Deseret Morning News, Wednesday, March 10, 2004
Gay art exhibit raises ire at SLCC
Diversity Week show is moved away from entrance foyer
By Doug Smeath
Deseret Morning News
A visual art exhibit at Salt Lake Community College was moved Tuesday
after a group of photographs offended several
Wimps.
Jon
- Original Message -
From: Jim Cobabe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:46 AM
Subject: [ZION] Marriage resolution dropped
Deseret Morning News, Wednesday, March 10, 2004
Marriage resolution dropped
S. Jordan Council decides to skip
Marriage has shown itself to be a core ideal for society's strength and
longevity. Society (read: government) therefore has a keen interest in
ensuring marriage is done in a manner that promotes a strong and safe
society; normally built upon traditions that work.
Gary
Ron Scott wrote:
Congressman Ron Paul on the Gay Marriage issue (just remember where you saw
the limit the jurisdiction of federal courts idea first grin):
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/03-22-2004/marriage.htm
Gay Marriage Quicksand
by Congressman Ron Paul
Nationalizing marriage laws will only grant
Toward the laudable goal of establishing family traditions that
work, shall I presume that society and government will soon
insist on repealing what are essentially divorce on demand
statutes? I agree that the ideal model is family with a father
and a mother, but it certainly is not the only
Would SLCC allow a display of photos/art depicting homosexuals on their
knees attempting to repent of their sin? It would definitely promote
discussion, wouldn't it? I'm willing to do a pictorial expose of gays
burning in hell, repenting on their knees before Christ, etc; if SLCC is
willing
I'm all for it, IF we can get Congress to do it, and then not renege on
it 10 years down the road under a liberal president. But how does this
affect state courts who are legislating the same things from the bench?
States would still be forced to draft amendments to their Constitutions,
A key difference, though, is that homosexuality is a sexual issue;
whereas marriages between man and woman (or even polygamy) has
additional natural issues: such as children born into the relationship.
Extra mothers to raise the child is different than two women taking up
together to have sex.
General Conference is coming up in less than a month on April 3 and 4. I
hope that President Hinckley will give us some additional guidance on the
matter of same-sex marriages. Right now I am terribly discouraged. The
advocates of same-sex marriage seem to have a plan and are all pulling
Gerald Smith wrote:
I'm all for it, IF we can get Congress to do it, and then not renege on
it 10 years down the road under a liberal president. But how does this
affect state courts who are legislating the same things from the bench?
States would still be forced to draft amendments to their
A father watched his daughter playing in the garden.
He smiled as he reflected on how sweet and innocent
his little girl was. Suddenly she just stopped and
stared at the ground. He went over to her and noticed
she was looking at two spiders mating.
Daddy, what are those two spiders doing?
Gary:
I understand that opponents of gay marriage are turning the
battle for a proposed Constitutional Amendment into a referendum
on sexual practices. This is precisely why I think the initiative
will fail and probably fail convincingly. The problem is that
long ago statutes prohibiting various
On the issue of Polygamy, it is a moot point. The Lord revealed to a
prophet to obey the law of the land on this issue, and it is well
ingrained in the Church now. If the Lord sees fit to reinstate it, he
will prepare the way, or allow the saints a trial of their faith. But
even the saints
RB Scott wrote:
Then there are economic issues to be considered. For instance:
suppose two good friends, both widowed mothers of minor children
decided their chances for remarriage were nil. Yet, in the
interest of keeping their families out the poorhouse, to
eliminate the need to leave children
Jonathan:
I guess I'm confused as to what you intend to do with the pieces
you're writing? Do you imagine this as something you'd like to
get published? Are you writing a thesis of some kind? Are you
writing for your own purposes only?
For instance, you claim the rising divorce rate is the
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 3:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Gay marriage is wrong
RB Scott wrote:
Then there are economic issues to be considered. For instance:
suppose two good friends, both
Ron Scott wrote:
I understand that opponents of gay marriage are turning the
battle for a proposed Constitutional Amendment into a referendum
on sexual practices. This is precisely why I think the initiative
will fail and probably fail convincingly. The problem is that
long ago statutes
RB Scott wrote:
Freaky? How would it be freaky for two old friends, both single
parents, to decide to pool resources? Why would it be freaky for,
say, two siblings, both single parents, to pool their resources,
reduce/consolidate their overhead costs as it were? Such has been
going on for years,
RB Scott wrote:
Does society derive benefits from encouraging people to form more stable
and more economically robust family units? The government says yes. So
does the church.
In the Proclamation on the Family the Church defines the family as a man
and woman. I don't believe the Church has
Jonathan:
I guess I'm confused as to what you intend to do with the pieces
you're writing? Do you imagine this as something you'd like to
get published? Are you writing a thesis of some kind? Are you
writing for your own purposes only?
For instance, you claim the rising divorce rate is the result
Would SLCC allow a display of photos/art depicting homosexuals on their
knees attempting to repent of their sin? It would definitely promote
discussion, wouldn't it? I'm willing to do a pictorial expose of gays
burning in hell, repenting on their knees before Christ, etc; if SLCC is
willing to
Though the advocates of SSM (even the initials seem dirty) are, as you say,
working together (showing a masterful example of co-operation which
Protestant Christianity has rarely done) I think we can still hold to the
old adage that any one person, plus the Lord, is a majority.
However, I would
RB Scott wrote:
Then there are economic issues to be considered. For instance:
suppose two good friends, both widowed mothers of minor children
decided their chances for remarriage were nil. Yet, in the
interest of keeping their families out the poorhouse, to
eliminate the need to leave children
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Gay marriage is wrong
RB Scott wrote:
Freaky? How would it be freaky for two old friends, both single
parents, to decide to pool
-Original Message-
From: John W. Redelfs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Gay marriage is wrong
RB Scott wrote:
Does society derive benefits from encouraging people
to form more stable
and more economically
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Help Me Please - Ignore as Usual
Jonathan:
I guess I'm confused as to what you intend to do with
the pieces
you're writing? Do you
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Help Me Please - Ignore as Usual
Jonathan:
I guess I'm confused as to what you intend to do with
the pieces
you're writing? Do you imagine
I respect your opinion John, even though I disagree with it to
the extent that it would be practically impossible to come up
with a definition of traditional family that would pass muster.
For instance, I can no imagine that the church would exclude
single parent families (widowed and divorced)
They've landed at Berkeley, CA.
http://www.me.berkeley.edu/hel/bleex.htm
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
Clinton lied. A man might forget where he parks or where he lives,
but he never forgets oral sex, no matter how bad it is. - Barbara Bush
--
Jonathan Scott
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
//
///
-Original Message-
From: Sander J. Rabinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ZION]
Ron Scott wrote:
I understand that opponents of gay marriage are turning the
battle for a proposed Constitutional Amendment into a
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Gay marriage is wrong
I respect your opinion John, even though I disagree with it to
the extent that it would be practically impossible to
Redefining things is exactly what this problem does not need. We have
arrived at the present situation because a very few vocal malcontents
decided that definitions that successfuly accomodated the cultural
interests of the civil majority for the past ten centuries now suddenly
don't cater
RB Scott wrote:
Huh? It defines marriage as a institution between one man and one
woman.
The wording hasn't even been agreed upon yet. You are getting ahead of
yourself. --JWR
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it
RB Scott wrote:
You didn't describe your purpose. While your footnotes may
support what you claim -- as I recall you provide a bibliography,
not traditional footnotes -- it requires the reader to assume
you've interpreted the source material correctly and that the
source material supports what
One of John Kerry's principal campaign issues is taxes. He promises to
rescind the recent tax cuts implemented by the Bush administration.
In the news coverage, it absolutely amazes me to notice the crowds
cheering with enthusiasm when they hear a promise to raise their taxes.
It has always
John wrote:
You can all move to Alaska. We already have such an amendment in our
Constitution. --JWR
Harold replies:
Or, you can move to California. We have such an amendment too. :)
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER:
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ZION] Gay marriage is wrong
I respect your opinion John, even though I disagree with it to
the extent that it would be practically impossible to
John wrote:
You can all move to Alaska. We already have such an amendment in our
Constitution. --JWR
Harold replies:
Or, you can move to California. We have such an amendment too. :)
This is too funny... :)
--
Jonathan Scott
McGee Doug R Contr OO-ALC/ITMS wrote:
Well, it might be OK in California
or New York but we're not having any of that crap in Alabama.
===
Grampa Bill comments:
That same little girl has stomped those spiders flat in Texas,
Georgia, and Alabama that
Jonathan Scott wrote:
What is a golddigger called if it's a man? :)
Grampa Bill responds:
I believe the term is gigolo... but this is different. What is a man
called if his dad is trying to set him up with a beautiful, talented
girl with a great personality and
Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
Nitpick for discussion concerning your questions:
So is it you or she who would not consider marriage to, frex, someone
who held a TR but joined the Church too late to serve a mission as a
young man?
=
Grampa responds:
Didn't say it
Recent reporting in JAMA turns science into a politically correct blunt
instrument. Echoed in the news reports, it reads something like
Obesity is an epidemic, we're eating ourselves to death. Reportedly,
being too fat is now the number two cause of death in the US, trailing
only tobacco.
People who cannot recognize a palpable absurdity are very much in the
way of civilization. - Agnes Repplier
--
Jonathan Scott
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please
44 matches
Mail list logo
