Oh my. What will the status quo do when someone has been discriminated against because of their religion as a Christian instead of because of their religion against Christians? Chances are nothing if Mr. Obama is president. That will change next year though.

Clay before we make her out to be a victim of discrimination there is a question of proof. There really isn't enough information in this article to prove her claims. I have to admit I'm a bit skeptical of her claims. That being said I’ll reserve any comment until more actual facts come out on this.

The one judge sure raised enough noise about what she said during the pageant. I dont like the idea of someone suing for money though. The bible says to keep matters out of court. I think her reputation is also part of it, and she seems to be responsible for some of her own shortcomings. My point is that people in general care more about the complaints of non Christians than complaints from Christians. Christians are looked upon as being crybabys while people bend over backwards to ensure that someone from another religion can wear their outfit or whatever. Thanks.

I thought she was pretty enough until she spoke into the mic, in answer to the question. If anything, she should sue herself for the crime of being stupid. She became very ugly with the utterance of just a few ignorant and prejudicial words and only has herself and her archaic beliefs to blame.

Well Robert you've done it again. That post was far more ignorant and prejudicial than anything she said. I guess in your world we should silence everyone who's opinions and beliefs differ from yours.

This is terrible how they are persecuting this young woman. She goes to my church and I know her personally. She is very kind and warm hearted. She did nothing to hurt anyone. All she did was answer a question that should have never been asked at a beauty pageant. She answered honestly and from her heart.
She is a friend of mine, who is GAY. It's so funny that none of her GAY friends (and there are many)had the courage to come forward and admit that she is not a hateful person. How sad that GAY people are afraid to speak their mind in PUBLIC...like she did.
I know for a fact that her hair and makeup people are GAY and are personal friends of hers.
They hide behind the curtain and in the closet. Too afraid that they too will be persecuted if they DARE admit or tell anyone that they actually like this girl.
I hope she sues the pants off all the Hollyweirds.

So John, if you think she is homosexual, why did she say that homosexuals shouldnt marry one another? Do you agree with her?

ravensfan - I believed she blew her own credibility all on her own. Sounds like an internal problem to me, that she handled badly. The wise person can always play the fool, but she is proof positive that that doesn't go the other way. In my world, people are far too intelligent to say things that are stupid, or unsupportable by fact.

"In my world, people are far too intelligent to say things that are stupid, or unsupportable by fact."

I guess you're forgetting your little analysis of when life begins you made on another blog, or have you uncovered facts since that post? You want to restate that vision of your world Robert. Let me do if for you. In your world people are too rude, arrogant, close minded, and ignorant to accept that there are views other than their own and that their own positions aren’t always supported by facts.

What has credibility have to do with your original rude, intolerant post?

I'm open to interpretation on when a fetus is considered a person, that that position is far more liberal than your "let's err on the side of life" crap that would impose breeding requirements on people who don't share your "problem" of when that point occurs, is not my problem, unless you force it. What is arrogant and rude, would be the enforcement of your imperatives on the unwilling already born Human beings you would force to breed against their will.

impose breeding requirements" Robert there are ways to prevent breeding, as you put it, that don't require abortion. You know it as well as I do. Face it most abortions occur because no precautions were taken. Pregnancy is a possible outcome of sex. Everyone knows it and there are plenty of contraceptives as well as surgical procedures to prevent it if so desired so spare me the forced breeding nonsense. It’s a pathetic attempt to try and support your weak position since you can’t use the religion card. When you reply, and you will, leave out rape and life of the mother because I’ve already conceded those to you.

I don't care if a woman uses abortion as their primary birth control, although I think it would be wiser and less costly to use other means. No form of birth control (short of sterilization) is 100% effective and because I don't believe that sex is something to reserve for procreation "or pay the piper", I don't have the hangups you seem to have that require a payment so drastic as bringing an unwanted and unloved child to term just for the crime of having sex. Our prisons are already full of those suffering the psychological results of growing up dysfunctionally and I see no valid reason to encourage more before they reach the status of person-hood.

It's really sad that you consider valuing human life a hang up Robert. That really doesn’t say much for you. What's even sadder is your pathetic attempt to justify your narrow minded view. You vacillate between the idiotic forced breeding arguments to the more eloquent one sparing an unloved child from being brought into the world. Your beliefs on paying the piper for sex are irrelevant getting pregnant is a possible result. The issue is and has always been at what point after conception is a human life created. Even someone as bigoted as you wouldn’t condone the taking of a life would you? Then again after reading your posts maybe you would.

Ravensfan, you need to stop letting the devil pull you down into his pit. God bless.

ravensfan - My suggestion to you, if you insist on thinking we will let you force the narrow parochial view on the totality of society, is that you find a short pier and then take a long walk. There can be no compromise on defending the freedom of the women you would oppress.

Clay - Shove it, you obsequies fanatic troll. Your mindlessness is beyond belief.

Clay while from a spiritual respect I believe abortion to be morally wrong. Robert is quite right that one person or religion's views should not be forced on everyone. That's why my argument with him has ignored my faith’s views on the subject. I’m beginning to seriously wonder if Anonymous was correct as to Poe’s Law applying to you.

All I know is, no matter who either one of you are, we shouldnt waste time arguing when more important things can be accomplished. God bless.

Clay how exactly does one accomplish something without arguing. Since everyone doesn't see things the same way arguements and diputes are bound to happen. It even happened among the early Christians. Don't you remember the arguement Peter settled over gentile conversion? In fact many of Paul's letters indicate that there was disagreement among the various churches. The issue isn't arguing, it's settling those arguements in a civil was that is important.

I think the only fair way to settle arguments about religion , is to have this god creature produced and its exact nature determined by questioning it. In all fairness, it would, because it loves us so much, be more than willing to end all the hate being done in its name and explain why so many millions have had to die over the centuries by men seeking the truth about it, or in trying to impose their version on others. Of course that presupposes that such a creature exists in the first place, which has never been proven by anyone.

And the more important thing that can be accomplished Clay is for you to learn to spell--crybabys--actual spelling cry babies--Ravensfan you have to understand, for Clay, all things have already been settled--the Bible, as he understands it, is the ultimate authority on everything--or so he declares--I wonder what version he reads--King James? Again I invoke Poe's law--the man is a complete phony. Here and there his facade slips and you can see the chink in his religious armor. And Robert, the reason the religious get away with so much nonsense is because the absence of this God creature cannot be proven--neither can the presence be "disproven"--your argument that all the hate in the world disproves the presence of a loving God will be breezily explained away by the presence of the Devil--which too cannot be proven. The religious will run you in circles--by the way Ravensfan, do you believe in an afterlife--that only the Christians will be saved and the rest will be thrown in hell? And Robert what say you, happens after death--"I don't give a damn?"--an eternal abyss of nothingness?--inhabitation of several parallel universes or multiverses in quantum subatomic forms by dead folks?

As for when life begins Ravensfan, even you must agree that in utero the baby cannot subsist separate from the mother--mothers do terrible things all the time to their babies in utero--modern science shows that even eating too much red meat during pregnancy will set the stage for future obesity and cancers in the unborn--but we don't isolate women and force feed them the right diets to save the unborn--even you would think that is ridiculous--many women smoke, drink, take all sorts of harmful meds, are promiscuous, use hard drugs during pregnancies and are beaten or abused by their husbands--which is terrible for the unborn--often these husbands are religious--preachers some of them--ministers thundering from the pulpit that people like Robert will be damned--notice how the guy in California-- Phillip Garrido--a sociopath-- who abducted Jaycee Dugard--was caught by an astute Berkeley campus police officer and what was Garrido doing in Berkeley? He was distributing Christian religious pamphlets and tracts. None of these things you anti-abortion advocates can address or stamp out--but abortion seems to stir up your juices the most--I call that totally brainless. All you religious sorts, steeped in superstition and irrationality, would have to run out and save the unborn from so many different abuses if you are to be truthful to your tenet that you should be the voices for the weakest of the weak--the fetuses of this world. I don't see any of you arm chair addicts to uterus wars being advocates for fetuses where it really matters medically--good nutrition for the unborn, protection of pregnant women from abuse, drug rehabs for addicted moms, smoking cessation classes instead of Bible classes-- for Pete's sake stop arguing when life begins--what's important is when the baby is absolutely independent from the mother for its nutrition and sustenance--when the umbilical cord is cut--until such a time it is up to the woman who is carrying the child, her family, her husband or her partner to make the decision about HER pregnancy--not yours or CLAY'S Ravensfan--HER pregnancy. If you want to make her pregnancy yours, get out there-- wipe her tears when her husband beats her, bring her to a shelter, stop her from smoking if she does, pay for her drug rehab if she is addicted to cocaine and pregnant--pay for her nutrition classes if she's eating only fast foods or if that's all she can afford pay for her good nutrition--if you can't or you WON'T do any of that--let her go to the nearest abortion clinic to do what she thinks is the right thing for her baby and herself-- Society fails pregnant women in multitudinous ways and it should butt out of the bedrooms of couples and the wombs of women. Religious platitudes that won't save a single child from life long distress after it is born need to be burned to cinders in bonfires across the land.

Anonymous - the burden of proof is always on the person making the positive assertion that something "is". There is no way to prove a negative and their call to prove that god does not exist is not possible in logic. I could state emphatically, that the third moon circling the forth planet in the Alpha Proxima star system is covered with a three foot layer of French brie, and challenge you to prove it isn't. You could not, and my request would be as dishonest as their claiming I should have to prove a god does not exist.

Anonymous I agree with you that Clay is a fraud. As for the whole when life begins issue I'm not interested in keeping that argument going. I think we all agree we don't know when life does begin and we will disagree on its significance as it relates to abortion. Since I don't see an argument from you or Robert that would change my position, and I won’t be able to make one that would change yours or Robert’s I'm not going to keep that argument going. The best thing is to focus on things we can agree on to decrease the chances of abortion being needed in the first place. All keeping the argument going will accomplish is to encourage Clay to spout more fake pious posts. I don’t think any of us really want that.

Robert Your arguement is flawed. Failure to prove something exists doesn't mean it doesn't. if I used your arguement anyone who believed the world was round wasn't right until it could be proven.

ravensfan - That is not what I said at all. They cannot prove what they say exists actually exists. If they assert that it does, the burden of proof is on their head and it is dishonest, as well as logically impossible, for them to call for those who don't hold an unprovable positive assertion to be true to prove the negative assertion that something doesn't exist, as no claim has been made for a positive assertion. It is a condition of logic, as impossible as proving ghosts do not exist. In logic, my argument is most sound.

Robert - if you are going to exert something doesn't exist that same burden fall on you as well.

Argument from ignorance ("appeal to ignorance"): The fallacy of assuming that something is true/false because it has not been proven false/true. For example: "The student has failed to prove that he didn't cheat on the test, therefore he must have cheated on the test."

All you can say with any certainty is God may not exist. You could also say it hasn't been proven. You can not say He doesn't exist unless you have proof and you don't. if you are going assert he doesn’t then you have to provide some evidence.

I assert that, because there is not now, nor has there ever been the slightest bit of proof that a god (or gods) exists, or has ever existed, that there is little point in wasting energy believing that it (or they) exist, or have ever existed. I hold out the possibility that such an entity might exist, but that it is such a long-shot that to put any credence in that proposition would be absurd. Having said that, I defy anyone to argue that I should have to prove that a god (or gods) do not exist, which in logic, is an impossibility anyway, just like the examples I gave above.

Produce proof (and I do mean proof) that a god (or gods) exist, and I will kiss its butt on main street at high noon. Until such a time comes to pass, I'll still consider god concepts to be rubbish, just like the possibility of the three foot layer of French brie covering the moon in a previously mentioned post.

Robert since belief is an issue of faith it will never be able to be proven. If it could be proven then everyone would bow down and worship not from choice, but out of fear. You either believe or you don't. You have every right to your belief he doesn't exist. In fact, I support your right to belief what you want. I only challenged any statement that says he definitely doesn't exist because it would require the same level of proof that you demand for his existence. Unfortunately for you when you see the proof it will be too late. That is truly unfortunate, but it's your choice.

ravensfan - To believe requires the least amount of thought, it just means abrogating the evolution of the process of Human thought and understanding, to an excuse for ignorance (the definition of Faith). To not believe means overcoming institutions of fear and power that have twisted Humanity to serve their needs for centuries. It means facing the fear of death without a made-up escape clause and all the other trappings that incorrectly answer questions we haven't earned the right to have answered .......yet. It is a fraud that by its very nature exposes the fraud as it was made by man when man thought the world was flat and that disease was caused by demons. I'll stick with the demonstrable, you can stick with the superstitious lies.

Robert actually it requires quite a bit of thought to believe. You seem to have the inaccurate assumption that those who choose to believe are some sort of mindless sheep. That's understandable it makes it easier for you to dismiss that way. It's far easier to do what you do and simply deny and say show me the proof.