Pennsylvania Gov. Issues Order Requiring Groups That Contract With State to Hire Homosexuals

Wolf-compressedHARRISBURG, Pa. — The Democratic governor of Pennsylvania has signed two executive orders banning government workers from turning down homosexuals and transgenders for Commonwealth contracts and grants, and prohibiting those who contract with the Commonwealth from doing the same.

“These executive orders—one that applies to Commonwealth employees and the other that applies to grants and procurement, say that no agency under the governor’s jurisdiction shall discriminate against any employee or applicant on the basis of race, color, religious creed, ancestry, union membership, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, national origin, AIDS or HIV status, or disability,” Gov. Tom Wolf said before a gathering at the capitol in Harrisburg.

“The employment practices of the Commonwealth must be non-discriminatory,” he continued. “And all businesses contracting with the Commonwealth should use non-discriminatory practices in sub-contracting, hiring, promoting, and other labor matters.”

Wolf also called upon lawmakers to pass legislation that would expand existing non-discrimination laws throughout the Commonwealth as his executive orders only applied at the government level.

“I am urging the legislature to pass a non-discrimination bill that makes it clear to the world that Pennsylvania is a welcoming place for everyone,” he said. “This is the right thing for us to do, just as it was right for William Penn to proclaim that Pennsylvania was a place for everyone regardless of your religion.”

The 1682 “Great Law” of Pennsylvania, penned by its founder William Penn, required criminal penalties for those who engage in homosexual acts.

“And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid that if any person shall be legally convicted of the unnatural sin of sodomy or joining with beasts such persons shall be whipped and forfeit one third part of his or her estate and work six months in the house of corrections at hard labor, and for the second offence imprisonment as aforesaid during life,” it read.

  • Connect with Christian News

Wolf said that he was unhappy that the legislature had not yet passed a law to provide protections for homosexual and transgender residents.

“I am troubled by the General Assembly’s inaction on passing non-discrimination legislation,” he said. “Pennsylvania needs to go on record to proclaim that all people—regardless of sexual orientation, gender expression or identity—are treated equally under Pennsylvania law.”

The Pennsylvania Family Council issued a statement following Wolf’s order, stating that it could cause problems for charities that receive contracts or grants from the Commonwealth.

“Under two executive orders signed today, PA is closed for business unless you agree with Gov. Wolf,” said President Michael Geer. “He’s ordering something that could very well exclude thousands of good people from doing business with their own state in their own state.”

“[T]hese executive orders will put the onus on many faith-inspired charities that serve needy Pennsylvanians to prove they are doing Gov. Wolf’s bidding or face complete cut-off of state funds,” the group stated. “Pennsylvania Family Council calls on Gov. Wolf to withdraw these unjust orders.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • The Last Trump

    “The Democratic governor…”
    Said it all right there, didn’t it?

    • acontraryview

      “And executive orders, no less!”

      You mean like that executive order former Governor Jindal put into place which legalized discrimination?

  • WesternIowan

    Love Thy Neighbor As Thyself, as well as, Do Unto Others As You’d Have Done Unto You – both teachings in action. Seems like a very Christian thing to do if you love Jesus rather than hate your neighbor for being born. Good for the governor no matter the party.

    • Pererin

      But because of scripture, Christians see homosexuality in the same category as paedophilia and beastiality, they are seen as perversions. Are you suggesting that Jesus taught that we treat people who embrace those temptations with equality too? Certainly we should love and help them, but accept their practices as good? Jesus said, “he that is without sin cast the first stone.” He then told the prostitute to “go and sin no more”. So Jesus loved her and helped her, but He also set her straight on her sin. That is how Christians should be in the issue of homosexuality, full of love toward them, but direct them toward God and the gospel, awakening them to their need to be forgiven for their sin. That is what Jesus did.

      • Paige Turner

        Perhaps they should stop seeing homosexuality as a perversion? Given that it is an inherent biological trait and not chosen then it would make sense to update the position. Medicine has already decided so its time for Christians to move with the times. Christian positions on issues such as divorce, working on the sabbath and eating shell fish has changed so there is proof that there can be movement.

        • Pererin

          They cannot, scripture teaches it. It’s God’s word. Why should Christians drop God’s word over man’s. Your declaration over homosexuality being inherently biological is false. Please give a source declaring this as fact. Is paedophilia inherently biological too? Is beastiality inherently biological? Is insest inherently biological? Of course not they are all perversions.
          Divorce is still sinful and the rest of your list of ‘changes’ in Christians that you give is not the same. Do you need me to explain why? I will gladly do so but it will be a bit of a read.

          • Paige Turner

            You have already dropped a number of God’s words. Bacon, Lobster and working on the sabbath without being put to death for instance.

            Why is this one particular issue the one that remains?

            It appears that you alone get to decide which sins are OK and which are not.

            When did God appoint you as his agent for this task?

            As far as a source, you could have a look at the DSM IV which removed homosexuality as a mental illness over 40 years ago as a starting point for your research into the medical position on the subject.

            Conflating gay people with pedophilia and beastiality is offensive and ignorant. Saying things such as this is damaging and cruel. You should be ashamed of yourself for doing so. The excuse that “the bible says” does not stand under these circumstances.

            To clarify an obvious point; A child cannot consent to sex as they are under age hence the illegality of pedophilia. An animal also cannot consent which is why you also cannot marry your dog.

            2 gay Men or Women of age can consent and what they do together is legal in the USA. Your personal opinion of this is yours to have, however you do not get to impose your will on others based on your religious views.

          • Guest

            You are serious confused. You are confusing dietary laws that are meant for observant ancient Jews with universal laws that are meant for everyone. You really should read the Bible before attempting to comment on it.

          • Pererin

            You are confused about the law of the Old Testament. Honestly, there is a difference between the two. Don’t just twist it, it is clear for you to read.

            It appears that you confuse me for an atheist or humanist. Christians get their morals, beliefs, authority from God through scripture. It is atheists who who make up which sin is ok for themselves with no authority exept themselves.

            I know that science has not come up with any solid evidence regarding be innately homosexual from birth. I have yet to come across anything solid to support the argument.

            You might think that levelling homosexuality with beastiality, paedophilia and insest is offensive, but we have different authorities. I follow the word of God, you follow the word of man. 50 years ago you would be offended by homosexuality just like a Christian is today. You have been socially engineered to react in this way.

            Consent has no influence on the matter. In God’s view it is wrong. God decides right and wrong. He is the ultimate authority. Not men who change their views from generation to generation. Liberal generations have chanced laws over the years. Conservative minded politicians are trying to reform and bring back respect for God’s word. Basically what this story is about. Generations of liberal politicians have imposed their will on conservative minded people resulting in the society we have today. Christians pray for a reversing of this pattern and why not? If God willed this to be so, in another 50 years generations will be appalled by homosexuality again, it makes no difference to the atheist world. Whatever society (man) agrees in right and wrong is all that matters to them.

          • Josey

            amen…Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. Man’s views are fickle and change with the wind but God never changes, He is God. And as God, He is not a man that He should lie, Jesus came to fulfil the law and commandments not to do away with them, He gives us grace to overcome sin daily.

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            Fyi, at ACTS.15:28-29, God has given some exemptions from His/ /Moses Law to new Gentile Christian adults, ie they hv to only keep the easy n non-burdensome parts of the Law, eg the Ten Commandments n other moral laws, n do not need to keep the difficult/hard/
            /burdensome laws of circumcision, kosher food n other customary/ceremonial Jewish laws.
            …….In comparison, God requires Jewish Christians n Messianic Jews to continue to keep all the 613 laws of Moses or Jewish laws bc it is not a burden to them.

            Eg a Gentile alcoholic who becomes a new Christian will still be saved from hell(= inherit eternal life in heaven thru faith in Jesus Christ), even though he/she will likely not live very long on this earth bc of the long term toxic effects of alcohol on the liver.
            ……. Psychotropic drug addiction like alcoholism, is permanent bc of irreversible brain damage or change in brain chemistry, similar to a Type 2 diabetic being “addicted” to artificial insulin for the rest of his/her life bc of pancreas damage, usually caused by a lifestyle of laziness/sedateness n/or gluttony..

          • gizmo23

            State law governs all people not just Christians. You can believe and do whatever you want, but state law trumps religious beliefs

          • Pererin

            Unfortunately these laws are infringing on the rights of Christians which is why Christians are so vocal. Thankfully there are still some men who are willing to stand up for God’s word. That’s what this story is about, the fight between liberal secular minded men vs men who respect God’s word. God willing he will raise up men who will stand up for His word and reform the laws of the US.

          • gizmo23

            I am a Christian yet I think these bills are hurtful and wrong.
            I fail to see how Christians are forced to violate their beliefs

          • Pererin

            Well for one, a Christian is not allowed to believe that homosexuality is sinful and therefore these Christians are unable to fulfil God’s expectations in wanting absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality.

          • gizmo23

            You can believe anything you want, but actions in the business wrold is another matter

          • Pererin

            Is that what is more important to you?

          • gizmo23

            So what’s next, not serving Carholics, Muslims, Hindus, or a host of others ? Maybe I’m a pagan that wants to dance naked around a bonfire in the park would denying me be a violation of my religion.
            We are all under the same laws. There are bunches of sins that people comit are businesses that serve those people supporting their lifestyle?

          • Pererin

            Nobody is refusing to serve anyone. All we want is the right to fulfil our religious beliefs. I suppose it depends on who your authority is at the end of the day. We have developed a secular society whose authority is man. But this secular society isn’t actually truly secular it is humanist in disguise. We currently live in a post-Christian society which is slowly converting from Christian to humanistic values. So all those religions you listed are all guests in a humanist world. As we move on it will become clearer. We are having our rights stripped away and you are letting it happen. Humanists do not loose out at all. How are they discriminated against? We must fight for our values not simply hand them over.

          • gizmo23

            Christians have thousands of churches, tv, and radio stations. Over 90% of elected officals claim to be Christians. I would say Christians have way more power than any other group.
            Secular, humanist what do those even mean?
            When the church decided to become a political entity and align it’s self with political parties it opened the door for attacks. It became secular

          • Pererin

            Of course there are, as I said, we live in a post Christian society, churches, radio stations, politicians etc are expected. 90% of these politicians certainly are not bending to the authority of God. They are acting in opposition to God in fact in their actions. In the UK when it comes to elections, religion isn’t even an issue anymore, it’s incredible. The US is not as far down the road of humanism as in the UK but surely you can see the path. Humanism is basically living by man’s authority. Christians should live by God’s authority. You can’t have it both ways. As He says, you are either with Him or against Him. You cannot sit on the fence.

            There is another story currently on this website about a social studies student who has been kicked out for putting an Biblical verse about homosexuality on his personal Facebook page. I doubt that would happen today is the US, you’re not quite there, but you are in the same path as in the UK and catching up fast. That is why I am saying to Christians like yourself, beware!

          • Josey

            amen…God is raising His army in these last days, glory to His Name.
            1 Kings 19:18 Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him. God will keep and bless them to stand and preach and nothing can stop God’s work in these last days. Pray Saints Pray that God will send out those with Holy Ghost boldness to do His will and bring those in that are in the byways, highways, etc. Pray for their protection as they go out and pray for one another. I pray for my brothers and sisters in Christ and God answers prayer. Matthew 7:7-8 vs7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: 8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Glory to the Name of Jesus Christ 4-ever, He’s coming again soon. If you don’t know Him now is the day to choose, now is the time, don’t put it off you may not have another opportunity than right now. Jesus loves you!

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            Who were the homosexuals in the Bible? Jesus said this: “For there are eunuchs who were born so from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. To him who can comprehend, that is enough.” (Matthew 19:12 Lamsa). The Aramaic word m’haym-ne (plural) is translated as eunuchs here, but literally means: trusted ones, faithful ones and believers. These “trusted ones” were also servants such as chamberlains, eunuchs and officers. Additionally, m’haym-ne meant homosexual men because they were trusted around women that were married or were not of their family. They weren’t a threat in committing adultery with other mens’ wives or in having pre marital sex with the women of the nation.

            The born eunuchs in the above verse from Matthew are referring to homosexual men. The second part of the verse says: “and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men;” These would be the man-made or castrated eunuchs. Also, the eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men were those appointed by the king to be servants in the king’s palace. Some of these were prisoners of war, captives, and exiles (Isaiah 39:7 Lamsa). The third part of this verse should be read as: “and there are believers who made themselves celibates for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.”

            Throughout the ancient nations that included Egypt, Babylon, Assyria and Persia; homosexuals were exalted to such positions as eunuchs that watched the women of the harem. Because of the mistrust of men, heterosexual or bi-sexual men were castrated; but homosexual men didn’t need to be. Eunuchs also had a recognized place in homosexual prostitution, and youths chosen as catamitic favorites were sometimes castrated. Homosexuality was long confused with eunuchry. Like effeminacy and hermaphroditism, eunuchry was sometimes thought of as creating a woman-man.

            — From “Is the Bible Against Homosexuality?” A scholarly response on what the Hebrew and Aramaic Bible says concerning LGBT people.

          • Guest

            Eunuchs aren’t the same thing as homosexuals. Stop making things up.

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            The following verses will show that the Bible defines the trusted ones (or eunuchs) as homosexual men.

            “Now God had brought Daniel into favour and [tender] love with the prince (sar- ruler, captain) of the eunuchs.” (Daniel 1:9 KJV). The first underlined word is from the Hebrew word khe-sed, which means loving-kindness, mercy and favor, and is translated as favour in this verse. The second underlined word is from the Hebrew word ra-kha-mim, which is translated as tender love here, but means love. Daniel was given favor and love (plural) in the presence of the prince of the eunuchs. Most likely the intimate word ra-kha-mim, meaning love, was given to Daniel because he was handsome (See Dan. 1:4).

            A second evidence where the Bible shows that eunuchs are gay men is in (Daniel 14:2 NAB), which says: “Daniel was the king’s favorite and was held in higher esteem than any of the friends of the king.” In the Aramaic Old Testament, the word friends is replaced with the Aramaic word raḥ-maw, which means “lovers of him [i.e. the king]”. Raḥ-maw is from the singular Aramaic word raḥ-ma (or raḥme), which means love. Chapters 13-14 are in the Catholic canon of scripture. The Aramaic Old Testament contains fourteen chapters of Daniel. The Aramaic text of Daniel also has “the song of the three children” (Or, “Prayer of Hananiah and his companions” – Aramaic name for that portion) after verse twenty-three of Chapter Three. Dr. Lamsa, being a Protestant, just left out the additional parts of Daniel and Esther, plus the Deuterocanonical books. Dr. Lamsa did insert an extra sentence in verse 23 that is not in the Masoretic text, but in the Aramaic and Greek text of Daniel.

            The translators of the New American Bible translated the Greek word sym-bi-o-tes as favorite, but that is incorrect. Sym-bi-o-tes, according to Liddell & Scott means: one who lives with, companion. That matches with the Aramaic text, which says that Daniel …was living with the king.

            The additional words or text found in the Old Testament book of Daniel in both the Aramaic and Greek texts are probably not inspired. I included this verse from the Aramaic text to show that an Aramaic speaker would have understood eunuchs to be active homosexual men; as they were often the king’s lovers. Boga (or Bagoas Greek pronunciation) was the eunuch lover of Darius the Persian and eventually became the lover of Alexander the Great.

            There is good reason to believe the so-called Deuterocanonical books are inspired (at least most of them) but no good reason to believe the additions to Esther and Daniel are inspired. These additions are not in the original Hebrew text of either Esther or Daniel.

            — From “Is the Bible Against Homosexuality?” A scholarly response on what the Hebrew and Aramaic Bible says concerning LGBT people.

          • Guest

            None of that proves that eunuchs are homosexuals. A eunuch, by definition, is someone who has been castrated or who is ineffectual. So are you falsely claiming that homosexuals have been castrated?

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            It is interesting to note that Jesus does not state or imply that born eunuchs exit the womb with genital deformities. Instead, Jesus makes a distinction between born eunuchs and eunuchs who have been physically castrated, whether by illness or by men.

            Jesus makes a further distinction between born eunuchs and eunuchs who make a personal choice to voluntarily abstain from sexual relationships for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.

            The distinctions below, so carefully articulated by Jesus, imply that born eunuchs are not required to abstain from sexual relationships such as a committed, same sex marriage. Some Christians believe that born eunuchs were often homosexual eunuchs. Abstinence from sexual relationships particularly describes the third class of eunuchs and possibly the second class but not the first class, whom Jesus referred to as born eunuchs.

            This distinction becomes important when confronting Complementarian assertions that limit marriage to the Adam and Eve marriage paradigm. God does not assert that limitation in scripture. Instead, Jesus carefully exempts eunuchs from the Adam and Eve marriage paradigm. Eunuchs, according to Jesus, cannot receive His saying about Adam and Eve style marriage.

            According to Jesus, born eunuchs are exempt from the Adam and Eve style heterosexual marriage paradigm. Traditionalists read into that exemption that all eunuchs must therefore be celibate, an assertion Jesus never makes.

            To read a prohibition of same sex marriage into the passage, when the passage does not say that, is to go beyond what scripture says. It seems clear in Matthew 19:11-12, that Jesus did not expect homosexual eunuchs, born eunuchs, gay people, to abstain from loving, committed, same sex, marriage relationships which observe Biblical moral principles.

            Is there room in this passage to allow homosexual eunuchs the right to same sex marriage? I believe there is room. How do I arrive at that conclusion? In the passage, Jesus intentionally differentiates between born eunuchs and the class of eunuchs who voluntarily abstain from marriage.

            — From Gay Christian 101

          • Guest

            All of that still doesn’t mean that eunuchs are homosexuals. I already gave you the definition of the word “eunuch”. Stop making things up to suit your agenda.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Stop making things up to suit your agenda.

            Uhm, pot, kettle, black comes to mind.

          • Guest

            Yeah, that dictionary with all its fictitious definitions is a pesky thing, huh? 🙂 Sorry, the gaystapo does not get to redefine terms.

          • Pererin

            Very odd interpretation indeed.

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            Yes, but only because it’s not the interpretation that you were taught.

          • Pererin

            Maybe, but what has been taught for the last 2000 years?

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            Which doesn’t make it right.

          • Pererin

            It does mean that the 2000 year old and accepted teaching is the correct teaching.

            Homosexuality becomes socially acceptable for the first time since Nero… shock-horror society tries to shoe horn homosexual acceptance into the Bible. Not going to work.

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            Neither the fact that the teaching is 2000 years old, nor the fact that it’s accepted, is verification of its accuracy.

          • Pererin

            True, but a theory concocted 2000 years after the original writings is going to be highly dubious. Especially considering it’s timing with it’s contemporary social ‘leanings’. I’ll stick with the traditional teaching thanks.

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            Only because it suits your agenda.

          • Pererin

            Of course, to follow Christ. What other agenda does a Christian have?

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            To openly discriminate against others under the guise of religion.

          • Pererin

            Is that what you believe the Bible to be? A guise to discriminate? All laws discriminate, that is the point of laws, do you really believe that you do not discriminate?

          • Gott Mit Uns!

            The Bible is not the problem, but its followers have perverted its meaning.

          • Pererin

            Agree, but who are the perverts? That’s the question. Probably the ones who want to change the interpretation after thousands of years of understanding.

          • Josey

            Eunuchs aren’t homosexual, they didn’t participate in sex at all, stop lying.

      • WesternIowan

        Based on your approach, Jesus physically attacked the merchants for making money off religion and drove them from the temple so every religious “leader” who takes a paycheck must be driven out of the church and everyone who has ever paid them is not a Christian. But you don’t see that happening. Also, every person with any imperfection is not allowed near the altar so you’d have to be escorting disabled people and people with glasses out of church and alway from the altar but you don’t see that happening. Which means the first stone is being thrown at the homosexuals by groups of massive hypocrites and according to Jesus hypocrites and pharisees are condemned. You missed the point of the stonecasting because you are stonecasting at homosexuals. Read the story again. He keeps telling them to dare to cast the first stone, but you have no problem stonecasting at homosexuals based on what you wrote. You are acting as though Jesus threw a stone at her and therefore you should throw one at homosexuals. Your remark “love and help them” is the sanctimonious stonecasting Jesus speaks of. You’re still in the mud with everyone else whether you try to act like you are better than others is the entire point of the story. You just donned the sanctimonious cloak worn by the would-be stonecasters.

        • Pererin

          Your equation of homosexuality and disability is not scriptural. The scripture doesn’t not say that disability is sinful. It does however state that homosexuality is. The bible clearly shows what sin is and that we should not do it. Stoning people is not helping them. Giving them the gospel is helping them. That is why we are here, to give people the gospel. Part of the gospel is to show the need for repentance, Jesus died for our sins, if we don’t repent we are lost. Do you suggest we ignore sin? We must love people, of course we should not throw stones at them. Ignoring Jesus acknowledging the sin of the prostitute is madness. He clearly called her sin and tells her to stop doing it. He acts with love as should we. He did not allow her to carry on, He did not approve of her prostitution.
          Make judgement on me all you like, it is certainly expected. But please re-think this matter. Sin exists and it is like a caged animal waiting to attack us, rather than embrace or support it, we must fear it and be very wary of it. That is why we must hold to purity wherever we can.

          • WesternIowan

            A stonecasting hypocrite and pharisee – clearly never Christian. Good luck with that.

          • Pererin

            You’ve just totally displayed the error of your words because if you truly believed what you write you would not have judged/cast stones at me. Do you see the problem?

        • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

          In that Temple story, Jesus Christ drove the merchants away bc they were occupying the space(= the Court of Gentiles) n depriving others from praying to God in the Holy Temple of God in Jerusalem.
          …….So, the equivalent for today is when a Church is turned into a market-place, eg for Avon, Tupperware n Amway products, n Church members r deprived from worshiping n praying to God/Jesus.

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        Paedophilia and beastiality are a crime, homosexuality is not. But I know some of you whished it was.

        • Pererin

          It wasn’t long ago that it was too. Laws change, they can change back too.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Yep, I rest my case.

          • Pererin

            Really? The usual deceived tolerance brigade, blind to their own intolerance.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            It wasn’t long ago that it was too. Laws change, they can change back too.

            Well you confirmed with this comment what I stated before, some of you wished it was a crime again. So, yeah I rest my case.

          • Pererin

            Really don’t know what you’re getting at, what case have you made? Behaviours seen as perversion in the Bible to be tolerated, making behaviours such as incest legal?

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Again. I stated that peadophilia and beastiality are a crime, homosexuality is not.

            You answer by saying this It wasn’t long ago that it was too. Laws change, they can change back too. So I guess you want it to be a crime again. So it confirmed what I stated. So I rest my case.

            Oh you want to talk about incest. How did Adam and EVe according to your bible, populated the world? Since they where the only humans on the planet. How did Noah populated the world again since and again according to your bible where the only survivers of the so called flood? Incest? So yeah, once it was legal in your bible.

          • Pererin

            So you’re not going to bother to read the Bible to get your facts straight? Just twist the words to make a worthless point? How long before you tell me I should not be eating shell fish? That’s another common one.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So I am wrong? then how did they do it? Boom, and there where more humans on the planet just like that? I’m not going to tell you what you can eat or not, that is your business. But you people are very good in cherry picking the bible.

            Just twist the words to make a worthless point?

            Pot, kettle, black, cause it is something you Christians are very good at too.

            If you let people live their lives they will do the same. if you discriminate against those people in any way or form, don’t be surprised they do the same to you.

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            God created Eve out of Adam’s rib bone, to be his wife. God very likely did the same thing for Adam’s sons, eg Cain, Seth, etc, ie created a wife for them out of their own rib bone.

  • Paige Turner

    Non Discrimination is a very good thing. People should not be discriminated against.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    May God deal with the United States of Sodom.

    • Paige Turner

      America. The United States of America.

      The sin of sodom was a sin of inhospitality.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        No, it was Sodomy. Read the entire Bible including the Book of Jude. America’s core value is nudism and it has no sanity or morality, apart from Christianity. You guys need Christianity to become human again.

        • acontraryview

          Actually, Grace, when the original story of S&G was written, there was no mention of homosexuality. That was added several hundred years later.

          • Paige Turner

            The word “homosexual” did not exist until the 1940’s

          • acontraryview

            Revisionist Christian Doctrine. They do love it.

          • Paige Turner

            Low sales resistance seems to be a real and present danger.

            “Want to be gay”?

            “Ive never been asked that before. Sure why not?”

            Terrifying.

          • Guest

            Language evolves all the time. That doesn’t mean that homosexuality didn’t exist for thousands of years.

          • Guest

            That’s false. Use truth and facts to bolster your argument, not fables.

          • acontraryview

            LOL. The whole thing is a fable!

          • Guest

            Yes, the gay agenda is a fable.

          • acontraryview

            Although we weren’t discussing that, I agree with you that there is no gay agenda.

          • Guest

            Do you not even know which article you are commenting on? 🙂 Of course we’re discussing the gay agenda. Try to stay on topic instead of trolling, contrary.

          • acontraryview

            I was commenting on the S&G story. YOU brought up the “gay agenda”, so if anyone was not staying on topic, it was you. Although since we both agree that it is not real, I’m not sure why you brought it up.

          • Guest

            You’re not very good at this. 🙂

          • acontraryview

            What is it you believe I’m not very good at?

          • acontraryview

            The story itself is a fable.

          • Guest

            Of course it isn’t. The Bible is counted as a historical source in secular history. We’ve been through this before and you were proven wrong. Do you even care to have intelligent discussions or are you just here to repeat the same tired, worn arguments? I’ve told you that I perceive you to be a lonely, middle aged woman with no one to talk to. Is that why you troll?

          • acontraryview

            “Of course it isn’t.”

            And your proof of this would be?

            “The Bible is counted as a historical source in secular history.”

            Really? I’d be most interested to know what secular historians view the Bible as a credible source of historical events lacking additional supporting evidence.

            “you just here to repeat the same tired, worn arguments?”

            I have never before put forth the assertion that the story of S&B is a fable.

            “I’ve told you that I perceive you to be a lonely, middle aged woman with no one to talk to.”

            Yes, you have. I then asked you what would lead you to that conclusion, but you never answered. So, I’ll ask again: What had led you to that conclusion?

            “Is that why you troll?”

            Please look up the definition of the word “troll” as relates to internet discussions and then get back to me as to how my posts fit that definition.

          • Guest

            Secular institutes always include the Bible as a historical source. You can go to any university or college in the west and find that it’s so. The fact that you’re asking me to have this conversation with you – again – merely shows that you’re here only to disrupt and harass, not to intelligently discourse. That puts you in the “troll” division.

          • acontraryview

            I’ll ask again: I’d be most interested to know what secular historians view the Bible as a credible source of historical events lacking additional supporting evidence.

            “The fact that you’re asking me to have this conversation with you”

            I made no such request.

            “you’re here only to disrupt and harass”

            In what way have I disrupted and harassed?

            “not to intelligently discourse.”

            You: “I’ve told you that I perceive you to be a lonely, middle aged woman with no one to talk to.”

            Would that be an example of “intelligent discourse” that you refer to? It seems to me to more of a disruptive and harassing comment, wouldn’t you agree?

          • Guest

            You just keep repeating yourself because you want attention. Perhaps a job is in order if you’re that bored?

          • acontraryview

            What is it I am repeating other than questions you have failed to answer?

            I’ll ask again:

            In what way have I disrupted and harassed?

            Regarding your statement that you perceive me to be a “lonely, middle aged woman with no one to talk to:

            Would that be an example of “intelligent discourse” that you refer to? It seems to me to more of a disruptive and harassing comment, wouldn’t you agree?

          • Guest

            I already answered them. Do you know how to scroll? And not only did I answer them here, I’ve answered them in past conversations with you. You’re starting to sound just like gizmo/gears, which makes me wonder if you’re just another one of his/her lonely alts.

          • acontraryview

            Hmmmm….let’s see.

            I asked you:

            “What is it you believe I’m not very good at?”

            You did not answer

            I asked you:

            “What had led you to that conclusion?” regarding you perceiving me to be a lonely, middle aged woman with no one to talk to.

            You did not answer.

            i asked you:

            I’d be most interested to know what secular historians view the Bible as a credible source of historical events lacking additional supporting evidence.

            You did not answer.

            I asked you:

            “In what way have I disrupted and harassed?”

            You did not answer.

            I asked you, regarding your statement about my being a middle aged lonely woman:

            “Would that be an example of “intelligent discourse” that you refer to?”

            You did not answer.

            As a follow-up to that, I asked you:

            “It seems to me to more of a disruptive and harassing comment, wouldn’t you agree?”

            You did not answer.

            So when you say: “I already answered them.”, what exactly are you referring to?

            “Do you know how to scroll? ”

            Clearly, I do.

        • gizmo23

          Yoh post the strangest things. Am I supposed to shower with clothes on to avoid nudism?

          • Guest

            Why are you personally attacking posters, gears?

          • gizmo23

            How is asking a question attacking?

          • plains-rabbit

            Flagged. You want people to puke?

        • Gott Mit Uns!

          You merely want the “sin of Sodom” to be homosexuality.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, read Genesis and Jude. Actually, it doesn’t take Christianity to see the Sodomic Western culture to be destructive. No religion supports secular West’s chaotic decadence. You guys prefer Eastern spirituality only because it lacks declaration of clear justice for the Western depravity. You guys were normal only when you were Christian.

      • Guest

        No. Rabbis agree that it was the sin of same sex unions that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Note that inhospitality isn’t known as sodomy – homosexuality is.

        • Ronald Carter

          No, that is false. Homosexuality was not the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It was inhospitality, and many sources online confirm this.

          • Guest

            Nope. While their lack of love towards others was their sin, Rabbis agree that same sex unions caused the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why else is homosexuality known as sodomy?

          • acontraryview

            “In the two centuries before Christ, the Hebrews became better acquainted with the Hellenistic world as they traveled, traded, and settled in Asia Minor, Greece and Rome. Heterosexual and homosexual acts were traditional expressions of fertility worship in the Hellenistic world. Having been raised under the Holiness Laws, the Hebrews found these practices offensive. Among the Hebrew’s reaction to these worship practices we find the first texts equating homosexual acts with Sodom. There are also references to the iniquity of sexual acts between Hebrews and Gentiles (“your union shall be like unto Sodom and Gomorrah” and between angels and humans. The references to homosexual acts usually were concerned with the practice of sex with youths, which was popular in Greece as an expression of appreciating beauty.

            By 50 AD we find the first time the sin of Sodom is associated with homosexual acts in general. In the Quaest. et Salut. in Genesis IV.31-37, Philo interpreted the Genesis word yãdhà as “servile, lawless and unseemly pederasty.” Around 96 AD, Josephus first used the term sodomy to mean homosexual acts. From Antiquities: “They hated strangers, and abused themselves with Sodomitical practices.””

          • Guest

            You copied and pasted that from “Liberal Christians”, hardly a reputable site. 🙂

            Here you go:

            “Rabbi Spero spoke of God’s compassion
            before the Flood, in hopes people would repent and turn back to His
            ways. He showed patience for hundreds of years.

            But, he said, the Talmud’s writings reveal that “before the Flood
            people started to write marriage contracts between men, in other words,
            homosexual ‘marriage,’ which is more than homosexual activity – it’s
            giving an official state stamp of approval, a sanctification … of
            homosexual partnership.”

            In fact, he said, “the writings indicated that it wasn’t even so much
            the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back,’ but that the sin in and of
            itself is so contrary to why God created the world, so contrary to the
            order of God’s nature, that God said then and there ‘I have to start all
            over … to annihilate the world and start from the beginning. …’”

            Rabbi Spero went on to say, “Even in ancient Greece they did not
            write marriage contracts between men. There was homosexuality, and it
            was wrong, but there was not an official ‘blessed’ policy. … Marriage is
            ‘sanctification’ (not simply a partnership).” He said to confer the
            title of sanctification and holiness upon this behavior is “probably one
            of the greatest sins of all that one does against God’s plan for this
            world.”

          • acontraryview

            “You copied and pasted that from “Liberal Christians”, hardly a reputable site. :)”

            What is your basis for stating that the information contained on the site is not reputable?

            “Here you go:”

            While the Rabbi is certainly entitled to his opinions regarding God’s thinking, it is merely his interpretation. Hardly a source backed up by…how did you put it….”truth and facts”. Further, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is the story of S&G.

          • Guest

            History isn’t an opinion. It’s a fact.

          • acontraryview

            Actually, it’s both. For example, it is historical fact that the Mayan civilization abruptly ceased to exist. Regarding the reasons for that, there are various opinions.

            I’ll ask again: What is your basis for stating that the information contained on the site is not reputable?

          • Guest

            Why are you going off topic? A fact is a fact. History is factual. No one is talking about opinion pieces. We’re talking facts.

            The site you gave is a propaganda site. It doesn’t operate in fact, it operates on emotion and conjecture.

          • acontraryview

            “Why are you going off topic?”

            In what way did I go off topic?

            “No one is talking about opinion pieces.”

            Rabbi: “probably one of the greatest sins of all that one does against God’s plan for this world.”

            Note the word “probably”, indicating that is his opinion.

            “It doesn’t operate in fact”

            What, in the information I posed from the site, is not factual?

            The Rabbi you quoted is most certainly operating from a standpoint of emotion and conjecture and is comments are most certainly designed to put forth propaganda. So, tell me, how do his comments differ?

          • Guest

            You’re like a stuck record. If I repeat it again, will it make it truer in your eyes? The website contains factually incorrect material, including what the Bible really says about homosexuality and same sex unions.

            The rabbi I quoted was referring to an historical study and used historical facts, including Talmudic references and Biblical Scripture as sources.

          • acontraryview

            “The website contains factually incorrect material”

            What information, specifically, in my post from that site was factually incorrect?

            Rabbi: “in other words”; “the writings indicated”; “that God said then and there ‘I have to start all over”; “is probably”

            Those are all statements of opinion/interpretation.

            “including Talmudic references and Biblical Scripture as sources.”

            The site I referenced used Talmudic references and Biblical Scripture as sources. In that regard, how do they differ?

          • Guest

            I already covered that. Do you not bother to read the posts to which you’re responding? Of course not, because that would require effort on your part.

          • acontraryview

            “I already covered that.”

            You have not provided any specifics regarding the information I posted from that site regarding its factual inerrancy. Apparently that would require too much effort on your part – or you simply know you can’t because the information is factually correct.

    • John N

      I remember that story.

      That was the one where, at the end, your god’s favorit guy got terribly drunk and had incest sex with his two daughters and impregnated them, was it not? All in accordance with your god, of course. And right after your god killed his wife because of curiosity.

      Yes, those were the days.

      Luckily, our moral standards are no longer determined by what the bible says.

  • acontraryview

    “Pennsylvania Gov. Issues Order Requiring Groups That Contract With State to Hire Homosexuals”

    Well, once again, CNN has chosen to use a headline that is false. The Governor did NOT issue an order requiring groups that contract with the state to hire homosexuals. What the Governor did do is a sign an executive order that groups that contract with the state, as well as state agencies, do not discriminate in hiring based upon sexuality. That does NOT mean that they are “required” to hire homosexuals. It means that sexuality can no longer be a disqualifying reason in hiring.

    • Paige Turner

      Well put

  • acontraryview

    “Pennsylvania Gov. Issues Order Requiring Groups That Contract With State to Hire Homosexuals”

    No, that is NOT what the governor did. The EO that the governor signed says that government agencies and those who contract with the government are not allowed to deny employment based solely on sexuality. No one is ‘required” to hire homosexuals. Apparently there are some who feel that being homosexual is sufficient reason to be turned down for a job – otherwise they would have no issue with this.

    • Josey

      OH what a bunch of bull, it is about promoting this lifestyle and forcing it down everyone’s throat just as they did in Sodom and Gomorrah before Almighty God destroyed it which what was before will happen again. You need to repent and receive Christ before you go down with the rest. No one denies employment to those who live this perverse lifestyle unless they are of the Christian faith in which it would go against the word of God to hire anyone living in a way that isn’t Biblical as God’s word states and why would someone living a lifestyle that goes against the Word of God want employment with a church or Christian based organization anyway? It is about promoting this sin and persecuting Christians, bottom line which shows how close the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus is to returning. Come Lord Jesus, Come!

      • acontraryview

        “promoting this lifestyle and forcing it down everyone’s throat”

        How does requiring that certain employer’s not make employment decisions based solely upon sexuality result in forcing the homosexual lifestyle down anyone’s throat? Does the employer have to become homosexual?

        “want employment with a church or Christian based organization anyway? ”

        This doesn’t cover churches. What is a “Christian based organization”?

        “It is about promoting this sin and persecuting Christians”

        How does requiring that certain employer’s not make employment decision based solely upon sexuality “promote” sin? In what way are Christians persecuted?

      • gizmo23

        Where’s my apoligy. If you are a true Christian I don’t want anything to do with your hate and anger faith

        • Josey

          I will not apologize to you for standing up for my faith and once again you lie about me for I do not hate anyone and I feel a righteous anger against you hypocrisy and lies.

          • Guest

            Gizmo is an agitator who posts under multiple nics. He was banned under gears glorified and a few other names. He also posts as pete j, james blue, and a few other names. He has claimed to be a high school student, a retired teacher, unemployed, transgendered, homosexual, and a hetero male. 🙂 He can’t keep his stories straight. I typically step over his posts unless he’s attacking another person.

          • Oshtur

            I make it a policy never to engage with that type, because that’s why they are here, to waste Christians’ time, act like their feelings are hurt, and generally be a childish nuisance. Once you get familiar with certain names and you know why they’re here, you just learn to ignore them completely. If we all did that, they would move along soon enough. In the meantime, definitely flag their worst comments, maybe the moderators will eventually ban them completely, although they always come back again, like herpes.

          • Josey

            Yes, I know who he is, he is a troll that goes to christian sites putting down believers and mocking Christ our Savior and I usually do ignore these kinds of ppl but it’s high time imo that we call them out and see them removed from doing this, it is of no benefit to any hearers, especially those who are young in the faith.

          • gizmo23

            You just can’t admit that you were wrong when you said I lied

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            Fyi, …….

            ROM.9:13 = As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
            .
            .
            HOSEA.9:15 = “All their wickedness is in Gilgal,
            For there I hated them.
            Because of the evil of their deeds
            I will drive them from My house;
            I will love them no more.
            All their princes are rebellious.
            .
            .
            PROV.6: =

            16 These six things the Lord hates,
            Yes, seven are an abomination to Him:
            17 A proud look,
            A lying tongue,
            Hands that shed innocent blood,
            18 A heart that devises wicked plans,
            Feet that are swift in running to evil,
            19 A false witness who speaks lies,
            And one who sows discord among brethren.

          • Josey

            Great scripture but am not sure why you posted it to me, could you enlighten me?

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            Bc u said: …”I do not hate anyone.”
            .
            Whereas God has commanded His people to love Him/Jesus with all their heart, mind n soul, love their neighbors(= eg brothers-in-Christ) as themselves n HATE THEIR ENEMIES(eg govt-persecutors, unrepentant sinners/evildoers/law-breakers).
            …….Jesus Christ did not come down to earth to change the Law n the Prophets. At MATT.5:17-48, Jesus only used the Law to tell the Pharisees that they would not be saved from hell if they refuse to accept Him as their Christ/Messiah/Savior bc the Jews wrongly thought that they were still being saved from hell(= going to heaven) by just believing in God n keeping His Law, eg did not commit murder, adultery, etc. That was the requirement of the Old Covenant.(LUKE.16:19-31, DEUT.15:11)
            …….With the New Covenant, keeping the Law was not enough to save the Jews from hell when they die, even though doing so would give them a good n long life on earth.(DEUT.28:1-2, GAL.2:16)

            It is very foolish n irrational for Christians to really “love their enemies” or “love the sinner/evildoer/law-breaker but hate only the sin/evil”, unless they wanna ‘heap coals of fire on their enemies’ heads’ n bring God’s vengeance upon them.(ROM.12:19-21)
            …….It would be quite hateful of Christians if they tell that(= love yr enemy or love the sinner) to the victims n/or family of victims of murderers, adulterers, rapists, players/sluts/casanovas, bullies, robbers, thieves, cheaters/fraudsters/perjurers/liars, Muslim terrorists, etc.

          • disqus_O2BUmbLecp

            Loving yr enemies or loving the unrepentant sinners/evildoers is like loving flies, mosquitoes, fleas, ticks, intestinal worms, harmful fungi, bacteria n virus.

      • gizmo23

        So you should be able to deny services to anyone that is not Christian, now I get it

        • Josey

          You of course misinterpret my comment and twist it, you are a liar. Christians running a bed and breakfast or have christian retreats for churches or families are being discriminated against because they will not condone an unholy union on their premises, there are many clubs and stores that limit who they serve and clubs as to who are let in. And the baker didn’t refuse to serve sodomites cupcakes or any other product, this homosexual couple had been served many times in this place of business, just specialty cakes with certain messages on them with support of that lifestyle and baker generally deliver specialty cakes and serve them, it is discrimination against Christians who do not want to deliver said cake or put messages on specialty cakes which goes against their conscience in obedience to God’s word and the same with the florist, she was discriminated against because she would be forced to deliver said flowers, setting them up at the unholy union which goes against her religious faith but she never denied homosexuals in making flower arrangements that they pick up on their own. If I go to a business that supports the sodomite agenda and ask for a specialty cake with a bible scripture on it they refuse, that is every bit as much discrimination based on your ideas and it has been proven so don’t deny that although I wouldn’t give them my business anyway, I will support those businesses who obey God. Sodomite agenda is going out and setting traps for Christian businesses, plain and simple, their goal is to force others to accept their way of life, they could get these services from other businesses but clearly that isn’t their goal, the sodomite agenda wants to brutally punish all who disagree with their sin. And muslims throw homosexuals off of buildings but no one is saying a word about that and go into one of their shops and let them know you are a sodomite couple who wants this or that and see what happens, you are a bunch of hypocrites and cowards who want to bully Christians. It is a sign of these last days, judgement is coming in the likes the world has never seen or known before and if you are on the wrong side you will be defeated by the Son of the Living God. Right now He offers salvation, grace and mercy through repentance and believing in Him. You have a choice.
          Joshua 24:15 “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”

          • gizmo23

            Blah blah blah

          • acontraryview

            Do you find it odd that these businesses did not turn away orders for a wedding cake if either of the couple had been previously divorced for reasons other than adultery? Or turn away orders for an engagement party cake for a couple having sexual relations? Or turn away orders for a baby shower cake if the mother-to-be was unwed? Or turn away orders for a wedding cake for a ceremony that was not taking place before the Christian god and thus would be a case of worshipping a god other than the Christian god?

            Wouldn’t all those be examples of supporting something that is contrary to biblical teachings?

      • Gott Mit Uns!

        Why on earth would a “church or Christian based organization” contract with state government?

  • Josey

    He didn’t add discriminating against Christians in his eo which is becoming the devil’s tool used by those who are into promoting perversion and greed. There was no eo needed, for sodomites got jobs before the governor issued an eo and there are many places that cater to sodomites so they are not doing w/out services but a Christian organization who stands on the Word of God and follows it is being discriminated against and losing jobs, having their livelihoods taken away because they obey God’s word on the matter in running their businesses, being told by many who have jumped on the bandwagon of perversion that they must allow sodomites to come stay at their bed and breakfasts even against their wishes or a florist must take flowers to a unholy union and regardless it is a forced participation to have to do so and goes against the conscience of the child of God or must bake a specialty cake which is delivered by said bakery to the unholy union once again forcing said baker to participate in that which goes against their conscience, etc. etc. You fools talk about tolerance for those engaged in these acts because it hurt their feelings and then you try and compare their hurt feelings to what blacks went through back in the day, you insult every black person alive for it was more than their feelings that were hurt but they were being killed, beat, etc. a huge contrast but you who claim Christians have no tolerance for the conscience or feelings of the one who only wants to keep his or her business and run it the way they in their hearts feel God our Creator has led them. When someone doesn’t want to do business with me, I move on and btw getting feelings hurt is just the way life goes at times and I don’t have a nervous breakdown over it, I don’t feel the need to harass said business, there are many business that sell high end items and clothing that would sneer at a lot of poor ppl if they happen to enter their store, it’s done everyday in N.Y. Paris, etc. I’d much rather give my business to someone who wants to do business with me but not sodomites NO, they must sue for their hurt feelings because someone doesn’t agree with them, they don’t care about the one whose conscience has been hurt because of their selfish desire to punish over their lil’ hurt feelings, what a crock, get over yourselves, you are not anymore important than anyone else living on this earth, you fill the courts with frivolous lawsuits and you hurt others, repent or you will pay a high cost when you appear before the King of Kings, Christ Jesus.

    • gizmo23

      Germany 1933 would seem to fit you well

    • The Skeptical Chymist

      Read the first sentence of the second paragraph again – it prohibits agencies under the governor’s jurisdiction from discriminating on the basis of religious creed. It seems that Christians are covered by this executive order.

  • DanH

    He looks gay himself. The eyes of a predator. I would not trust someone who looks like that to be a lone with a little boy.

    • Paige Turner

      The ability to determine someones sexuality and predisposition towards criminal activity by simply looking at a picture of them would indicate some kind of psychic ability (which would be deemed to be the work of the devil) or an outright fraud.

    • Jo Lux

      Dude, I’m sorry to say it so bluntly … but this is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read in a long time.

      • DanH

        If you don’t like my posts, don’t read them.
        Problem solved.

        • Jo Lux

          If you don’t want others to comment on your comments, don’t post.
          Problem solved.

    • Gott Mit Uns!

      If you want to see the eyes of a predator, take a look at the photo of the officer who was terminated for insubordination.

    • Oshtur

      I think that is a stretch, but he does not look trustworthy or sincere, which is typical of Dim politicians in general. Amazing that voters can be gullible enough to focus on just their cliches and not try to read their faces or body language.

    • Jo Lux

      Wow looks like the mod deleted my post … I guess I was too blunt. Okay, then let me rephrase …

      First, you suggested that this man is gay just by looking at his picture. If that is not unintelligent, I don’t know what is.

      Second, you suggested this man must be a predator, because he is gay. If that is not a slander, I don’t know what is. Slander is a sin, is it not?

  • Jolanda Tiellemans

    Why is that even a issue? I know that one of Belgiums former prime ministers is gay. Like I said in another thread, I’m really glad we don’t have these issues here in the Netherlands. So a small nation compared to your grant nation and we don’t have any problems here when it comes to LGBT rights, or in our neighboring nation Belgium.

    • 0pus37

      Isn’t that wonderful? You’re a shining light of compassion and clarity.

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        Yep, I am. You should try it sometimes and stop discriminating against people you don’t even know.

        • petej

          You go first, Christian-hating troll. Typical hypocrite.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Oh see, a example of a compassionate person right here. Why would I hate you, it’s a waste of time.

    • plains-rabbit

      All those wonderful Dutch collaborators with the Nazis. You have so much to be proud of, helping Germans round up people to exterminate.

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        Oh right, who said in another comment Christian hating troll. You are a real example of a person who hates others who don’t think like you do. Who said I am Dutch, living in a country doesn’t mean I am from there. Something you americans should be familiar with, cause you’re ancestors where all immigrants right? Oh and all those good americans who exterminated all those Native Americans something to be really proud of. See two can play that game.

        • petej

          Um, the Native Americans were not exterminated. There are 3 million of them today, plus 100 million more who have Native American ancestry. Your grasp of history is as bad as your inability to spell correctly.

          You have 2078 comments but only 1378 upvotes. Smashing success there.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Oh so you comment for the upvotes? And got nothing else to say so go for the spelling errors? Right! Why don’t you try to write something in Dutch and I can comment on your spelling errors, fair?