1000 Rabbis say HOMOSEXUALITY will lead to natural disasters

[CptStern]

hey it's the jewish version of Pat Robertson

"When Americans are suffering economically and millions need jobs, it's shocking that the Administration is focused on its ultra-liberal militantly homosexualist agenda forcing the highlighting of homosexuals and homosexuality on an unwilling military. This is the equivalent of the spiritual rape of our military to satisfy the most extreme and selfish cadre of President Obama's kooky coalition.

We agree with Eileen Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness that this will hurt the cohesiveness of the military, cause many to leave the army, and dramatically lower the number of recruits, perhaps leading to the reinstatement of a compulsory draft.

"Thirteen months before 9/11, on the day New York City passed homosexual domestic partnership regulations, I joined a group of Rabbis at a City Hall prayer service, pleading with G-d not to visit disaster on the city of N.Y. We have seen the underground earthquake, tsunami, Katrina, and now Haiti. All this is in sync with a two thousand year old teaching in the Talmud that the practice of homosexuality is a spiritual cause of earthquakes. Once a disaster is unleashed, innocents are also victims just like in Chernobyl.

goddam christian extremists ...oh wait

also "spiritual rape" ...you cant see me but I'm raping your soul as we speak

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/9630112926.html

 

[Krynn72]

"Thirteen months before 9/11, on the day New York City passed homosexual domestic partnership regulations, I joined a group of Rabbis at a City Hall prayer service, pleading with G-d not to visit disaster on the city of N.Y.

heh... where is your god now? heh...

Also, I misread the title and thought they were going to be saying something about 1000 rabbits saying gays cause natural disasters.

 

[delusional]

At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Sen. John McCain R-Ariz., urged Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates to "keep the impact it will have on our forces firmly in mind."

Yet those gathered at Marine House made it clear they've already accepted the idea of gays and lesbians serving among them.

Of far more interest to them were other areas, they told Mullen, such as allowing women to serve in infantry units. They also asked about relations between the military and the State Department and, more narrowly, when a key Defense Department official would be assigned to Amman permanently.

Indeed, since Mullen appeared on Capitol Hill earlier this month and told a stunned Congress that in his personal view, gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve, the response among members of the military has been little more than a shrug.

After Tuesday's question-and-answer session, Mullen told McClatchy that although he's held three town hall sessions with troops since his testimony, not a single service member has asked him about the issue.

At Tuesday's session, which included not only Marines, but members of the Army and the Air Force, both male and female service members explained their indifference to the issue: They'd already served with gays and lesbians, they accepted that some kind of change was imminent, and, they said, the nation was too engulfed in two wars for a prolonged debate about it.

That there's been so little reaction raises questions about how much study the issue needs and whether the Pentagon study is meant to pacify its concerns — or Congress'.

Funny that I just read this

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/85439.html

 

[Kaptain H]

I knew plenty of homosexuals when I was in the military, and I don't recall anyone giving a crap either way. Maybe we were all too busy complaining about the shitty new black berets and PTs.

 

[swan_song1973]

those dudes need a kick to the tookus.

 

[Raziaar]

Christians, Jews, Muslims... all of 'em ridiculous when it comes to viewing homosexuality.

 

[fishdbaz]

One-thousand rabbits say "HOMO!"
Now that would be front page news.

 

[Emporius]

1000 Rabbis gather in NY to pray to god not to visit disaster on the city.

13 months later, 9/11 occurs.

COINCIDENCE?

 

[Shyam]

COINCIDENCE?

it is obvious, the joos did 9/11.

since dickbar got banned, someone had to fo it.

 

[Sparta]

It's obviously the gays that brought about 9/11. Not decades of horrendous U.S. foreign policy.

 

[Danimal]

Well seeing as Jewish Magicians taught King Solomon black magic (Who buried the info beneath his tomb to be found by the Templar knights, who eventually formed The Illuminati, which some reckon committed 9/11 as an occult ritual), then the jews are, ultimately, responsible for it.

Spoiler

Don't hurt me oh God

 

[Iron Kat]

Also, I misread the title and thought they were going to be saying something about 1000 rabbits saying gays cause natural disasters.

I thought this too! Glad I'm not the only one!

 

[unozero]

yeah being gay is wrong but playing around with a baby boys dick is fine.

 

[Shyam]

yeah being gay is wrong but playing around with a baby boys dick is fine.

If that joke is aimed at circumcision, then your joke is..... bad. And that's coming from me.

 

[unozero]

Is your sarcasm meter broken or are you saying the argument is invalid?
It's not a joke it's a valid point.

 

[Noodle]

You're REALLY stretching the definition of "playing around"... beyond it's ability to make a valid point.

 

[Wanted Bob]

1000 Rabbis say homosexuality will lead to natural disasters

1000 Rabbis are wrong.

 

[Planetary]

It's impossible to turn back the clock. Why can't they just accept that? Is there some basic moral tenant that prevents 2 consenting adults from doing what they wish in a private bedroom? What?

 

[Warped]

1000 Rabbis and 1000 Priests walk into a bar....

also we should join some crazy christian/religious forums and make a ruckus

 

[Mogi67]

1000 Rabbis and 1000 Priests walk into a bar....

also we should join some crazy christian/religious forums and make a ruckus

Yes, because everyone here is an evangelical atheist.

It's impossible to turn back the clock. Why can't they just accept that? Is there some basic moral tenant that prevents 2 consenting adults from doing what they wish in a private bedroom? What?

That is their claim, yes.

 

[Noodle]

And of course, they are completely representative of all others that follow any Judeo-Christian faith, right?

Bah. That's like judging all conservatives based on Sarah Palin. It's just not fair.

Oh, and the 1000 Rabbis are wrong.

 

[99.vikram]

I bet the USMC will get a new camo outfit, and it will look FABULOUS!

Also, 1000 Rabbis is the most kickass name for an alt rock band ever. When I learn to play guitar, y'all will remember that name.

 

[CptStern]

And of course, they are completely representative of all others that follow any Judeo-Christian faith, right?

you're the only one saying this. mostly likely because you have religious chip on your shoulder. also explain what this has to do with christians? you specifically mention judeo-christian faith groups. why?

Bah. That's like judging all conservatives based on Sarah Palin. It's just not fair.

Oh, and the 1000 Rabbis are wrong.

ya but Sarah Palin has absolutely no say when it comes to determining religious policy. these rabbis however do:

Igud HaRabonim (Rabbinical Alliance of America) is a prominent beth din (rabbinical court) in the greater New York City metropolitan area. ... Its decisions are binding in civil courts if the litigants agree to appoint the beth din to arbitrate their dispute.

they're the jewish equvilent of a sharia court

 

[DEATHMASTER]

can we just kill people this ****ing stupid?

 

[mastag]

Christians, Jews, Muslims... all of 'em ridiculous

Fixd. Well, shortened for efficiency.

 

[Noodle]

you're the only one saying this. mostly likely because you have religious chip on your shoulder. also explain what this has to do with christians? you specifically mention judeo-christian faith groups. why?

They're under a similar religious umbrella, and it makes it a bit more representative when looking at the subject from a political stance rather than religious. Also, the whole group pretty much gets the same treatment by those on the forum. So it seems, anyway. Maybe not. You'll probably disagree.

ya but Sarah Palin has absolutely no say when it comes to determining religious policy. these rabbis however do:

She has influence over American conservatives. They are both one of the the more extreme and least respectable parts of their respective group, and not a good representation of the philosophies as a whole. Because they are less respectable, they will be used as examples by anyone arguing against the general philosophy, be it Judaism or Republicanism.

It'd kinda be like judging every Muslim based on your impressions of a suicide bomber. That sort of "judging the whole by it's least respectable extremist sect" debate tactic is very annoying, and quite prevalent these days.

 

[unozero]

can we just kill people this ****ing stupid?

we tried.

 

[CptStern]

They're under a similar religious umbrella, and it makes it a bit more representative when looking at the subject from a political stance rather than religious. Also, the whole group pretty much gets the same treatment by those on the forum. So it seems, anyway. Maybe not. You'll probably disagree.

didnt you recently complain that religious bashing on this forum seems to be mostly one sided towards christians? now it's orthodox jews as well?

still I fail to see how this is at all related to the initial point you were trying to make; that hl2.net members were implying this particular incident was indicative of all those of judeo-christian faith. it seems to me like you're the one over generalising when it's quite clear everyone in this thread is specifically talking about the 1000 rabbi group and no one else

and one cant really look at this from a political standpoint when the reasoning behind the decision is purely a religious one

She has influence over American conservatives.

that's a bit of a stretch. even conservatives recognise she's retarded. anyways hardly the same thing as a group who are directly involved in deciding official policy

They are both one of the the more extreme and least respectable parts of their respective group, and not a good representation of the philosophies as a whole.

you're speculating. this isnt an extreme view at all. it completely fits with official orthodox jewish dogma.

"The Torah clearly states its views about the act of homosexuality. The act of homosexuality, i.e. two men having sexual relations, is prohibited. The act is twice called a ?Toaivaan abomination? and it is such a severe sin, that it merits the death penalty in a Jewish court system. If not for the fact that homosexuality is prevalent in Western Society today, there would be little controversy about this Torah sin. It is clearly forbidden and never condoned anywhere in the Torah."

http://www.lookstein.org/resources/homosexuality_amsel.pdf

Because they are less respectable, they will be used as examples by anyone arguing against the general philosophy, be it Judaism or Republicanism.

It'd kinda be like judging every Muslim based on your impressions of a suicide bomber. That sort of "judging the whole by it's least respectable extremist sect" debate tactic is very annoying, and quite prevalent these days.

again, not an extremist organization. ultra conservative yes but orthodox judaism by definition is ultra conservative

"Rabbinical Alliance of America) is a prominent beth din (rabbinical court) in the greater New York City metropolitan area. ...Its decisions are binding in civil courts..."

you're speculating and being overly defensive of religion in general without knowing the facts.

 

[Tyguy]

If that joke is aimed at circumcision, then your joke is..... bad. And that's coming from me.

speaking of circumcision, you know why it is that the tip of the penis is larger than the shaft? it's so your hand doesn't fly off and hit you in the forehead.

continue.

 

[Mogi67]

can we just kill people this ****ing stupid?

You're right, too bad the holocaust failed

 

[Noodle]

didnt you recently complain that religious bashing on this forum seems to be mostly one sided towards christians? now it's orthodox jews as well?

I didn't say it was biased against Christians more than other religions, but Christianity is arguably the more prominent religion in western society, and thus will take most of the blow. The forum strikes me as pretty anti-religious all around.

It's an extreme view on the scale of Judaism as a whole. Especially the part about natural disasters. I'm pretty sure most Jews probably don't give a crap about homosexuality.

 

[CptStern]

I didn't say it was biased against Christians more than other religions, but Christianity is arguably the more prominent religion in western society, and thus will take most of the blow. The forum strikes me as pretty anti-religious all around.

It's an extreme view on the scale of Judaism as a whole. Especially the part about natural disasters. I'm pretty sure most Jews probably don't give a crap about homosexuality.

except these are orthodox jews not "most jews" in general. there's a clear distiction between orthodox, reform, conservative, reconstructionist, hasidic etc jews. just as there's a difference between amish and catholics despite both being christian. and it's not an extreme view. orthodox judaism is pretty mainstream in the jewish community

 

[Noodle]

it's not an extreme view. orthodox judaism is pretty mainstream in the jewish community

So you think the idea that homosexuals cause natural disasters is a view held by the majority of Jews?

 

[CptStern]

So you think the idea that homosexuals cause natural disasters is a view held by the majority of Jews?

? why do you keep repeating that when I clearly said orthodox jews? why are you lumping all jews together? you're guilty of what you accuse me of.

 

[Noodle]

You said orthodox Judaism was pretty mainstream in the jewish community, and if this is a common view of orthodox judaism, does that make it a common view in mainstream judaism as a whole?

 

[CptStern]

You said orthodox Judaism was pretty mainstream in the jewish community, and if this is a common view of orthodox judaism, does that make it a common view in mainstream judaism as a whole?

you're arguing in circles. you're the one making the association not me


it's exactly like saying "evangelical christians belive in x. since evangelical christianity is mainstream and not extremist it follows that all christians believe in x"

hasty generalization logical fallacy

 

[Noodle]

No, I thought YOU were making that association. My bad. I'm saying that this view is NOT reflective of the majority of Jews.

 

[CptStern]

No, I thought YOU were making that association. My bad. I'm saying that this view is NOT reflective of the majority of Jews.

sigh ...you're arguing in circles again. orthodox jews certainly believe this ...or at least 1000 rabbis in the greater NY area teach that particular ideology to their flock. and since they're orthodox chances are some of that will stick ...but determining exactly how many jews subscribe to this ideology is besides the point, despite your attempt to thrust it to the forefront of the debate. all you really had to do was read the OP. it clearly says 1000 rabbis and not ALL jews everywhere

 

[Solaris]

No, I thought YOU were making that association. My bad. I'm saying that this view is NOT reflective of the majority of Jews.

He never made that association, I don't see how you could honestly think he did. Stay out of threads like these please if you've nothing to contribute.

 

[Noodle]

Okay, I misunderstood. Sorry.

Whoops.