Connie and her Christmas Fruitcakes

When I set out to make this blog a source for affirming theology in understandable terms, I not only went to the names on the tags below who made the argument opposite to mine, but I also went to other blogs to see what they had to say. One that kept on coming up was one I once named here, but then took off then I realized I was sending traffic his way. It really was an ugly place with spider webs in the corner and packed with virulent content against homosexuality. He has a list on his "about" page with what he calls his inspirations naming benign "ex-gays," but look closer at his postings and you get a different story. In one post he hints that homosexuality should still be considered a mental illness and he tries his best, bless his heart, to link the Catholic pedophilia scandals with homosexuality. I can only stay at his blog for a few minutes before it starts making my skin crawl.

Years ago I made a comment on his blog post he made about the Frisch and Brønnum-Hansen study (gays have a higher mortality rate) with me saying he neglected to mention the study was done at the height of the AIDS epidemic. The authors of the comparative study said that their study shouldn't be twisted by those like that blog author with what is a; “agenda-driven, pseudo-scientific gobbledygook.” The authors also went on to say that the mortality rate between married gay men and straight men was the same after 1996.

This blog author responded amicably as I did in return, but later he tried to get back at me by linking to what Gagnon said about what I wrote on my Centurion post (he actually did me a favor because it gave me the chance to refute Gagnon yet again). We came across each other again in the comments of another blogger and I was glad I had the chance to refute him, again, which I hope will be a final banishment back to his blog full of witches.

The debate with this author was gracious and civil, but he didn't post my last comment that corrected him. This was my response to him he didn't post:

"You're mistaken. Three men are heterosexual with families, two have a Ph.D. and two are not Americans. If Solberg wanted men and women with PhDs, I could have given him a laundry list if that was his criteria. They also aren't all 'gay social activists.' Their writings and work are in the framework of the Church and minorities with respect to social injustices like women and other minorities. I also take exception to him saying; "I would encourage you to consider the wider body of Judeo-Christian scholarship on this issue. There are hundreds of brilliant luminaries whose names are widely known and have valid insight to  well." What was the whole point of our conversation? That the bible translators, early church fathers, and many in-between really had an axe to grind with homosexuality or were just wrong with it, a historical PROVEN fact with the links I gave him. If their bias can be shown, their opinion, no matter how brilliant in supposed scholarship, amounts to nothexceptn of excluding a group from the Kingdom of God. The Church has been horrible with its history of how it saw the Jews, the indigenous, women, minorities, animals, and those who didn't believe as they did at a given time remember, they also pointed to specific Scriptural verses to justify how they believed."

This blog is acting wonky (sentences that act like they are trying to escape through the window, postings that bleed into each other so they look like one gigantic post, fonts changing on their own, and now it wants to try different languages on me كيف يتم ذلك؟). One day that black bar just showed up on the upper right side I can't get rid of. Years back I tinkered with my blog codes to make it scratch-n-sniff capable and now my blog has taken on a life of its own. I swear I can hear it moving around at night like it's coming for me and that's why I have a baseball bat next to my bed "just in case."

 

   

   My blog probably on the prowl again.