Here's My Take!

NY Republican Gov. Candidate Makes Anti-Gay Remarks

Interesting headlines! Makes you want to read more! What it is, is an example of bad journalism, with a selective part of a speech taken out of context to influence an election. Here is the quote they took exception to....

"I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don't want them brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option -- it isn't," -Carl Paladino

What he said in front of that is the kicker. He basically asked that the content of his next remarks not be taken out of context. That he lives in a , "live and let live," kind of world. Personally, that's the part I found offensive.

If you have an opinion, and choose to state it, back it up. Know what you believe and why. Paladino is a Catholic, the Bible is clear that homosexual behavior is a sin. His faith forbids same sex marriage, case closed. If your going to take your lumps, tell them why!

The reporter goes on to say that his speech contained this passage that Paladino must have decided against saying. "There is nothing to be proud of in being a dysfunctional homosexual." It's my guess he found that portion in bad taste, but yet somehow he's being held accountable for something he chose not to say. That is in fact, if this reporter is clairvoyant or had access to the written form of his remarks.

Homophobia? Hardly, it's his faith. Why is it we can accept Muslim radical doctrine without question, but a Christian view is offensive? An honor killing, or a stoning Americans can live with, and here they look down their noses at a part of the Christian doctrine that renounces other socially questionable behavior. If your going to accept religious doctrine tolerance, doesn't it apply to each equally?

Here's the skinny, we're being dooped! In a country where it's politically incorrect to be religious, we are being told to accept the religion of Atheism. That the only acceptable belief is the is no Deity. If Atheism is to be accepted as a true belief, doesn't that make it a religion? Shouldn't the separation of church and state fallacy apply to that as well? Ergo, it is not appropriate to practice Atheism in the town square.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill