the sleppys

Elton John is claiming that Jesus Christ was gay. I am interested in his reasoning.

My own thoughts on this subject is that Jesus Christ is not gay and looks down upon homosexuality. Of course, God loves all His children, and homosexuals are not an exception. But it is not logical for Christ to be gay while simultaneously being God.

God created Man in His image (that means we look like God does, with eyes and arms and toenails). To multiply and subdue the Earth, He created the forms of male and female, which cannot procreate alone nor can they procreate with like forms (that means that two males do not make babies). This is a fact in humans and most all species, although some fish and invertebrates can switch their gender or spontaneously procreate. I don’t know if it’s possible with non-animal living organisms.

It is illogical that Christ is a homosexual. It would make more sense if He is asexual because God has no reason to procreate. But I do not believe that to be defending it further.

Aside, when speaking of Jesus Christ, because He is the living Word of God, we use the present tense.

He does want us to be loving and forgiving, but He also wants us to make good choices, which do not include perversion.

I’m happy to see that the amendment to define marriage [between a man and a woman] had passed. Yet I don’t understand how someone can vote for that amendment and vote for the current President-elect, aware that he is the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate. *shrugs* In my peacenick, hunky dory, liberal youth, I thought, What’s the harm in letting two people who love each other get married? But that leads to What’s the harm in letting first cousins get married? Brothers and sisters? Sisters and sisters? A man and his horse? A woman and her television? I know! It gets ridiculous!! Besides, marriage is the foundation of the natural family. You can’t call yourself a Christian or Jew or Muslim and believe that two people of the same sex can be married. God made Adam and Eve. And Adam and Eve made babies. Like a male tiger and a female tiger make tiger cubs. Two men can’t make babies. Two women can’t make babies. It is physically impossible. And even if you don’t believe in the Bible and Adam and Eve, historically, marriage is an institution that begins a family. Marriage is older than any of today’s religions. Marriage is as old as the Law of Man. Marriage, in its own constitution, is about Family. Not about Love.
Two men can love each other. That’s a little crazy, I think. But possible. If they want to live together, that’s possible. If they want to be on each other’s wills, then they can do that through other venues and laws. If they want to visit each other in the hospital, they can grant each other power of attorney. If they want to rear children, sorry, I can’t allow that. Every baby deserves a mother and a father. That’s what marriage is about!!

Now that the amendment passed, we will have to decide what defines a man and a woman. A man who goes through surgery to superficially change his gender (because he will never have ovaries or lactating mammary glands) and goes through the courts to change his name is not a woman. Yea, here we go again.

Dad and I watched the Democratic presidential nominee’s informercial on Wednesday night (10/29). We both chuckled hard (actually, we were in hysterics for at least a minute) when we saw the image of Democratic presidential nominee’s standing in an office that looked very much like the Oval Office with darkened walls and furniture. It’s amusing that he likes to believe that he’s the president. Well, after that, we were bombarded with stories of families who can’t afford a gallon of milk and old couples on Medicaid who have to work at Wal*Mart after retirement. It was depressing. The Democratic presidential nominee showed us that we are a country of losers. Really depressing. We can’t put gas in our cars. We can’t pay our mortgages. We can’t put food on the table. But the Democratic presidential nominee also gave us hope. He’s going to be like Robin Hood: Steal from the rich and give to the poor. The Democratic presidential nominee will do it in the form of taxes, so it won’t really be stealing. It’ll be a legal confiscation of funds, making him more like Prince John than Robin Hood. If you don’t pay your taxes, you’re a criminal. If you don’t vote for the Democratic presidential nominee, you’re a racist.
Today, we woke up at 5:30am. At least I did. I started waking up the boys, but they didn’t stir. Dad woke up. I started the coffee. I woke up the boys again. I changed the babies’ diapers but didn’t feed them because they both nursed about an hour earlier. Brushed Kyle’s dreadlocks out of his hair while nudging Taylor with my foot. Changed Taylor’s diaper and changed her clothes. Ty made toast, prepared my coffee, and shined Dad’s boots. I’m only kidding. haha! He did make toast, though. We were locked and loaded in the van at 6:41am.

We drove to our polling place and were surprised to see a fairly empty parking lot. We stood in line, maybe the 70th and 71st ones in line. I had a baby in the sling and a baby in the stroller (switched them around often, depending on which one was hungry). There was a dad with his two girls, a little older than Ty, who looked like he wasn’t used to waiting in long lines with them – not that we often wait in long lines with the children. He had a box of distractions. Literally. He had a box with paper, crayons, and coloring books. Ty and Kyle sat on the ground twice during our wait, drank water from our canteen, and read a Berenstain Bears book. Taylor was the one who was acting up – just a tad. Enough to get her doll taken from her. The dad with the two girls offered us paper, but we said that we didn’t need any. “We are practicing patience,” explained Dad. It helps to be around the children 24/7 instead of this only-on-weeknights-and-weekends kind of parenting that seems to be the trend.

Voting was a breeze. We were out of there by 8:15am. But Dad and I did notice that two of the poll workers were wearing some Black History shirts. Why is that so wrong? Because political displays are not allowed within 200 feet of the polling place. These Black History shirts (with portraits of MLK, Malcolm X, Frederick Douglass, George Washington Carver, to name a few) were proxies for the Democratic presidential nominee shirts that the Democratic presidential nominee has been selling at his rallies. We as tax payers should provide these poll workers with a uniform. A blue, green, or turquoise shirt, something easy to spot. What’s this monkey business with Black History? C’mon. Imagine if we walked in there wearing shirts with images of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and Andrew Carnegie. We’d be asked to leave the premises. We would not be allowed to vote. There would definitely not be any allowance for a white poll worker to show up wearing a White History shirt. By the way, there should be a month designated for dead white people and not just Presidents. Oh, am I racist? Voting for the Democratic presidential nominee just because he’s black (or half-black) is racist. Voting for John McCain because he loves America is American.
We stopped by the grocery store to pick up doughnuts and chocolate milk for our Election Day breakfast, which isn’t technically “break fast” because we had toast earlier. So now we’re enjoying the rest of the morning, watching Dad save Princess Zelda, reminding Kyle to pronounce his fricatives, and mainly recuperating from waking up way too early. I have to work later.

Last night, after the kids went to bed, the Dad and I watched the ending of Game Three of the Stanley Cup Finals. After a long day figuring out what the crap happened to our internet connection (for him) and sewing without the internet (for me), it was nice to have quiet and a game to watch. The game ended, and a WWF show came on. I asked Dad to change it, but he wanted to watch it for a few minutes. And I put up with bad acting from a giant. Well, after a few minutes, it got a little messy, so I got up to change it (which was okay with Dad).

“It’s either this or the fag on MadTV,” announced Dad. I saw a Grandma telling it like it is to her Gen-Y bimbo granddaughter. At first, I liked the whole “You are spoiled. You’re clothes are made of plastic” attitude that the Grandma had. But the granddaughter kept throwing kitchen appliances at her Grandma. It was all in good fun because the Grandma was really a young actor who was picking up furniture to throw at the girl.

“Weren’t we just watching this on the other channel?” I asked.
“Oh, yea, I guess so.”

So I closed my eyes until it ended. I think Dad changed the channel back to WWF, but I don’t remember. When he changed it back to FOX, the fag actor was making a bad impression of Steve Jobs who was supposed to be demonstrating a new Apple product. The fag made Jobs look like a klutz, and the skit went on forever. No dialogue, just dropping white boxes and destroying props.

Finally, that was over, and some show that I have never seen before started with this disclaimer:

The following program has two middle-aged women making out. Big time.

Thanks for telling me. But I was hoping it wasn’t true. The show was a little funny. They had some bad acting , but it was okay. Then they had a “Ask for Advice” segment.

Dear Show Host,
My husband and his ex-wife are still talking a lot. What do I do?

And this is where two women were sitting with a man between them. One woman got up. The man shifted to the woman’s seat. The woman sat in the middle. She put her arm around the other woman… And I closed my eyes. I heard whooping and cheering from the live studio audience. It was disgusting. I almost threw up. I’d rather express my dog’s scent glands than to watch two people of the same sex making out.

The kids were in their rooms, dreaming about apple juice and dinosaurs. I should have gone to bed earlier.

I play the piano for a Lutheran church. I don’t know why I bother listening to the sermons. I always come home with something to rant about to my husband. For one thing, the pastor continues to discredit science and scientists by saying, “We Christians already knew this and that because we believe in God.” Well, that’s ironic. I believe in God, and I didn’t know that the Earth revolved around the Sun until Nick Copernicus told me. And whatever changes or progress are made or discovered by science and scientists, the pastor accuses the scientists of doing it for money, id est, the International Astronomical Union designated Pluto as a dwarf planet because they wanted money. Although he makes no supports for his claims, the congregation just nods and accepts this as truth.

Yesterday, the pastor mentioned the parthenogenesis of a shark in Belfast, but he used the term “virgin birth.” Only a few parishoners had heard of the story, and most were shaking their heads either in disgust or disbelief. He did not mention that some species of fish and reptiles are known to reproduce without the genetic information of a male parent, especially while under the threat of extinction. He simply offered his regular bit of wisdom, “We Christians already knew that a virgin birth is possible because we believe in God.”

I suppose they already know how to reduce the garbage from the fellowship hall, but nobody bothers to put it into practice.

A Florida boy was physically forced by public school teacher to remove his braids.
Since when does a teacher have the right to hold a student down (unless he’s flailing a knife around)? The parents ought to know better than to send their boy to school with a freakish hair-do (unless it’s a school for freaks). Poor kid. This is the kind of stuff that sticks in kids’ minds. In a decade, he’ll be going postal. Poor kid.

At a party a few days ago, someone mentioned that he has relatives who are having a child through a surrogate. Twins, I think. Well, what do you say to that? “Congratulations?” I suppose that it’s nice for the couple who has always wanted children but couldn’t naturally conceive and/or carry them. So, yea, I guess “Congratulations,” fits. I reckon that most surrogacies end without a big deal, with most parents getting their children without much protest from the surrogate.

Couples who have had no success with traditional attempts to start a natural family can offer important services to the life of the human person, exempli gratia, assistance to poor or handicapped children and their families. I know a old lady who never had children. She has lost two husbands and has miscarried a dozen babies. This lady did exactly what she was here to do: She taught handicapped children to mold clay into bowls and vases. She shared her talents. It is from childless couples that I hear the most comments about how children are a blessing and are gifts from Heaven. And I absolutely agree. My kids carry my genetic information, which, I hope, they will pass to their own children. That is why we are here: To make more of us.

With marriage being the foundation of the natural family, how is surrogacy tolerable? How do I possibly offer congratulations to a couple who are behaving contrary to the unity of marriage? They are interfering with the natural process of human procreation, which is the purpose of marriage. “Hey, congratulations on disrespecting the origin of human life! How does it feel to desecrate the dignity of procreation? Awww, must be nice.”

Maybe I’m being too traditional. Maybe it is God’s will for His people to be fertilized in vitro and gestated in artificial wombs. Maybe Aldous Huxley was a prophet.