically wrong (Lev 19:19). The Bible says that unicorns exist (Num 23:22) . Children out of wedlock cannot enter heaven (Duet 23:2). It supports book burning (Acts 19:19). The bible says prayer always works (Matt 7:7-8).
    Oh look I can quote the Bible too! And I’ve got plenty more if you’d like em?

    And I’m Walker Parkhill, a senior at your school.

  38. Experience does not mean everything. FDR and Wilson were two wartime presidents, neither with any service in the military, and I’d say they handled the country and the two World Wars quite well. Like Rationalpsychic said, Lincoln had only one term in Congress, four terms in the Illinois House, and even ran an unsuccessful campaign for the US senate.
    If you care about your citizens so much, why do you want to send more troops to Iraq? What good will that do? Iraq was an unnecessary war; there was NO proof of WMDs, Al Qaeda was in NO way linked to Iraq, nor was Iraq connected to the attacks of 9/11. And what was even more outrageous is that Dubya and his cronies lied about the fact that they had evidence about the WMDs. So many Americans died for no reason. So much money was worthlessly thrown at a war that should never have happened. Conservatives love to accuse liberals and dems about being “unpatriotic” and “hating the troops”- well we sure don’t advocate the waste of so many valuable lives.

    Guess what- I don’t believe in the Garden of Eden, and I’m skeptical about Sodom and Gomorrah, so I don’t buy that argument. Like it or not, modern research and science shows distinct differences between the gay brain and the straight brain, ergo proving that it is not a choice. So 3 things can be derived from that:
    1. God created everything, so God also must have created gay humans, and is not everything created by God good? God loves all people, no matter what they do or who they are,so would he also not love homosexuals?
    2. God is not good- He creates homosexuality and then condemns those who are homosexual.
    or 3. There is no God.
    Personally, I like to think number 1 is the correct choice.
    And if you quote Paul’s views on sexuality, I quote to you Paul’s view on women- I Corinthians 34-35 states “34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. 35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.”
    Do you believe that women should be silent, and obey their husbands? If not, then why not? If Paul’s word was final about homosexuality, shouldn’t it also be final about the status of women?

  39. Magiera-
    Number 1 assumes some things that might not be true, such as things are all as they were when God created them. Perhaps God created humans and then they perverted things. Your first argument also assumes that God created murderers, so they must be good and child abusers and rapists, so they must all be good too. I think I know where you were going, but you didn’t take a good route there.

  40. Too many comments to read..I’ll just add “Same old spill”? And Obama said anything different than the usual Liberal line?

  41. Thank you Kristi.

    Walker and Jon,
    I have no case against your experience/commander-in-chief arguments or your thoughts on the war. That’s all valid and well-done. I’d like to speak about the Bible though. Although yes it is true all of your quotes came from the Bible, (except the unicorn one- Numbers 23 has nothing to do with unicorns), they are all taken out of context.

    Leviticus 19:19- Don’t wear shirts made out of two types of material. This passage comes from a document of law for Israelites under the old covenant (before Christ). They had to obey laws we find silly today and make sacrifices to God to atone for their sins. That is, until the coming of Christ. Jesus is the new covenant, the ultimate sacrifice, who rewrote the law- love God and love your neighbor. By his blood we are no longer bound by the laws of the old covenant like this one.

    Deuteronomy 23:2- Illegitimate children cannot go to heaven (without Christ). For we are justified by grace through faith, and this is not of ourselves, so that no man may boast. We all fall short of the glory of God. I can’t go to heaven on my own power, neither can you or Mr. Carson or any illegitimate children anywhere. That’s what the Good News is all about, though, that the condemnation of our sin and the past is washed away by the blood of Christ.

    Acts 19:19- The Bible supports book burning. Context. When the people of Ephesus heard of the works that were being performed by the apostles and the power of the Holy Spirit in those He worked through, they confessed their sin, gathering all of their pagan sorcery documents and burning them in repentance. Even if your argument is that the act of book burning is a sin and that they should have disposed of these things in a better way, the Bible isn’t supporting it, it’s just documenting what happened.

    Matthew 7:7-8- Prayer always works. Ask and you shall receive, knock and the door shall be opened for you- pretty famous little piece of Gospel. It doesn’t mean that prayer is some shallow way to get the stuff you want, or that the girl you like will suddenly fall in love with you. What it means is that whenever you seek God, he will always be there for you, no matter who you are or what you’ve done, He will not forsake you. There’s nothing in the world better than that.

    1 Corinthians 1:34-35- Women should be submissive to their husbands and silent in church. The Bible has always defined a traditional view on the role of women, but this passage seems to take it too far… until you understand the situation for which this letter was written to the Corinthian church. There were a lot of problems in Corinth at this time- it was sort of the Las Vegas or Amsterdam of the Bible. One of these problems was distraction in the church. There was a lot of side conversation and chaos with speaking in tongues in services and the women (at least some of whom were likely Corinthian prostitutes) were also causing distractions. In this passage, Paul is pretty much just calling them out so that order may be maintained.

    Call me out if I’m wrong.

  42. What an excellent case study for our point Biar. But you forgot the Unicorn reference in Numbers 23:22. The explanation is a bit lengthy but please follow with me. Lets take a look at the Hebrew translation for a moment. The Hebrew word translated “unicorn” in the KJV is “re’em” (Strong’s #7214, and defined as a “wild bull” in Strong’s Dictionary). Its exact identity is not known. The “wild ox”, the rhino, the “unicorn”, and various other creatures (bison, antelope, etc) have been suggested. Perhaps this word is one of the cases the KJV translators had in mind when they said, “…it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence…”. However, when we look at the Septuagint (LXX – the Greek translation of the Old Testament used by the early church), we see something quite interesting! The LXX supports the idea of a single-horned creature, using the word “monokeros” (derived “mono-” meaning “singular” or “one”, and “keras” meaning “horn”). Thus, the idea of this creature being a single-horned creature is very old. But should it be translated “unicorn”? There are other single-horned animals that qualify as a “monokeros.” It should be remembered though, that a single-horned creature seems to create the Deut 33:17. Most versions around today have “wild ox” or something similar, in the verses above. This is due largely in part to Deut 33:17- The creature in question has more than one horn. Both Easton’s Bible Dictionary and Unger’s Bible Dictionary say the Hebrew reem was a two-horned animal, most likely a now-extict wild ox of some sort. Easton’s also says “The word thus rendered has been found in an Assyrian inscription written over the wild ox or bison”.

    One popular idea as to the identity of this creature, when trying to find one-horned animals, is the rhinoceros – specifically the greater Indian rhinoceros or the Javan rhino (the white rhino, the black rhino and the Sumatran rhino all have two horns). In fact, the Genus and Species of the Indian rhino is Rhinoceros unicornis. “Rhinoceros” is derived from “rhino-” (nose) and the Greek “keros” (horn).Also of interest is a marginal note made by the KJV translators. On Isa 34:7, they put a marginal note indicating the “Unicorn” may be a Rhinoceros.

    Another possibility was the Elasmotherium (Elasmotherium sibiricum), or “Giant Unicorn”, is a now-extinct mammal, similar to a modern rhinoceros but much larger and covered in wooly fur. It was up to 26 feet long and had a single horn up to 7 feet, which was sometimes split at the tip. An extremely powerful animal, the little-known elasmotherium is the prime candidate (in my opinion) for the indentity of the Hebrew “reem”

    In response to your war comment Walker, I feel compelled to elaborate on my comment on the war though. First Walker, is it in any way “retarded” to hold off attack until you have a numbers advantage? Don’t get me wrong, Monty never would have been qualified to serve as the Supreme Allied Commander like Ike and Operation Market Garden was a huge disaster. But, in all fairness, he directed such decisive victories as El Alamein and took part in Operation Cobra. In regards to Vietnam and Iraq, American forces were sent to those two countries in an attempt to help their citizens gain the freedom that America so devoutly advocates. You may hem-and-haw that everything was fine in Iraq when we invaded but explain why the Iraqi people were so joyous when Sadam was overthrown. Is it not your philosophy that all people deserve freedom or does that only apply to U.S. citizens?

  43. Patrick, I will answer your question about the Iraq war.
    Maybe Iraq really needed help overthrowing Saddam, and obviously they were happy when he was captured and killed. Saddam was a pretty bad dictator and killed many. But was is the job of the US to go in there and “help” them with it? They never asked for help, and this point was only made by the US after weapons of mass destruction were “not found”. You can talk about how bad Saddam was, and how many people he killed but the army is in Iraq killing people. You can also say that the army is there to advocate freedom and democracy, how are those ideals being advocated by war? If the US really wanted to help Iraq they would’ve at least pulled the troops out of Iraq by now (after the capture of Saddam), and installed another form of “help” in the country. If they were so eager to help why is the army still in Iraq allowing so many lives to be wasted, both Americans and Iraqis?

  44. Patrick Ryan,
    We all know that you are an intelligent individual, but your random insertion of inane facts (in most posts, not in all, mind you) to strengthen your argument, in lack of better words, doesn’t do a thing. Your arguments, just as almost everyone else posting on this blog, have some validity to them, but as Jon said in a previous post, not everyone believes in the scripture. Most of your arguments are backed solely by what you BELIEVE was written and inspired by God (this pertains to Biar as well), I’m not attacking anyone, I am just saying that for the most part in the real world, you cannot back arguments with something that is not a 100% proven fact. Whether you like it or not, no matter what you say to a non- christian, no matter how many facts you give from bible class, you will not be able to prove beyond a doubt in their mind that the bible is completely accurate. With this as the case, the arguments about homosexuality and etc. (I apologize that I don’t have the time to read all of these posts) are completely unfounded in most of the non-christian, non-conservative eyes. Also, i think the comments about Mr. Carson not having a backbone are completely inaccurate. He is a extremely liberal teacher at an incredibly conservative Christian school. He has already shown his true character and his possession of backbone by voicing his “controversial” opinions at Houston Christian. You should be very thankful you have a teacher with the willingness to help you explore another point of view on history and current events. Although Mr. Carson is a Christian, from my perspective, he doesn’t readily push his religious views on others, especially concerning gay rights, because he believes that every human being deserves their unalienable rights, no matter what race, gender, or sexual orientation. Oh and by the way, as a believer in the Bible, I believe the Bible is just like the Constitution, an ever changing document. Not in the exact same way per say, but the same concept. Many of the laws are outdated and we are not obligated to follow them anymore. For instance, people in the early first century and prior to that were getting married much earlier than we are, by a considerable amount of years. Abstinence was completely different than it is today. Instead of waiting 15 years, some wait 30-40. I believe homosexuality and the union of a man and a man or a woman and a woman is completely acceptable. These are just my opinions, which I’m sure you’ll mostly disagree with.

  45. I am not the one who made the posts bashing Carson for his beliefs or for having a lack of backbone. Some other person made those posts about him and used what I said as reference. He is one of my most respected mentors and I never would insult him by saying that he does not have any guts (something that he has proven time and again by voicing his opinions in public so freely at our school). He is an incredibly intelligent man and I would much rather you gain insight from him rather than me. He is the teacher with the degrees, I’m just the devil’s advocate in this case :). I admit that what I say is a Christian perspective of the world and that not everybody is ever going to agree with it. I am sorry if you took some of my posts to be in any way negative attacks against Carson or any other blogger on this post. They were never intended that way.

  46. Actually, I have been reading through previous posts and I don’t believe that I made one point clear. I don’t believe that people do not have the right to be homosexual. In America, people have the freedom to speak or take action in any way they want as long as it doesn’t infringe upon the rights of others to do so as well.

  47. yep. and my primary reason for my quoting the Bible was to answer walker’s challenge, show that homosexuality is not Biblically acceptable (but not that it’s not acceptable in america), then to prove its consistency in response to walker and jon’s posts. but yeah i see what you’re saying that in general the Bible is not an acceptable historical document

  48. Way to many things to address here.

    First thank you for that explanation Patrick, I guess I can throw the unicorn argument out. But it still does say something that if there are issues with translation in one part of the Bible, they must exist else where too.

    It is not that “marriage” must stay between a man and a women, which in my opinion is fine as long as all of the rights granted to married people can be given to homosexuals as well, thus effectively removing the advantage of marraige. Simply because marriage is just a word… granted to you by the state. Nothing more, nothing less.

    I wrote out a rather lengthy response to the war comments but then realized I’d rather keep this debate where it is instead of having it shift into several topics. So if you have some spare time read at least the first section of Kant’s Perpetual Peace… and it’ll point out a few problems with the current war.

    And to Biar,
    If you are going to cite that certain rules laid out by the Bible are just a matter of context, then I’m going to go ahead and say the whole thing is. Therefore because I no longer live in Ancient Rome, I don’t have to follow any of it…
    My point is that you can’t pick and choose which rules you want to impose on others and which you think are out dated or where just part of context. How do you know that what Paul said about homosexuality were not dealing with a specific contextual situation?

  49. Sorry to resurrect on a post that is a few weeks old, but I wanted to share something after reading all of the comments above.

    Their are twelve mentions of homosexuality in the bible.

    Two of these are in reference to rape. Take Judges 19:22 for example, which says “While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, “Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him.”

    Six of these refer to some sort of prostitution, for example 1 Kings 14:23-24. “They also set up for themselves high places, sacred stones and Asherah poles on every high hill and under every spreading tree. There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.”

    Since these references to prostitution and rape do not condone homosexuality in any way, shape, or form, we can throw out those eight verses. That leaves us with four verses, all of which do condone homosexuality. I can not argue with that. The favorite verse for right-wing conservatives to site is Leviticus 18:21-22: “‘Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD. ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”

    Now, would you like to know how many times grace is mentioned in the Bible? 31. Forgiveness is mentioned 17 times. Salvation? 28. Bear in mind, I am just using a concordance – so that is just counting how many times those WORDS are mentioned.

    So, God inspired every aspect of the Bible, right? So, based on the statistics I just presented, what do you think believes is important? Homosexuality, or forgiveness, grace, and salvation (as in we should FORGIVE homosexuals.) Yes, I know this going to be difficult for some to believe, but homosexuals DO get to heaven.

    Oh, and I almost forgot – Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. He did condone all forms of sexual immorality though. So if you want to look at it that way, the majority of male students at Houston CHRISTIAN High School (actually at any high school) who have viewed pornography are just as perverse in Jesus’s eyes as homosexuals.

    But, there is good news for all of us. Romans 3:23-24 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.”

    In the end, homosexuality is for the church to debated about, but that will not stop the right-wing conservatives and bleeding heart liberals for jumping in too. In the mean time, I think Barack Obama sums up the government’s role in the issue quite well. “I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination.”

    PS – watch this video. It is an amazing clip from one of the most amazing television shows of all time, and it sums up this issue quite well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWc

  50. Dillon,

    Not trying to be nitpicky here, just trying to understand your post… when you wrote “condone,” did you mean “condemn”?

  51. When I said “Since these references to prostitution and rape do not condone homosexuality,” yes I meant condemn. Sorry – wrote that in a rush!

  52. The discussion on homosexuality is always an interesting one, but I think it is a mistake to grant from the outset that it is immoral. I just read through this entire thread, and unless I am mistaken, everybody argued this on their way to discussing legality, tolerance, or forgiveness.

    I would maybe grant that the ancient Hebrews probably viewed it as a sinful abnormality. But that doesn’t mean their primitive understanding of what they thought were universal truths still apply.

  53. True that we need to be tolerant but that doesn’t mean we have to compromise our society to fit other peoples values.

Comments are closed.