Comments on: For born-again governor, love is a matter of faith

By: Kirk

Kirk — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:55:20 +0000

What the fuck did I just read?

By: JERRY@SARASOTA

JERRY@SARASOTA — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:14:33 +0000

I have ZERO sympathy for the man…he wanted Clinton IMPEACHED for one B.J.!

By: boB

boB — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:50:34 +0000

Does DOMA say anything about this? It looks like traditional marriage needs to be protected against things other then same sex relationships.

By: Lizbeth

Lizbeth — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:20:37 +0000

“That high doesn’t last, Chapman warns” Not true. The high can last, it can change, and it can die out. Saying that it doesn’t last is disproved when there are couples around who still act like newlyweds even though they’ve been together for decades. This is just another excuse from the Evangelical Church to “force” their traditional values on people. I am not saying that the great emotions that comes with a new love will just stay around if its “true love”; both people in a relationship have to work to keep it alive. I hate to think of the confusion this man’s take on religion is causing in that community when it comes to emotions and relationships. I do not believe love is an ephemeral and fleeting emotion; it stays, grows, deepens and changes. This man is cheapening the role love plays in relationships, whether they be romantic or otherwise. Trying to force something that is not there is never a good foundation for a relationship.

By: sait

sait — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:08:11 +0000

20 years ago, I would have dismissed all of “Cubby’s” spiel. But, now older and wiser–and more conservative (it happens with age)–I would like to think that same-sex love can adhere to at least SOME of his values. I’ve seen many relationships come and go in our community because something “better” comes along. Bed-hopping, serial monogamy, breaking others up for sport or challenge or because those who are unhappy begrudge those who are…and what about single lesbians who are viewed with suspicion by coupled lesbians who deem them potential threats to their relationships? How is that different than “Cubby’s” view of other women? It would be nice to have a formula for gay marriage and monogomous relationships–a set of rules to follow–for building solid relational foundations that can be relied upon to not crumble in times of turbulence.

By: Sarrellec

Sarrellec — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:36:21 +0000

What Daniel S. said.
Is it any wonder at all that these people cannot comprehend the capacity for love of one man to another?
They cannot comprehend the capacity for love on a man for a woman.
It’s a “bargain”!
This is mideivel!!! ( I spelled that wrong)
No wonder they cheat on their wives!
They’re not with someone they WANT to be with. They’re not following their own sense of worth or enjoyment or fulfillment.
They’re following some *plan*–a list of instructions.
My recipe for a successful relationship?
There is no such thing as a honey-moon period.
If one manufactures a personna to project in order to get someone to fall in love with them and then, after some arbitrary amount of time, throws out that personna and introduces a completely different one, then expects the connection to continue…well, that’s just nuts.
If you treated your partner courteously, with respect, with diligence and care when you met and during this “honeymoon” period, then continue to do so.
WHY is it okay to treat someone you care about worse than you would treat a stranger on the street?
Please and thank you and “will you?” and “can you?” instead of “do it” and “you better do” MUST continue throughout the relationship.
Anyone who expects someone to stay with them by screaming at them, not treating them politely because they feel they no longer have to is deluding themselves.
12 years later and we still ASK and not TELL. We still say thank you and please.
There is NEVER a time in a relationship wherein treating your partner less politely or courteously or personally than you would treat a stranger on the street you’re meeting for the first time is okay.
As for monogamy…?
Wellll….that’s another story.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:07:44 +0000

“Their point is that love is not a feeling,” Sanford told The Associated Press in a tearful two-day confessional. “It’s a choice. It’s an action.”

It’s a crock of shit. Where do these people get their ideas from? Despite what some people like to claim, you cannot CHOOSE to feel a certain way. You cannot control your emotions. You can control the manner in which you express them – or at least most people can. You can make a decision, consciously or otherwise, to suppress an emotion. You can choose whether or not to act on an emotion. However, you cannot control how you feel. Love is not a choice, though if these nutjobs believe otherwise it certainly explains why they believe homosexuality is a choice.

Governor Sanford did nothing wrong by falling in love with another woman. He did nothing wrong until he made the conscious decision to act on those emotions. THAT was the choice, and it is sickening to see him portrayed as part-hapless victim and part-romeo-type tragic slave to love. He was a hapless victim and a tragic slave to love when he merely had the emotion, but the moment he made the decision to act on it he ceased to be a victim.

What is even more sickening is how all his Christian cronies are rushing to “counsel” and “support” him, while they will happily condemn us. Excuse me, nutjobs, but which did your God condemn in the ten commandments – adultery or homosexuality? And which, therefore, is the greater “sin”? Why are you not spitting at him in the street? Why are you not driving him from your churches and demanding he be removed from office? Why is he worthy of your compassion, despite committing one of only ten crimes expressly forbidden by your God, while homosexuals are not when there are only vague references condemning homosexuality that many academics accept are probably expressions of man’s prejudice rather than God’s condemnation?

Sanford is a sinner. He has violated your God’s law. I demand that you either treat him like the vile piece of human crap your precious Bible commands you view him as, or stop pretending you have any respect for the book and stop using it as a justification for your hatred and bigotry.

I can accept your hatred, but not when it is accompanied by hypocrisy. Either your God’s laws matter, or they don’t. You can’t have it both ways.

By: kujie

kujie — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:33:13 +0000

by plutonic i mean like pluto, as in the size of your ass.

By: Dieter

Dieter — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:04:33 +0000

to the dolt who said we should believe in PLUTONIC love….Does that mean having sex with PLUTO?…..
me thinks you need a dictionary….

By: kujie

kujie — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:17:20 +0000

It’s called keeping it in your pants. Have these people ever heard of plutonic love? Love that is not sexually gratifying? These assholes just need to learn how to keep this stuff in their pants and don’t make your penial mishapes into some kind of life lesson.