"Who raided Social Security?"
Clinton. His idea. His push.
http://www.freedomworks.org/publications/clinton%E2%80%99s-3-trillion-ra...

This report from 1999 (prior to Clinton's budget taking effect) outlines exactly what the Pres. was doing with his numbers:
http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1999/bd030499.htm

As far as deficits...
http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/6D3B934F4DD3A1C4A80479981CD0...

"The best way to reduce the long-term debt burden is to combine spending restraint with a pro-growth tax policy that keeps America's debt levels affordable. Unlike the tax increase option, spending restraint promotes economic growth, retains a low tax burden, and therefore reduces the debt burden. With corporate welfare, pork-barrel projects, obsolete programs, and waste totaling hundreds of billions of dollars annually, lawmakers have little excuse for not streamlining spending."
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/09/ten-myths-about-budget-...

As far as your simple math... of course that fine on paper... but when spending is 10 times revenue (tax policy), a 1-ford increase in revenue (tax increase) will not put a dent in the deficit if spending stays the same or increases (the Dem playbook M.O.) Additionally, raising taxes can and often does have negative implications to consumer spending which in-turn lowers revenue. The problem with raising taxes, is that the politicians who support it are the same ones who look at the increased revenue (short term) as a means to increase spending. (The Dem idea of "cutting spending" is to not increase spending next year)

Clinton may have raised taxes, but Republicans balanced the budget.
http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Those are the facts and they dont lie.
Under Clinton's 39% top tier rate, the deficit went both up and down, just as Bush's 35% rate saw deficits go up and down... (down under Bush and the Repubs, up under Obama and the Dems)

Who was on-watch when the deficits boomed?
Republicans?
nope.

Note that the top marginal tax rates have been the same (35%) since 2003, yet the deficits dropped under REPS and exploded under DEMS.
...whats more, Bush was actually reducing the defict until the DEMS took over in 2006/7.

Likewise, the rates were the same (39%) from 1993 through 2001 and the deficit dropped under REP control and rose under DEM control.

This is your wake up call Zack.
(and my apologies for the double post, below)

Zack, I'll try to go slow.... your conclusion only works in a worls filled with responsible politicians. Unfortunately, we are not in such a world. Newsflash: tax policy does NOT dictate how much money the govt can budget. We could eliminate taxes for a year and the Govt most likely would attempt (and probably succeed if Dems were at the wheel) to spend more than they did the previous year.

In our reality-stricken world, the only way to reduce deficits is to reduce spending and encourage economic activity (lowering taxes). Increasing taxes has always had the net effect of slowing economic activity and discouraging consumer spending, which reduces tax revenues. Regardless, tax revenues no longer appear to dictate the budgeting and spending of the Fed Govt. To Dems it doesnt matter what the deficit is, they always want to spend more.

Go ahead and bash Bush all you want, I have no problem with that, but under Obama the deficit has balooned catastrophically, which makes GW's deficits look like a grain of sand.

The economic policies you are decrying are not those of Bush and the "neocons", but of pelosi, reid, frank, and obama, the dems who controlled the purse strings from 2006 through 2010 (thats 4 years prior to Obama if the math is too complex)

the evil republicans were warning the saintly dems way back in 2001, (and 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007) that the housing bubble was not sustinable ad fannie/freddie was a train wreck in the making. (Barney Frank, of course, insisted all was well)

Bush had it wrong.

You've stated one fact in amongst all your drivel:
"it all depends in how you define what is the best" I'd say we agree on that one point. But our definitions would be very different.

You seem to want the "others" to pay... "Let them pay for their own stuff. "
hmmm.... isnt that familiar....?

Trouble is... no one else can afford the costs involved on a market scale outside the US.
Canada? yeah, sure. thats it.

Great, now that LePage is showing real results, as promised, perhaps we should give the $$ over to the Dems to squander on iPads for fetuses and cell phones for inmates. (that way they could wave their proverbial fingers at the Gov when the money is gone)

(a) Cut taxes for businesses, they can pay folks more.
(b) Cut taxes for citizens, they can buy more.
(c) Citizens buy more from businesses, businesses can make more.
(d) Businesses making more requires more citizens to be hired.
(e) More citizens hired means more tax revenue for state.
(f) More tax revenue for state means state can cut taxes for businesses and citizens.
(g) see (a)

Just where is the "TRIM" when the budget is quite deliberately and clearly increased; taxes are increasing, just (1) position is being cut while (4) are created and overpaid (with economic flatulence)?

Moreover, Councilor Shea has already publicly pledged he will be looking to INCREASE spending for the School Dept as top priority. Yes, he is ready to throw more taxpayer money at the children so they learn better.

Who's looking to trim???
SJ misses the reality factor once again.

Seriously Dan, you missed that target by a mile.
Perhaps you should stop using boomerangs.

This according to the Bible (Old Testament)

from Latin: peccatum Sodomiticum, or "sin of Sodom."
Genesis 18-20

You can check all this out on your own:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

FACTS:
This nation is governed by the people, for the people and of the people. Not by the lawyers, of the courts and for the politicians.

Therefore if the people continually vote DOWN gay marriage, and the politicians keep pandering to their special interest group by passing laws that the people repeatedly vote down, there is a problem.

Just because you feel being gay is "normal" is irrelevant. If society says it is NOT, then you cannot legislate otherwise. Especially if the PEOPLE keep telling you otherwise.

OP ED:
As far as harm to others and society, I could argue ad nauseum that your ad hominem attacks are wholly unrealistic. Society suffers when it embraces lifestyles that are unnatural, immoral and perverted. Yes, that includes many heterosexual pastimes also.

You've got your opinions, I've got mine. This is America.

I don't "hate" anyone, but when someone throws their disgusting lifestyle in my face and demands I accept it I'm not going to have anything nice to say about said person/people.

Ah yes, anyone opposed gay marriage is a bigot?
Logic? Using logic results in the answer that gay marriage is wrong. It's when you throw logic out the window that it suddenly becomes viable.

"Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes!"

If those opposed to same sex marriage were to apply the same tactics used by those supporting it, the cry would be "rapists and child molestors!rapists and child molestors!rapists and child molestors!"

Tina, we just got rid of a stink... and it wouldnt surprise me if the dmes raised a new one.

And whats this about the "appearance" of a lack of ethics?

I'd say McCormick has more than an "appearance" herself... she needed to go. For all the reasons stated in this article from both sides.

As opposed to all those startling expose's the SJ published digging into Baldacci's and Mitchell's spurious universe of nepotism throughout Maine over the last 15 years.

Woops, sorry wrong paper.

in 2004, Gov. Baldacci appointed Paul, his second cousin, to the board of the University of Maine system.

Additionally, Ocean Properties partners include George Mitchell and second cousin Bob Baldacci, Gov. John Baldacci's brother.

"When Portland invited proposals to develop hotels or other commercial structures on the Maine State Pier, Ocean Properties submitted a proposal that many observers felt was inferior to that of its competitor. Apparently Ocean Properties shared this assessment, as city authorities allowed them to completely redesign and resubmit their proposal before giving them the nod. City Councilor Kevin Donoghue called it the process a farce, Olympia officials cried foul, and reasonable observers were left wondering if political influence might be weighing the scales. "

http://www.workingwaterfront.com/columns/Maines-Ruling-Family/11794/

Apparently deep seeded and widespread institutional nepotism from the left is acceptable but LePage's isn't?

'THE DEBUNKING OF SHANE'

QUOTE: "you have no idea what humanism or for that matter, Marxism, neo-communism, or socialism are"
Really? No idea huh? Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel relevant.

QUOTE: "What are these failed humanist states you speak of?"
Western Civilization, on the large scale, Shane. For starters, I recommend you read John Carrol's book 'The Wreck of Western Culture'.

Nothing baseless. If you disagree you will have to explain why?

QUOTE: "Humanism is a pretty recently formed movement.."
600 BC pre-Socratic Greece- Thales of Miletus & Xenophanes of Colophon espoused an explanation of the world in terms of human

reason rather than myth and tradition. They led the first humanist movement, although "Humanist" wasnt the monicker used to describe

their creed. Anaxagoras, Pericles, Thucydides, Democritus, Epicurus, among others, all espoused ideologies that are embraced

enthusiastically by today's "Humanists"

From 'The Book of History', by the Duke of Zhou (1046-256 BC)
- What the people desire, Heaven certainly comply.
- Heaven (God) is not believable. Our Tao (doctrine) is moral (from former sage kings and to be continued forward).

Humanism continued as a movement through the Renaissance (although, again, the "term" was not yet coined.

'Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto' = "I am a man, I think nothing human alien to me"
This quote is from a the ancient Roman playwright Terence and was endorsed by Saint Augustine. The entire work still epitomizes much of

todays "humanist" attitude.

QUOTE: "and humanists often pull a great deal of their philosophy directly from Founding Fathers like Paine, Jefferson, Franklin,

Madison..."
Perhaps in small degrees, but Adolf Hitler, as well as Stalin also ran with some humanist ideas.

As far as Jefferson inspiring Humanists... welll try this on for size Shane:
“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to the happiness of man.
1. That there is only one God, and he all perfect.
2. That there is a future state of rewards and punishment.
3. That to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion.
These are the great points onwhich he endeavored to reform the religion of the Jews. But compare these with the demoralizing dogmas

of Calvin. ...Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now

have been Christian.”
— Thomas Jefferson, June 26, 1822 in a letter to to Benjamin Waterhouse

QUOTE: "I wonder if the 78% of Jews in this country who voted for Obama over McCain are also Jew-hating"

Shane, there is more to being Jewish than to being an American Jew. If youve heard of that "Israel" place over seas you'd know this. In the

majority of examples one finds, the left, liberals, and the media are not friends of Israel. Israel is Jewish. Jewish Americans do not do a

service to Israel by voting in leaders who would prefer to openly embrace Islamic nations who have publicly vowed to "wipe Israel off the

map"... Why any Jewish American would consciously vote for a Presidential candidate who wishes to talk to such radical anti-Israeli

leaders is astounding and mind boggling. But there simply is no answer for such deep seeded party loyalty when it transcends the tenets of

what we as individuals believe.

QUOTE: "the article also says "leftists worship atheism". People don't worship atheism.. just as people don't worship theism. It's not

possible."

I would present to you that athiests may infact worship many things, (science, themselves, dirt, trees, rocks, the cosmos, etc) But

regardless of what particular fetish they have bonded to, by knowingly denying Jesus/God/the Creator, they are arguing directly against His

divine truth and eternal existence, they are worshiping at the alter of Satan himself and are bound to his tenets. Theological ignorance

mixed with politically correct worldly humanism is no excuse for accepting a role as one of Satans useful idiots"

Worshipping the world with conscious denial of Christ is infact worshipping atheism... it is worship of Satan. The world IS satan's domain:

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You

must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
—Genesis 3:1
"The great dragon was hurled down--that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the

earth, and his angels with him."
—Revelation 12:9

No one is going to force you to believe what I believe Shane, but if you are a Christian, this is not rocket science.

QUOTE: "This article states that liberals have nothing good to say about John Locke, Thomas Hill Green, or Thomas Jefferson. Show me

something where a liberal in government speaks ill of these men. "

For starters we have the unending "Jefferson had a daughter from his slave" which has never been proven, but that doesnt stop the

accusations... then we have the "Jefferson owned slaves!" or "Jefferson never got rid of his slaves!" arguements. Using these as moral

arrows to lesson the man has been a liberal pastime for decades, if not longer.

Now, the snippet you quote must be read in it's entirety:
"The worst example of PC re-labeling is what the Hard Left has done to the word "liberal." Our current Left is anything but "liberal." They are

not concerned with liberty. They have nothing good to say about John Locke, John Stuart Mill, or Thomas Jefferson. Instead, they impose

PC speech control wherever possible, including in the mainstream media. They try to intimidate anyone who disagrees, and have purged

professors in universities by accusing them of the current smear labels: Racist, Sexist, Homophobe. "

What the author is referring to is the "New Left"... the Neo-Communists. He states very clearly, the new left is anything but "liberal"... Read

the article Shane. Its clear as day. Its right there in black & white.

QUOTE: "Show me policies.. direct policies and bills proposed by democratic leaders that are the product of a communist/Marxist

philosophy"

Califormia SB1322 (Feb. 2008) by Democrat Alan Lowenthal would explicitly allow the promotion of Communism in schools, allowing

teachers be allowed to teach communism with the intent to indoctrinate or to inculcate in the mind of any pupil a preference for

communism. The bill would also delete provisions that a teacher may be dismissed from employment for the same.

Seriously Shane, we cant MAKE this stuff up. (unless we're Democrats in elected office) Thats about as purebred DIRECT as it gets.

Now Shane, might I ask that in having a reasonable debate, you do more than call differing opinions "baseless" followed by asking a dozen

questions of your opponent? Try simply arguing your point. I do not make it a point to try to scare off the opponent with a barrage of

"homework questions", and it really doesnt work. At least not with me.

A history refresher? Woodrow Wilson, that champion of the left, introduced the central bank and the income tax.
Marxist germany successfully implemented its own universal healthcare system in the 1930's
The Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill (H.R. 2861), in 1943, put forth by Democrats, was the first US bill to propose a universal healthcare system

and spawned debate in Congress for the next 20+ years, until LBJ became President, when Medicare and Medicaid were passed with the

new Democrat majority.
Under FDR, social security was implemented.
The passage of Obamacare under the Democrat controlled House and Senate was the most dramatic step forward for the Marxist agenda

in more than a generation.

Having a debate should not equate to taking a long-form SAT test.
You want to debate, debate. Lose the 20 questions tactic and THINK, Shane!

"Dude"... you ask:
"Show me policies.. direct policies and bills proposed by democratic leaders that are the product of a communist/Marxist philosophy"

You're kidding, right?

I'm, heading out the dorr this minute, otherwise i'd waste more time debunking the slew of questions youve posed that are every bit as empty as the only i just quoted.

Your POV on these issues is obviously jaded and etched in stone. You're wrong, Shane.

Perhaps when I get back this evening i'll waste some more time on youre haughty ideas of what is and isnt.

A Good read:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/the_evidence_for_neocommunism.html

TO QUOTE:
"Yes, there really was an international Communist conspiracy, controlled by Lenin and Stalin and their successors, with tens of millions of sucker-followers in the West. Today the average liberal is not a knave, but a sucker; but there are knaves aplenty on the Left. We can see them acting out in the noisiest way. "

Heads up Dan, there are still a few new Republican articles ive found today on SJ that you've missed. You might want to get those all taken care of too.

100% agree Robin.
It would still be good to know the details though; the article is lacking substance in this area.

Here Here!

Wilma, I agree. And it comes down to the difference between "immigrants" and "refugees". Our doors should always be open to immigrants and immigration... even some asylum seekers.

Refugee's on the other hand are another story.
They have a different set of rules... rule #1 is "there are no rules".

When we stop the revolving door and get back to actually requiring those entering this country to prove they are here for the RIGHT reasons, then this country will begin to benefit once again from those decalarations held by Lady Liberty that are all-to-often misued to imply we are not a land of opportunity but a landfill.

I wish Mr. Mahamud the best or luck in this situation.

Tell me, Mr. Know-it-all.... when was the last time I watched FOX News, or even their website for news?

Dan, you simply have no clue what youre talking about. FOX News?

Georgetown already allows for birth control pills for cysts, acne etc.
http://studentaffairs.georgetown.edu/insurance/

The entire plan is there. (you can d/l the PDF)
With a PROPER Dr. referral the conditions & prescriptions as-such that everyone is harping about are infact covered. Apparently none of the women Fluke cites bothered to have a Dr. give them the proper referral.. if in fact every single one of them had some awful GYN disorder that required birth control pills.... ya.. thats it.

So what is Fluke talking about?

Be honest with yourself. This is a charade.

$3000 a year Jason. Do the math.

The crux of her arguement was that Georgetown was a religious university and as such didnt cover birth control. She has been an activist feminist for years, both in and out of DC. She has been a professional student. She enrolled at Georgetown knowing full well what their policy was. Her track record and her record of activism on feminist subjects smacks of a plan.

The Congressional hearings were about religious freedom vs Govt mandated birth control coverage for a private university. The Dems had a College professor (UCC affiliation) scheduled to testify about the subject, then at the last minute dropped him and arranged for Fluke to testify. She had no experience in religious freedom issues, only feminist issues. The last minute change prevented the normal 72 hour vetting for those proposed to testify.

Moreover, Fluke is now shown to have ties to the Obama White House and has been working these avenues for years. She is NOT an "innocent Co-Ed" she is a 31 year old political operative who has been working the govt mandated birth control issue for years.

Do a little research Jason.

Yes, Rush should not have made his statement. I dont defend his poor choice of words, I simple am pointing out the hypocrisy of nearly everyone who has an axe to grind for personal and political reasons. Maher did far worse. Plain and simple. And Fluke is anything than what she is being portrayed as in the MSM right now.

And thats the real issue here. The truth.

Keep in mind that Sandra Fluke was asking the Govt to essentially pay her for having sex.... that is the jist of the whole "slut" analogy when combined with the QUANTITY of sex Fluke alleges she had when she was a student at Georgetown. Read the transcripts... and my next post (below this post)

Compare Rush's comments in THIS context with those of Maher, Schultz, Olbermann, etc and there is simply NO comparison.

Nothing fictional. According to your (once again double) standard Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann also have a case against Bill Maher, Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann. The things THEY have said about Palin are far more slanderous.

You do realize that one does'nt need to volunteer to testify in Congress or be a college student before being eligible for slander lawsuits. It's true Dan; college students are no different than anyone else.

Then you have the cases of Kathleen Willey, Juanitia Broderick and Paula Jones... Need we go there? Remember what THEY were called?

What defines "public figure"? If I organize and PROMOTE a speaking engagement at the National Press Club, am I not putting myself out there in the public eye... before the PRESS? Without her plublicity "tour" she would have never been noticed and would not have been tapped to speak before Congress. These are the facts Dan.

What did Bristol Palin do?
Broderick and Jones certainly did nothing. They were named on Subpeonas and REQUIRED to testify, yet they were pilloried and torn to shreds in the media. But thats ok huh?

No Dan, there isnt any difference.

If there were, than that would mean that there is a difference between Jim Lehrer and Tony Snow, and there would be a difference between Juan Williams and Brian Williams... or that there would be a difference between Katie Couric and Greta Van Susternan (sp)

And as a matter of fact, Rush Limbaugh is not in anyway a dead-pan news anchor... he is a celebrity just like Maher. Limbaugh injects as much humor into his program (almost non-stop) as Maher has in his.

Infact... they are no different.

I believe it's best to speak with some semblance of good taste. Therefore, I dont excuse Rush for his statement, but I do judge the sheer hypocrisy of those who call him out yet ignore far more egregious violations of taste in the name of an agenda and a "shared ideaology"...

An apology is just that. We can choose to accept or not accept it, but if it is never made than that choice is taken from us. You choose what you will for your own reasons.

Each of us can say *nearly* anything we want, it IS free speech... but we must accept the fallout when we make such statements. The problem comes (once again) when a double standard is applied subjectively to one group of people and not another.

For every Rush, you have a Maher, an Olbermann, a Schultz and a Franken who more often than not, get a free pass...

Thats what *I* believe Dan.

Honestly, Rush has a backlog of companies who would love to advertise on his program. I dont think Rush cares about Carbonite... there is list of companies waiting right behind them. (And the next day after pulling their ads, Carbonites stock portfolio dropped 12%. The following day they were courting the EIB network to try to get "back on" to advertise during Rush's program... i believe they were turned down)

Rush apologized because the MSM latched on to the comment and is running with it. And he went against his own rules and stooped to the level of Bill Maher, Kieth Olbermann and Ed Schultz. Rush has always knew how far is far enough and this is an unfortunate crossing of that line. He knew it and he apologized within 24 hours. None of the other aforementioned personalities have ever apologized.

Thats my take on it.

you know him personally? really? I highly doubt it Carl.
he knew "nothing" about the woman? really Carl? I highly doubt that too.
Do I have the right to call you names? I would argue that you most certainly have the right to call me names.

Regardless, Rush apologized the next day... which apparently is not acceptable anymore by the left. Bill Maher has steadfastly not apologized for his comments which have been far more foul, vile and hatefilled than anything Rush could possibly come up with... yet his gall and complete unapologetic record gets no attention and a complete pass by everyone left of center.

Pretty screwed up stuff indeed.

So Carl, do you accept Rush's apology?

Linda calls Rush a loser than calls EVERYONES mother a "slut".
Thats nice Linda. Real nice. Classy gal.

STATISTICS 101:
Per-Pupil Operating Expenditures
http://www.maine.gov/education/data/ppcosts/2009/geninfo.htm

Enrollment by County:
http://www.maine.gov/education/enroll/attending/historical/pub/fenpbch.htm

Need we go on like this?
No more admisitrators!

What we have is an administration that is doing what it promised to do. Reel in spending. No other Administration in the last 2 decades has even attempted to seriously tackle this problem. Its a bumpy road but its the raod we must stay on. LePage is doing what he was elected to do. He doesnt want to control everything, he simply wants every department to act responsibly and fix their budget shortfalls. Mahieu stalled.

Tina, as with Claire, i totally agree with your post right up until the venomous anti-LePage stuff is thrown in for measure.

"Ah yes. The unmistakable sound of someone oversimplifying a situation for the sake of a cheap shot. "

"The more the right whines about it the more I want to support it."

Profound.
Sybil delivering a self-indulgent monologue.
supported by wikipedia no-less!

Its refreshing to finally see someone on the left admitting their rationale for taking one side of an issue... The true "thinkers" of today.

Betty, that arguement has been run through the washer and come out in tatters for over a year now. Some history for you:

a) The repubs lost control of Congress in 2006.
b) GWB and even John (king of the RINOs) McCain warned congress dozens times starting in 2001 about the volatility of Fannie/Freddie
c) Dems ignored all warnings and stood by the housing market (Barney Frank most vociferously)
d) Dems continued in-control through the end of GWB's term.
e) GWB made the mistake of signing on to the TARP and Bailouts brought forth by the DEM controlled congress.
f) Obama got elected. Dems remained in control of Congress and now had the WH too.
g) over a year later after Dem congress and Obama approved a SECOND bailout, it was evident both bailouts had failed and the housing market was trashed.
h) Repubs finally got control of the House ONLY, in 2010. Dems remained in control of WH and Senate.
i) The House has passed more bills in the last 2 years than in the last 8, the DEM Senate has passed almost NO new bills since 2010.
j) Obama and the DEMS OWN the economy 110%.
k) Gas prices continue to climb under Obama and the Dem Senate. Whereas during t he 2008 campaign the mere mention of "drill baby drill" and the propect of finally becoming oil independent scared the prices back down, before Obama got elected and the pressure was off.... they have subsequently gone up up up since Obama stifles every attempt to capture our own oil. Obama OWNS gas prices.

then when thats done, they can apply for an extension (AS MANY TIMES AS THEY WANT!)
Yes... that IS the way our system is set up...

correction: she never HAD a college education.

Woops!
Must have only been an "isolated incident"....
and dont forget... "its LePage's fault"

The only thing King has going for him is his "Independent" label, which is what Snowe and Collins have been lying about, pretending to be Republican, or Conservative, or what not. King is at least honest enough to admit he isnt a Republican and insnt neccesarily conservative... Is he a liberal Democrat? perhaps not, but he deserves credit for his choice of "label"...

Still not sure i'd vote for him....

(apologies for the typos.. typing at light-speed in low-light has its problems)

Garry. A great Christian School has closed due to low enrollment. We dont want another great school to follow suit. Whats deplorable is that CMCA isnt even mentioned in the article above. It is the most direct replacement for Vineyard students. St. Doms is not the best alternative... its too expensive and the mission statement and statement of faith is very very different.

While I understand some may think its tacky or in poor taste to recommend a great shoool for Christians, it is in service to those Christian families who are now faced with the task to finding another school for their kids. It's about keeping Christian Schools alive in L.A. I stand by my "advertisement" 100%.

FYI: Taxpayer funded charter schools get "free" advertisement, but Christian Schools do not. Public schools get millions and millions of $$ to waste on the latest gadget whiloe their buildings fall apart aroiund them. Christian schools do not. Tacky advertisement? No.

Additionally, I dont work for CMCA nor do I recieve money from them.. My post is a Christian PSA if anything. If you're not Christian you shouldnt care.

Thus say the wisdom of man.

Go to each schools respective websites and download/read their statements of faith

Go to each schools respective websites and download/read their statements of faith.

I'm saddened that Vineyard is closing. Christian Schools are often a very (surprisingly) affordable alternative to the Public School system and they teach the four basic subjects in addition to a solid Christian worldview.

Central Maine Christian Academy at 390 Main Street in Lewiston, is an excellent school and should be seriously considered by those parents and students who attended Vineyard. Don't let what happened to Vineyard happen to CMCA and keep Christian education alive here in L.A. (And by no means should St. Doms be confused with Christian schools. There is a huge difference.)

Please consider CMCA for your students.
http://www.centralmainechristianacademy.org/admissions/
or call them at 777.0007

Uhhh, ya. Ok. So how about Mike Michaud start voting along with Speaker Boehner and Issa. Would Michaud be seen by Maine Dems as "independent" or a turncoat.

Reality Check. Double Standards no longer allowed.

The ALL in question here is the ALL who are completely hypocritical when it comes to praising Snowe and Collins for their "independent" record. Turn teh tables and the hypocrisy becomes glaringly evident.

When youre a (supposed) Republican and you get accolades, praise and sympathy from Lurch (John Kerry) you know its time to get out of it.

Patti, youd have a better chance of lighting a candle with an icecube than to expect your very reasonable request to be honored.

As opposed to wanting an unrealistically high price no matter who has to be exploited to get it?
Prices stated in article range up to $28 a plate. when you budget in a drink (even just one) on top of that, plus tip... well...

ya...

Better food? No, "better food" isn't worth THAT. Perhaps some of us know better?

Quite simply, i'm tired of the canned corporate chain joints, Ruby Tues., TGIF, Longhorn, 99, Applebees... In that regard, '40 Sea' is a great thing, but we shouldn't be collectively raped for it because "frankly there is no competition"... which is exactly WHY the prices are so high.

My 2, 4 and 6 cents.

QUOTE:
"I'm very confident," Tam said. "(Maine) is beautiful, all the people are nice. Honestly, there's not too much competition."

Besides my price-point comments below... i do agree with the manager. And that might just be enough for the place to survive...

But i still say the prices are a tad too high for L.A....

We'll see.

The Prices listed ARE expensive. I love sushi and I love Japanese Hibachi with talented chefs. It is entertainment, for sure (if they are good) but the price point listed here is too high for L.A. This isn't Portland, and certainly not Boston.

The location, at the Lewiston Mall does not generally attract the high dollar shoppers... (Sears is about as high class as that corner gets)... I would go dine at Sea 40 tommorrow if not for the price. As it is, my family and I are in economy mode these days. It's unfortunate we will not be going to this establishment, because, as I ve stated Japanese Hibachi is wonderful.

Lower the prices and this restauarant will be a success.

UGH. LePage is making huge efforts to back-fill the financial and economic SKINKHOLE the DEMS left us all. To do that takes guts and backbone. Unfortunately, Tina, it seems to take a REPUBLICAN to do these things. Since the Dems and the RINOS wont go near ANY of these issues.

Its too bad there are no Dems with answers, or even Dems with the will to make decisions that affect there welfare-bound voter base... you see, take money from the voter base and you get no votes.... and that, Tina, is why Dems cannot fix Maine.

So, LePage IS doing what needs to be done. And think about this... he's almost single-handedly putting ALL These issues ON THE TABEL because now, finally, after decades, good-intentioned folks like you are actually talking about fiscal responsibility, sound economics and smart government. All things that should have been a part of the discussion under Dem controlled Blaine House, Dem controlled house and a dem controlled senate.

Its crystal clear. LePage IS upholding his promise. This is step one.

Tina,

Taxes are too high in Maine. Period. Business Taxes. Payroll Taxes. Healthcare costs. This translates into businesses leaving Maine, and/or not hiring. It also precludes businesses from COMING here.

Taxes cannot be lowered with a DHHS budget that swamps every other expense on the boards. Lower the Medicaid/DHHS/Welfare budgets and you will open up the windows for lower taxes across the board, which will then open the doors for businesses to hire, stay and/or come to Maine... that will get the unemployed employed again....

Other than that I'm really not sure how you expect to cut the budget. Where? Who? It's clear that in Maine Welfare is the Sacred Cow of budget items. It cannot continue to be so.

IMAGE GALLERY
http://www.centralmainephoto.com/MBCL/

More to be added in the next few days...

I havegrandparents, great grandparents, great uncles, great aunts, second cousins and other relatives buried in that cemetary. I am not angry at where this man cjose to take his own life. To be so protective of a public cemetary but so ambivalent and unconcerned about others taking their lives "somewhere else" is simply wrong.

The cemetary is FILLED with burials of thousands of individuals over the last 150 years. Im sure some of them did actually kill themselves. Perhaps in rather disturbing ways. Our loved ones went to their resting places in the cemetary long after many suicides where buried there, and im sure others will in the future.

The loss of an innocent life, be it by drunk driver, suicide, accident or cold blooded murder is a loss to a family almost every time. This man went out in a terrible fashion. Where he will spend eternity none of us know. But we do know that there are many buried in that cemetary who it could be said, were evil individuals. What about their story? Who are they? who knows. But they are most certainly buried their along with the truly blessed and sanctified.

All of this doesn't change anything for me in any way. Especially in a cemetary with so many "lives" interred. Every one of those lives has a legacy; some grand, small insignificant, some tragic, some uneventful... but all of them are no less significant than any other, be they young, or old.

May God bless this man and have mercy on his soul. May God also bring comfort to his family and loved one in this time of loss. May He be the light for their path and bring peace to their hearts and minds.
I pray this is the name of Jesus Christ.
Amen.

If it turns out GOP officials deliberately excluded Washington County or any other towns, cities or municipalities, knowing full well that such an imposed delay would forfiet those respective caucus results I would fully support censuring or firing any and all so involved.

The Maine GOP is a wreck as it is, and the will of the voters has quite possibly been suppressed by mandating a completely unneccesary "snow delay" when there was in fact no snow.

Totally unnaceptable.

Oh Brother! Quoting the Maine Center for (Socialist) Economic Policy??!!??
Mr. Martin writes:
"LePage’s economically unsound...draconian cuts to health care for children, seniors, families and disabled individuals, the core problems with Maine’s struggling economy remain unresolved."

He then goes on to state:
"Maine lawmakers must act now to chart a new course by:
■passing a robust bond package for transportation, public works and communications infrastructure, education, research and development, small business loans and other investments...
■restoring tax fairness to maintain funding for health care, education, job training, child care and other programs that support families."

Ya, thats it, increase our debt, and increase taxes. Thats gonna fix Maine???
Thats what got us here.

The whole of the Federal Labor Stats from which the article cites are ignored but for one incomplete metric. That the big picture is deemed irrelevant is both suspect and quite deliberately dishonest. Go look at the Fed stats on the Fed website and run the numbers. Maine is not dead last in any truly significant labor demographic.

Well said Joe, but there has got to be a way to stop this is EVERYONE on the council is opposed to it. The council represent the PEOPLE. If the people say no, why shouldnt the Planning Dept go pound sand?

RE ENTERED MESSAGE: (my typing was not entereing into screen)

Dan, you are not a Republican. I am. You can tell the MHPC whatever you want. What *I* tell them (and they do actually listen to Republican voters) is KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! Thank God we have MHPC working for us Republican Voters in Maine.

Nice try Dan.

Hats off to Councilors Bellefleur and Shea.

In a time when Auburn should be bringing BUSINESSES back to downtown, it seems Labonte and his friends just want to bring in Fedreal money and low income subsidized residents to downtown.

The Auburn Lanes spot would be better is it were a breakfast joint, a coffee shop (not a convienience store... got that a block down) or a small retailer or such.

But alas, the FEDS dont give out free grants to developers to develop BUSINESS SPACES!

No more low-income housing in L-A, we have all we need. The more we build the more we need, as the welfare folks will keep flocking here...

oooo not naming names on that 1982 city manager huh... (snicker)
Well.... some of us know who it was. :-P

LOL. exactly Libby! and I do agree with you, this is such an off-the wall use of THAT corner. How about a coffee shop of another breakfast joint... would be much more useful and add to the economic vitality of that stretch of main st.

EDIT TO ADD: If in my reference to having a special needs child, I am referring to "Claire", below, please forgive me... I always confuse you two.

Really Tina?
I act like *my* stuff doesnt stink?
wow...

Im no better than "the others"?? Who are "the others" and who's the one tossing insults left and right?

If there are 65,000 recipients who dont need the help then they should be cut. But not cutting anyone is not an option. So youre saying dont cut anyone? Its all administrative costs that are burying DHHS?

Which is it? So far all youve said is LePage is a moron and the problem is DHHS employees. Hmmm..

I agree... but remember, the grant saves the developer alot of that $$. I make no claim that this is ANYTHING but low-income housing. I feel it is just that, and I agree, the only reason the developer would even consider building this is because of the "free money" the Feds are dangling.

In Lewiston at least, Mayor Macdonald "gets it" that these projects do nothing to bring economic vitality to a struggling city.

As for Labonte? Does anyone really know what he thinks? Very very much a SOP Maine Politician. We'll have to build it and wait until it fails or succeeds before we know if he is fort or against it.

Tina, give us a break. Schools are not failing because of NCLB. (BTW did you know NCLB wasa Dem. Idea pushed in the 1990's and then embraced by GWBush? No? Yes. 100%. Look it up.

Now the meat and potatoes is the Schools and the TEACHERS. When I was in HS (back in the 80's) our Senior English teacher was as boring as a box of rocks. We had (1) girl who was an honor student (what she was doing in our class we had no idea)... she got an A always. The rest of us were sleeping. literally. At the end oif the year i'd say roughly 80% of the class was going to get an F. Flunk. Guess what. We all passed with a D. I didnt learn a damned thing in that class, and I failed almost every test. But hey, who cares, I passed the class and got my diploma.

Dont you dare blame NCLB for failing schools. NCLB shined a light on whats been getting bigger and bigger for the last 30 years: Crap teachers.

Are there better approaches than NCLB? Probably. But it isnt NCLB that is the problem.

Good Luck and best of fortune in this new venture!
Having spent over 25 years in Arizona, I might be a harsh critic on the "authenticity" scales... but good food is good food. If its good you'll succeed!

Oh i do agree... we can ad SHOULD work hard to motivate him and change him as MUCH as needed as long as he STAYS in that 4th grade class year after year until he masters the 4th grade curriculum.

Youre half correct here. Public Schools are a reason private schools thrive. But the private schools in Maine are hurting right now. Not because of the curriculum or the performance (they outperform public education by miles) but because of the economy. St. Doms will accept almost anyone, probably even avowed athiests if they have the $$. This is sad.

I do know there are Christian Schools that are top-level adacemically that are not at all expensive, and the best part is that they still hold the students and parents to the mission statement of a true Christian School. That involves active parental involvement and family-centered Christ-centered living (notice not "God" as that can mean anything to anybody). But this is one reason when combined with the economy that they are hurting right now. The only upside is that the student to teacher ratio is extremely good. No public school can tough the Christian Academies in this area, and the tuition is surprisingly low.

Hebron Academy and St. Doms are just flat out expensive... too expensive for all but the financially cozy...

agreed.

EDIT TO ADD:(insert "Scarcelli" into above examples to suit your own personal consiracy theory)

MONEY, is NOT the answer.
FAILING students need to be HELD BACK.
STOP passing the flunking kids into the next grade.
Is it really so complicated? NO!
If your kid FLUNKS you kid doesnt move on to the next grade!

This is so absurd, we spend more on education than almost every other state in the US and what do we have to show for it? Taxes higher than almost any other state in the US and kids who are flunking.

When are folks gonna figure this one out?
Buying flunking kids iPads and giving them free laptops isnt doing anything for their education. PASSING kids who FAIL isnt doing anything either. Loose the iPads and FLUNK the FLUNKEES and guess what? evenutually performace will improve. (three years in 4th grade should produce and very smart 4th grader)

I dont care WHAT test you administer, with a 15% reading proficiency NCLB is indicating the truth: FAILURE.

Seriously, Is the School Department saying the test is unfair to "poor" children? Or is it something else.

Dumbing down the tests is not the answer. Fabricating a test that removes profiency from the equation is not the answer. Back in the day students were "held back" if they flunked. That doesnt happen much, if ever these days.. (the "were ALL winners" mentality prevails)... and the flunkees get moved along right beside the A and B students into the next grade.

If the kids are flunking they need to be held back. Even if it means we have a bunch of 13 year old 2nd graders at Longley.

Santorum, while having his own flaws, is the only candidate that I would vote for without reservation. I'm not LDS so I have no reason to vote Romney. If by some chance Ron Paul becoms the nominee I will vote for him. But a Romney ticket will guarantee I stay home in November.

ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY
REPUBLICAN PARTY CAUCUS LOCATIONS:
- Geiger Elementary School

ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY
DEMOCRATIC PARTY CAUCUS LOCATIONS:
- Auburn Middle School
- Greene Town Hall
- Lewiston High School
- Lisbon Town Office
- Mechanic Falls Town Office Council Chambers

QUOTE:
"Occupy is an aggregate of a lot of individual philosophies."

In a nutshell. What the heck are they REALLY protesting? No one really knows. Surely it must somehow be important enough to BURN the American Flag over! (???)

American has never stood for Anarchy. The last time this sort of "movement" got legs was 1895-1905 and we lost a President over it. (McKinley)

Perhaps Dan hates everybody...
Nahhhh....

EveryTHING.

;)

The Senate and House were filibuster-proof for a number of years with Dem control under Obama.... and guess what... those Dems never passed a budget. Repubs had zero control. The Dems refused to pass anything even when they could have without a single Repub vote. With complete control of the house and senate the Dems wouldnt pass even Obamas own initiatives when they could have, wouldnt pass ANY budgets when they could have and now that the senate is still controlled by the Dems but no longer filibuster-proof it is somehow all the Repubs fault?

The house is now controlled by the Repubs and the HOUSE has passed literally dozens if not hundreds of bills. The DEMS in the senate are the ones not passing those Bills. Look up the Senate Record, The House Record and the number of Bills passed and who is passing them. "Do nothing Repubs"??? Sorry. No.

Bottom line, the bill would not have gotten out of committe without her vote. She was the deciding vote. She allowed it to go to the floor knowing full well what might happen.

So there you go, you and I both agree that Snowe and Collins have failed Maine. Even if for different reasons. I disagree with your reasons, you disagree with mine, but we both agree they do not deserve to be re-elected. That is the ULTIMATE sign of total and complete failure as a politician.

Will you vote for either one? If not than you illustrate the point Im making exactly.

In realty Dan, Snowe voted YES to allow ObamaCare to move out of committee and on to the Senate floor. Snowe was on that committee and could have voted NO. She voted YES. She was the only "Republican" on the committee to do so. It was because of Snowe's YES vote that ObamaCare got to the Senate floor at all. Snowe burnt a bridge she will never get back, no matter how hard she pretends to be conservative during the campaign cycle.

As far as Susan Collins, both she AND Snowe were two of only five Republicans to vote against defunding planned parenthood out of the ObamaCare system. In essence, they voted to retain ObamaCare as is.

FROM THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION: (scores legislators on a number of key votes)
2008
"For the first time, two Republicans scored as absolutely liberal in voting."
Snowe, with a score of 20%, and Collins, at 12% — more liberal even than then-Sen. Barack Obama, who scored 17%. Not surprisingly, Collins says she may also back the Baucus bill."

While Collins has had no direct YEA vote on ObamaCare, her voting record is more liberal than Obama's was. No excuse for a RINO like these two.

Personally, I'd rather have a DEM in office than a RINO only "pretending" to be conservative. The net result would be the same, and at least we'd all know what to expect from the DEM.

QUOTE: "Obama was given a major task, left behind by Republican George W. Bush. It was a mess that accumulated during Bush's eight years in office. Obama should get another four years to fix the chaos left behind by the Bush administration."

Perhaps the most shallow statement around. This opinion fails to acknowledge that the GWB admin and GOP lost control of Congress (completely, 100%, in-totality) in 2006. Three (3) years of DEM control coincided with three (3) years of economic collapse in the US. Furthermore, on now less than seventeen (17) occaisions GWBush warned publicly of the dangers Fannie-Mae and Freddy-Mac were facing without immediate reform. Moreover, RINO-extraordinaire (but nonetheless Republican) also warned congress publicly on-the-record of the same dangers. The DEMOCRATIC controlled congress ignored these warnings over and over, indeed DEMOCRAT Barney Frank defended the policies that were in danger and lauded them as solid, sound and solvent.

From 2006 to 2009 The Dems ruled the roost. GWB's biggest mistake was "going along to get along" with the Dems, and McCain followed suit. The Dems are and were responsinble for the housing crisis and the economic collase of this nation. It is now 2012. The Dems had complete control of BOTH houses for four (4) years... 2006-2010 and have had complete control of the Senate for EIGHT (8) YEARS... (2006-2012.

Blaming the problems on BUSH is naive at best and willfully dishonest.

This economy belongs to the DEMs and OBAMA.

I have read one of Mayor Macdonald's TCT article... I'm not sure if it was the one you're referring to. Let me know which issue so I can read it. Maybe we'll disagree, maybe not, but I'll definately read it. (I usually catch the TCT every week but have missed a few weeks lately)

I agree with everything you mention here about Private Messaging (PM) feature. You are exactly right, and thats the biggest benefit. So much we often would like to discuss but dont due to side-tracking topics and time issues. Oftentimes these comments can spur serious thought about issues (on either side of a debate) and these things can better be hashed out via PM. Makes for evn more honesty and saves alot of needless back-and-forth on some hot-button issues.

I'm very interested in the "new deal" that the REP and DEM factions say they have agreed upon regarding the DHHS budget. How great can it be? We'll see I suppose.

Kris, are you saying we need to all MUST remain complete strangers? If you're uncomfortable with a Private Message you could block that person and never hear a word from them again. Now, apparently you seem to have an issue here that isnt being addressed? Tell me why *I* would want to private message someone. Since you *know* it is mock worthy, please do tell us all why *I* would want the SJ to enable that feature. Otherwise the mockery is only in self-doubt and insecurity. Please do tell.

You'll have to be specific, we really dont know what you are concerned about or specifically talking about.

Kris, is there a problem?
...or are you just in a mood to be rude for no real reason?

It never ceases to amaze me how some here feel the need to behave like angry children over absolutely nothing. If you dont agree simply state your reason. Otherwise youre just adding to the troll issue.

the whole "Occupy" concept is, in itself, against the laws of most munipalities. Since when is the "occupation" of public places ok? We are free to use these public places, but they are not campground, and they are not open to homsteaders who claim them for their own.

The tactics and goals of this group are so detached from American values (yes there IS such a thing) that they could only find a home in a bolshevik style uprising.

By all means, the "Occupy" kids have the right to walk around protesting whatever they are protesting (does anyone really know for sure?) but at the end of the day they need to pack it up and go home to mom's basement or the soup-kitchen, or the shelter of their dorm, or their car, of dumpster... wherever they came from (does anyone really know for sure?)

Martha, while I support the real name policy, I agree with you 100% about the lack of banning users who are habitual trolls here. We know who they are, SJ knows, and they themselves know. Problem is, like most things, "sensitivities" prevail at the expense of policy enforcement and common decency. SJ needs to get rid of the abusers.

Thanks. My analogy simply illustrates that there is "right" and "wrong" and "normal" and "abnormal" sexual behavior. Social engineering to make one "wrong" somehow "right" while ignoring other "wrongs" of similar dysfunction really is the issue. You've figured it out... most folks have... too bad we choose to "not offend" by being silent. Ah well. Great posts nonetheless.

Funny, I wasnt a SJ contributor back then. And how long ago was that? Additionally, the Legislature didnt just up and pass a TABOR law on their own after the people said no... No comparison.

There is no doubt at all that you ARE right in "God loves all of us equally the same." AMEN to that. But if you are to use God as a defense you must also accept God's unbending word. Truth:
matters.
■ You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)
■ If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. (Leviticus 20:13)
■ For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. (Romans 1:26–27)
■ Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9–10)

We cannot ignore that in this passage Adultery is every bit as much of a Sin as Homosexuality and guess what? I was one heck of an adulterer in the past. As were most everyone who will read this... many of whom still ARE adulterers.

With that we must also remember that like many other sins, having committed them in and of themself does not automatically condemn us to eternal damnation:

■ And such were fsome of you. But you were washed, but you were 4sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.(1 Corinthians 6:9–10)

If we are going to use God's love for us as an excuse for homosexual acts, we cannot ignore God's warning and God's promises.

The state legislature passing a law that Mainers voted down previously IS forcing it down our throats. Mainers then had to VOTE IT DOWN to REPEAL the law and now the damned thing is being brought BACK again for a VOTE *again*!

If thats not forcing an issue down our throats then what is?

The problem is when we project a message to the world (middle east, islam, etc) that we will no longer back up Israel, it emboldens Israel's enemies. When Israels enemies are emboldened it heightend the tensions in the middle east. When tensions in the middle east are heightened the increases Oil prices. When Oil prices are increased it stresses the world economy. When the world economy is tressed, nations tend to act and react more extremely. When Isael and Islam are stress and reactionary it heightens military sensitivities and taxes cultural tolerance / intolerance.

Israel is the only democracy in the middle east. Without the support of the US the entire region becomes a tinderbox. While I agree we dont "need" to support every aspect of Israel, we MUST make it clear that when the &*$# hits the fan we will side with Israel. If we do not make that stand we can count on that tinderbox igniting rapidly and without delay. Israel is a nuclear nation and by allmeans they *can* defend themselves. However, the US imparts the biggest influence on Iraeli foreign policy, and without our support they too could become a rogue nation that pays little attention to the wishes of impartial neighbors.

Ron Paul's ideas in this area seem sound on paper, much like most of his positions, but in the real world stage we are faced with, his ideas could easily become a recipe for disaster.

Just my view on this, but my views are shared by many others who otherwise find his platform very solid.

Don't worry. I will not be voting for Romney. I'll stay home if he is the nominee.

As far as Ron Paul, please read the entire blog by Eric Dondero:
http://rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-from-fmr-ron-paul-staff...

READ THE BLOG
by Eric Dondero, former Ron Paul staffer of 12 years.
Quite interesting to learn a bit more about of the Man behind the moonbats.

http://rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-from-fmr-ron-paul-staff...

Not worth invading Nazi Germany just to save the Jews.... uhhh... ok.

Incapable of critical thinking? Really?
Bob Wright, I dont know who you are, or what you believe (you havnt said anything or relevance or consequence here) but I can tell you with 100% certainty, youre assumption of my capability and analogy of my likeness is pathetically misguided and wholeheartedly afoul.

I will say this though; the absolutel over-sensitive touchiness of Ron Paul aupporters begs the monicker "Moon Bat" as stated by another poster here.

Moonbat? sure... youre earning it.

I guess when it comes to Ron Paul, we must be 100% in or we are incapacitated pavlovian drones... Laughable. Shallow. Dangerous. Much like the O-bots.

Jonathan, is God homophobic? Because he clearly said living a gay lifestyle is an abomanation. He despises homosexuality. He loves all of us, but we choose the LIFESTYLE we live. Sin is sin. He will forgive all sin if you believe on Him and repent. Does that mean you must be absent any inkling of deep-seeded gayness? No.

If you dont believe in Jesus Christ as your saviour, the one true God, than keep on spouting your anti-Christian rhetoric as a Christophobic bigot. Are you prepared to live with that label?

The Christophobic left are perhaps the most foolish group in the world.

These OT passages are the Old Covenant. A definate problem for Jewish followers for sure.

The New Covenant deals with these issues clearly. READ THE BIBLE. OT & NT.

Once again, ignorance breeds ignorance. The arguements presented here are both old and weak, well worn out decades and centuries ago by those who have not actually read the entire bible.

OT Reference to new covenant:
"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."—Jeremiah 31:31–34

NT new covenant:
7For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.—Hebrews 8:7–13

Joanne, are you serious? Do you believe in "sin"? If yes than you believe in God's word, the Bible. If you do not believe in the Bible than you are "lost" (according to the Bible, not me) and that wouldnt matter tou you anyway if you consider the Bible fiction.

The only Dark Agers here are the ones who deny the Bible. It is theor right (even thier God given right) to deny the Bible.

If, on the other hand, you DO believe the Bible, the true and perfect word of God, than you wouyld know that "yes" being gay (actually choosing to live a gay lifestyle) is in fact a sin.

Dont believe the bible? Than you shouldnt care one way or another what the Bible says.