Gay marriage legalized...

Bill O'Reilly has discussed the subject of gay marriage extensively in his broadcasts. While he opposes gay marriage, he also has said he "doesn't care" about it because it "doesn't hurt" the country in general. I disagree.
Canada, and now Spain, recently announced that gay marriage has been legalized by their courts. WATCH what happens to these countries! Watch their economies, their death rate, their natural disaster occurrance rate, etc.
What am I saying here?
The institution of marriage was NOT created by man. Marriage was created by God, or as Bill generically calls Him, "the Deity". For those who take their faith seriously, and believe what the Scriptures say about such things, marriage is described as a "joining together" of a man and a woman in a holy union, the characteristics of each gender complimenting one another to form a completeness.
Man AND woman were created in the image of God according to the book of Genesis. However, apart, they do not represent the complete image of God. When joined in marriage, the union takes on a picture, a parallel, of His attributes. The husband exhibits the providence and protection of God. The wife exhibits the nurturing and tenderness of God.
In the New Testament, marriage is explained to be a picture of Christ and the Church. Christ is described as the "Bridegroom" and the Church is depicted as the "Bride of Christ". We see scriptures which command the husband to "love your wife as Christ loves the church".
Since true Christian believers (and I'm not excluding anyone at all here...you make your choice) take their faith and Scripture seriously they also believe that there is a spiritual entity called "Satan", or the Devil. Not just an IDEA, but a fallen angel, according to the Bible.
This devil would love nothing more than to distort and pervert the institution of marriage! This would be a direct attack on the very things that God calls holy and would pervert the parallels of the character of God and of Christ and the church.
When a nation legalizes and endorses the perversion of what God has created to be a HOLY institution, that nation WILL ABSOLUTELY fall under a curse. Watch for earthquakes, mudslides, tidal waves, tornados, and other natural disasters to increase exponentially. Watch their economies tumble with unexplained drama.
God forbid that America ever travels this road...but I see it coming.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Patrolling the Borders

One of Bill O'Reilly's crusading topics of discussion is the issue of protecting our national borders, especially our southern border with Mexico.
His stance has consistently been to put the National Guard on the borders to reinforce the Border Patrol.
While I agree with this approach to a large extent, I think another option would be to militarize the Border Patrol itself. In other words, put the Border Patrol underneath the Department of Defense, add a wing to the Pentagon and have Border Patrol representation inside the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The BP would go through boot camp, as well as intense military training and survival methods. There would also be an elite corps inside the BP who would do specialty tasks that involve precision and a high degree of covertness.
This whole issue of border protection has been turned into a racial one. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'd like to ask these dunderheads who oppose higher protection of our borders if they would let just anyone into their HOMES without going through proper protocol. Would they care if just anyone who wants to, walk into their CHILDREN'S SCHOOL without signing in and getting authorization, possibly endangering their child.
Are the walls of their homes just as open to unauthorized entry as our borders are? If not, then they and their arguments are hypocritical.
Border protection is of the same mindset as the alarm on your car, the locks on your door, and the security of our children's schools.
There are boundaries around our country, our states, our homes, and our vehicles for a reason! Security!!! And each of these boundaries have certain types and degrees of protocol to cross them. Or face certain consequences. If an unauthorized person breaks into your car, it is a crime, punishable by the law.
I'd like to ask these same pinheads whether they would mind if boys could walk into the girl's bathrooms while THEIR little girl or their wife is inside. No? Well why NOT!!! That's gender descrimination! Do you see the senselessness of their argument?
Security is not a racism issue just as much as the previous example is not a discrimination issue. Security is a life or death issue.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

The differences...

It amazes me that the differences between the Republican party and the Democrat party are so vast. I could understand two parties with many common philosophies and a couple of major differences that set them apart. No so, however!
With few exceptions, the platforms of the two parties are built on separate mountains. On most issues, socially, economically, or in worldview, they are diametrically opposed!
Many of the members of each party are not well-informed on the issues or well-versed as to what their party embraces. I firmly believe that if many Democrats, who are that by name only, would switch if they were to become educated in the current political thoughts of the day.
One thing that the Democrat party does to attack the Republicans is to distort the GOP platform. They get these one-liners going such as "Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor" or "Republicans are for big business".
In actuality, who really IS for the poor? The Democrats who want to keep them under their thumb by subsidizing their state of poverty, KEEPING them poor? Or the Republicans who encourage them to be self-sustaining, providing opportunities for employment and education.
Then there's the issue of life. The Democrat platform embraces legal abortion, conveniently nicknamed "pro-choice". While there are pro-choice Republicans and pro-life Democrats, the majority of each party have polarized this issue. Most Republican leaders recognize the sanctity of life and consider the unborn child as much a citizen as the born. The "choice" was made most times while having sex. The pro-abortion crowd use the rape excuse or the "life of the mother" excuse but these have both been proven to be a small percentage in event. The truth of the matter is that the liberal sector of society wants to eliminate all consequences of bad behavior in order to make it easier to live the liberal lifestyle. Their mindset is to give condoms out in school...eliminate the consequences. Give sterile needles to addicts...eliminate the consequences. Oh, it's done in the name of "safety" but the facts show that in all of these attempts to eliminate the consequences...they get worse...in one form or another. And this is the mindset embraced by most of the liberal Democrat party.
The Republican party isn't perfect. I'm like Bill O'Reilly, an independent. However, I admire the platform of the Republican party on social and economical issues. I also agree with their attitude on the war on terror. If they would only become a party with backbone when it comes to promoting its agenda in the face of the opposition party and media.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Bill O'Reilly Review

This is my attempt to inject my thoughts into the political discussion after viewing or listening to the TV and radio broadcasts of Bill O'Reilly, the popular news analyst and issues pundit on the Fox News Channel and Westwood One networks. Mr. O'Reilly also has his own website at http://www.billoreilly.com/. He is a self-described "independent" in political leaning, a "traditionalist" in worldview. In most cases I find myself agreeing with Mr. O'Reilly when it comes to the war on terror. When the subject of religion and Christianity comes up, I usually disagree with his theology.
I am glad that Bill O'Reilly has a plethora of his recorded statements at his disposal in the event that he gets accused by the likes of the "Rev." Jesse Jackson to have "convicted" Michael Jackson before the trial even began. Mr. O'Reilly was able to draw from several of his own recorded statements in which he stated that Michael Jackson was innocent until proven guilty. While I have heard Mr. O'Reilly express his opinion that he believed Jackson to be a pedophile based on the behavior and past history of the popular singer, this is a long stretch from pronouncing a legal statement of guilt.
"Rev." Jackson, find the Bible that you have so long ago abandoned and read it for a change.
- CrippleCrab
.
.