E. Graham: Outraged by media efforts

Recently, a Portland television station did a piece on two lesbian women winning a free wedding. One of the lesbians said "now we are just like everyone else."

The bottom line for me in observing the presentation of that piece was the continued bias of the media (all kinds) to promote the credibility and acceptability of the homosexual lifestyle.

Tim Carney (Washington Times) was recently quoted as saying "the media create public opinion." The liberal media is promoting homosexual marriage and is entirely responsible for the growth of support for this unholy way of life.

At the same time, the media show hostility to the great commands of the Judeo-Christian faith.

It is sad that during this time of holy Thursday, Good Friday and the ultimate Resurrection Day of my Lord Christ Jesus, a panel of nine judges are considering that God is wrong and the homosexual culture and its advocates (including the president) have wisdom greater than our great God and king.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (former ACLU member) has stated "Roe v. Wade went too far," and many of those who support holy marriage say that it would be going too far to make a national ruling for gay marriage.

I agree.

I believe that people of this nation should be outraged at the efforts of the media to force this unholy initiative upon us.

Elaine Graham, Farmington

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



Jason Theriault's picture

Elaine, how dare you!!!

Elaine, how dare you try and tell me what's right and wrong. That isn't your place.

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

(1 Timothy 2:12-15)

Jason Theriault's picture

Well, too bad.

You know, at some point, you just have to say "It's not worth it".

Because I do not think that logic will sway Ms Graham.

Jeff Johnson's picture

Dear Elaine, Thank you for

Dear Elaine,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your letter to the editor, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She's 14 and texts a lot!

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.


Mike Lachance's picture

Cut n Pasting from the 'net... only for the weak.

Isn't it easy to copy and paste material copied directly from the internet and pretending it was your own oh-so-intelligent content? Weak. And Jeff, you might try reading the old and new testament and connecting the dots. The New Covenant laws take care of many Old Covenant laws. The ones that are not addressed do not generally deal with sacrifices at altars now with atonements. Those covenants were deemed null with Christ. The laws of right and wrong, however are and will always be clear. So many of your weak cut'n'pasted citations are ridiculously positioned and without any semblance of context or biblical perpetuity.

Elaine is 100% on the money, and it riles those who pick and choose Old Testament snippets to weakly attempt to debunk anything they see as personally uncomfortable or socially unfashionable.

It's time to stop, Jeff; sit down, close your eyes and listen to those deep seeded hunches that have likely been nagging at you for years. Shhhhh. Don't scream out in protest to yourself, just listen and process your uncomfortable hunch at your own pace.

Jeff Johnson's picture

It most certainly is easy to

It most certainly is easy to cut and paste... especially when the message is so fitting. You'll notice, I never claimed it as my own. My bad for not citing the original author; I doubt I could have found any reference to them.

Speaking of citing and references, there's a serious lack of references in your email. You state, "The New Covenant laws take care of many Old Covenant laws." Why are there no references or proofs?

Secondly, I'm not big into the hypocracy of organized religion, but the Jew in me tends not to follow the New Testament too much... Jesus was a great man and teacher... but I'm a little skeptical on the messiah idea. What does the New Testament have to say about homosexuality? How about the Book of Mormon? Cite me a couple verses that I can look up and make my own decision. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so... does it? "

"The great thing about the internet is that everything on it is true!" -Abraham Lincoln

Deep seeded hunches? Um... wha? Since I have no idea what you're getting at, I'm going to assume that there's some sort of projection going on? Are you trying to allude that I'm homosexual? Athiest? Prefer vanilla ice cream over chocolate?

I agree with Elaine in one aspect: the media overplays the homosexual demographic. Studies put the population as low as 3% and as high as 11% homosexual. I believe it's somewhere in the middle... around 6%. Television would have us believe that 50% of the population is gay.

Lastly: "weakly attempt to debunk anything they see as personally uncomfortable or socially unfashionable."
What do I see as personally uncomfortable or socially unfashionable? Homosexuality or your religious beliefs? While I don't completely understand homosexuality, I absolutely accept it. I don't believe in your religion, but that doesn't mean I won't defend your absolute right to practice it. I do, however, laugh at your total belief in right and wrong.

Mike Lachance's picture

All the reference you need is

All the reference you need is in the OT&NT. In choosing to not research or cross-reference your thoughtless parroting of internet talking points, your arguments are empty. Those hunches are what you are not listening to. Reflection seems to have hit solid ground, (having little or nothing to do with being or not being homosexual). You are free to laugh at "my" (or Elaine's) "religion" but you present a zero-sum argument. You've said it all; you cannot accept politically incorrect notions such as "right" and "wrong".

Jeff, the premise of your revealing post is based on the disqualification of Christianity. So simple. So easy. So Human.

Jeff Johnson's picture

"Jeff, the premise of your

"Jeff, the premise of your revealing post is based on the disqualification of Christianity. So simple. So easy. So Human."

1. Yes... I'm human. Am I to asume you're divine?
2. Am I also to assume that because I'm not christian you consider my opinions, or the very right to have them, wrong?
3. Christian sects don't even interpret their bible the same way... Catholics disagree with Protestants... Evangelicals disagree with Pentacostals... I suppose that your religion is the only "right" one? I guess the Jews, Muslims, Bhuddists, and Hindus which outnumber you 2:1 are all wrong too, huh?

Do you like apples?

Once again, you cite no references, other than stating my arguments are empty.

Old Testament:
Exodus 21-7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do."

New Testament:
Ephesians 6: 5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart."
Colossians 3:22 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything,"
1 Timothy 6:1 "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor,"

Yeah, seems to me that the new testament is OK with slavery... Just how was that covenant fixed? I believe this covers Leviticus 25: 44 also.

Old Testament:
Leviticus 19:27 "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard"

New Testament:
1 Corinthians 11: 5 " but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven."

Once again... the new testament puts cutting hair in a dim light.

Old Testament:
Leviticus 15: 19 "And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean."

New Testament:
... nothing.

I could keep on going... but I'm really interested in how you're going to justify those covenants.

Speaking of apples:

There are several little quoted passages in the Bible that acknowledge sexual contact and love between men. For example, Abraham asks his servant to swear an oath by putting "your hand under my thigh" (Gen 24:2). David, speaking of Jonathan, wrote: "...greatly beloved were you to me, your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women" (2 Sam 1:26). Indeed, Jonathan and David seem to fall in love at first sight: "...when David had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was bound to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (1 Sam 18:1). And later, "Saul's son Jonathan took great delight in David" ( 1 Sam 19:1).

Lastly, I'd like to point out the fact that only four verses explicitly address the issue of homosexuality. To me that implies that this subject was of relatively little importance to the authors of the bible. In contrast, there are 17 verses on how to make a grain offering. The Hebrew Bible also condemns eating fat (Lev 3:17), and cursing one's parents (Lev 20:9, Deut 21:18-21).

How about them apples?

Mike Lachance's picture

Recipe for Applesauce

First start with these OT & NT Ingredients
Genesis 13:10-13
Genesis 18-19
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Deuteronomy 29:23; 32:32
Judges 19:16ff.
Isaiah 1:9; 3:9; 13:19
Jeremiah 23:14; 49:18; 50:40
Lamentations 4:6
Ezekiel 16:46-56
Amos 4:11
Zephaniah 2:9
Matthew 10:15; 11:23-24
Matthew 19
Luke 10:12; 17:28, 32
Romans 1:18-32; 9:29
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
1 Corinthians 7:2-5
Galatians 5:19-21
Ephesians 5:3-5
1 Timothy 1:9-11
2 Peter 2:6-9
Jude 7
Revelation 11:8

Also, keep these things close to heart Jeff, stay true in your search and the truth will find you....
Your jumping on the internet bandwagon parroting the notion that David and Jonathan were gay lovers is at best hopeful (for your arguments sake) and undoubtedly misguided. Study this book Jeff. Judas kissed Jesus, did that make them gay lovers? Jesus loves us all more than any man loves any woman, does that make Jesus gay? I would give my life for my brother without hesitation, and I love him more than any words can describe. I have dated (and lived with) women who I did not love as much as my brother or other very close and dear male friends. Do you not get this? Study the book of 1 Sam and 2 Sam outside the gay apologetics community. You'll be comforted.

Your quoting of Abraham in Genesis 24 is heinous. The full context is:
[in the quest to find a wife for his son Isaac, Abraham employed one of his servants for the task]
"1Now Abraham was old, advanced in age; and the LORD had blessed Abraham in every way.2Abraham said to his servant, the oldest of his household, who had charge of all that he owned, “Please place your hand under my thigh,3and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live,4but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son Isaac.”
The consensus is pretty clear on this one Jeff, the farthest thing from sexual as one could imagine!

As far as your Levitical law citations, well, they speak for themselves. Comparing the African Slave Trade of the 17th and 18th century to the slavery system of biblical times is also a stretch. It is a simple study to research the system of slavery present 2000-4000 years ago. It's easy for us (and correct) to assert that ANY "slavery" as we know it today cannot possibly be good, to understand the history goes a long way to understanding God's laws in those regards. [Ex 21:16, Gal 3:28, Eph 6:8, Col 3:11, Lev 25:39-43, Ex 21:2, Prov 29:21, 1-Cor 7:21-23, Rom 13:1-8, Col 3:22-25]

Slavery in ancient times involved

Mike Lachance's picture

Jeff, I'm glad you're reading

Jeff, I'm glad you're reading the Bible!
I suggest you keep studying, as the answers to your worrisome questions will come!

You're off to a good start!
Carry on!

Noel Foss's picture

Separation of church and state

As simply as that, every argument the church has been making against the government allowing same-sex marriage is invalid and should be discarded.
Fortunately, we've kept the "Wisdom" of "our great God and king" out of other legislative issues in the past. Otherwise:
We'd be forcing rapists and their victims to marry (Deuteronomy)
We'd be killing the children of criminals (Isaiah) and
We'd be killing children who cursed their parents (Leviticus) (none of us would have made it past puberty!)
And, my personal favorite, we'd have outlawed BACON! (the eating of fat is prohibited forever-Leviticus)
Frankly, if we looked to scripture for every policy, we'd be a very backwards nation indeed. One need only look to other countries who do so for an example of why it's best that we don't.

Jeff Johnson's picture


I'd be able to sell my daughter into slavery...(Leviticus)
I'd have to smite my neighbors for working on the Sabbath, Stone my wife for wearing clothing of two different fabrics, destroy my neighbor's crops because he's growing lettuce and tomatoes in the same field... etc.

Here's my favorite thought though: "The Homosexual Lifestyle!!!" *...add dramatic music here...*

What the author of the article pictures:

6:00 AM: Wake up, have wildly violent S&M Style Sex.
6:03 AM: Worship Satan.
6:30 AM: Over Breakfast, Plan how to recruit children into homosexual cult for pedophelic exploitation.
8:00 AM: Slink into public job, pretending to be a "Normal Person" but trembling under the pressure.
5:00 PM: Go home to start drinking vodka and pig's blood cocktail.
7:00 PM: Go to the public bath house for swinging homosexual sex with multiple partners.
3:00 AM: Look for puppies and children to rape on the way home.

Actual Homosexual lifestyle:
5:00 AM: Hit snooze 7 times.
6:00 AM: Start coffee pot, jump in the shower
6:15 AM: Wake up the kids, let the dog out, iron clothes
6:30 AM: Wake up the kids again, start second cup of coffee
6:45 AM: Wake up the kids again, feed the dog, feed the kids, finished getting dressed
7:00 AM: Separate the fighting kids, put together kids school bags, pick up dishes and clothes.

Sounds an awful lot like your, lifestyle... no?

David  Cote's picture

C'mon Elaine...

Everyone living under the sun is, or should be protected under the basic element of equal rights. That covers everything from the color of one's skin to sexual orientation. It makes me cringe when people debate whether we should or should not "allow" gay marriage to be legal. It's pompous and condescending for anyone to believe they have a say on the matter, and that includes the government. A gay couple's choice to marry should always have been a foregone conclusion, in other words, their OWN CHOICE. And outside of sexual orientation, they are just like anyone else. They share the same ups and downs as a heterosexual couple. There's enough hate and disgust in this world. Don't add to it by making what should be a non-issue an issue.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

The law, as written, does

The law, as written, does treat all individuals equally. Remember, the key phrase here – equally under the law.

That says, marriage is between one man and one woman; now if this is not applied equally to purple men, then you have a case. However, it does not, any man of any color sexual orientation and whatnot can marry.

Remember, all laws discriminate in some form or another, such as in you cannot marry your sister. As long as the law is applied equally to everyone, it does not infringe on the 14 amendment.

 's picture

As soon as the government stepped in

and began requiring licenses to get married, mariiage stopped being a "holy union". It became a civil contract, whether it was conducted in a church or in a courthouse of the local VFW hall.
If you want it to be a Holy union, get married in a church where your great imaginary friend can bless it, nobody is saying that churches have to conduct weddings for gay couples. If it happens anywhere else then it is just as valid a marriage as those performed in churches. Oh by the way, there are actually some people of the cloth who aren't as close minded as you and are willing to perform ceremonies for same-sex couples.
Get with the times lady, yours is a dying breed. All you do by sending in letters like this is prove how desperate you are to prove a point to an audience that has already stopped listening...

RONALD RIML's picture

You complain that Judges are considering God is Wrong...

Then you Pizz and Moan that God wrongly created some People with an attraction for the same Sex.

How the hell do you want it, Elaine? You logically can't have it both ways - (unless you're bi-sexual, perhaps)

MARK GRAVEL's picture

I thought you were on

I thought you were on vacation?

RONALD RIML's picture

And here's a good thought concerning 'Gun Control'

"The existence of a right to interpose will generally prevent the necessity of exerting it."

James Madison, Federalist # 43

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Not all founders got it

Not all founders got it right. “From my cold dead hands” has more of a ring to it.

RONALD RIML's picture

Everyone I took guns from preferred surrendering them to death..

Let us know how that 'Ring' works out for you.

RONALD RIML's picture


I just haven't been pulling your string.

 's picture

Not the first time,

but this is one of the rare occasions that we agree on something.



Take a deep breath, count to 20 (10 isn't enough) and say to yourself, "I have the right to be wrong just as others do, I do not have to prevail." That would be a lot closer to the philosophy of Jesus than what the professionally righteous spout to get you to give them money.

Ginsburg said she wished Roe v. Wade had not come before the court because she was convinced that choice was going to be enacted by legislative action. It was not that she realized choice is wrong. She still feels that the choice belongs to the woman, not some dried up batch of spineless Senators.

And the media really isn't biased - that's just one of those conservative myths started by Ronnie Reagan's handlers to explain news about something they disagree with. Look at this paper - they have more right wing pundits than Fox - they even published a column by that monger of hate Michele Malkin.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

“they even published a column

“they even published a column by that monger of hate Michele Malkin.”

Talk about wearing your bias on your sleeve. Would you have rather suppress opposing opinions?
Boy, what color is your pot?

The simple act of deciding what is news and what is not news is subject to ideology. That is part of the human condition. It cannot be separated from the individual.

Donald Irish's picture




Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...