The old testament, although a hilarious collection of fictional stories, can't be used to justify legal decisions. You seem to have a clear moral perspective though - stoning someone for being gay is clearly one of the most ethical things one can do. Have you been sacrificing animals as God has told you to in the good book? Seriously, sometimes my friends and I sit around and read the old testament for pure comedic enjoyment. Even 2000 years ago, the old testament was ridiculous, that's why they needed a new one.

" Seriously, sometimes my friends and I sit around and read the old testament for pure comedic enjoyment". Do you really? I think sitting around as a group intent on mocking a book is a pretty lame way to spend time. Where else do you guys find amusement? If you are amused by, and spend time mocking, the Old Testament, you must have other worthwhile vocations. Perhaps hanging out by Garden Walk to mock the Hindu's coming out of their temple. Or maybe hanging out in soup kitchens to make fun of the poor people. I am curious. Perhaps we can soon read of other enjoyable pursuits with the Patton gang?

Laugh it up, all in good fun

Its something we have done, not often or routinely, but its much more enlightening than watching TV or playing video games, and I don't think you've ever attempted to view the old testament from a comedic light, such as the part where they give directions on how to treat the women you kidnap when you hold a city captive, and God's supposed sadistic obsession with animal sacrifice.

normally does not include the denigration of another or their beliefs. There are many things that I do not understand in this world, and I consider myself more intelligent and better read than many. I have learned that there is wisdom in many things and folly in many things desired by man.

One of my favorite lines from any book has the protagonist state “The wisest and the best of men-- nay, the wisest and best of their actions-- may be rendered ridiculous by a person whose first object in life is a joke." Could this describe you, Mike?

Many modern people equate animals and humans on the same plane and assign the same value for life. When you view the bible as you do, you see this “fictional” God as barbaric. You cannot fathom a reason behind such barbarity. But the bible clearly states that man has dominion over the world. The world in those days had value and wealth in livestock-as it represented a means of survival and propagation. A sacrifice in that context is a sacrifice of wealth and a portion of survivability. God wanted man to worship him, not man worshipping his own wealth or his abilities. In that context, animal sacrifice can be more than explained.

I don't care what anyone says there are specific locations in the bible where God clearly states how he feels about this.

So what? The Bible isn't the law of the land. It never will be either. This isn't a theocracy like some of the countries the rest of the world has to deal with due to their insane religious views. THANK GOD for free will.

A couple of cities existed in the Old Testament where it must have also been a "sign of the times!"

However, I did not know that kids looking at a gay person, such as a visit, could hurt their morals. I suppose looking at their Father and the man with him they didn't know about.

I will say that if I personally were in that situation as the gay Father, I would not bring anyone with me to visit my children.
I can't tell why the judge wanted the Grandparents excluded unless they were there to run off the gays!

The standards the world had when they stoned or hung gays ( was that the middle ages?)seem somewhat low tech standards! Was that about the witch-burning time? Or the Spanish Inquisition and the Iron Maidens?
I think water-boarding was invented about that time also.

I ask only because you clearly have neither sense of grammar nor composition. The substance of your scrawl reveals you to be a decidedly ugly little closed minded twit-turd-tard.

What does the sentence "now the children has to be drug into this mess" mean? What is a gay's and? Is it some strange part particular to gays? What is your's there? Can you get it from here?

Perhaps you should "for coverup your lifestyle", whatever that may be, and preferably far away from me.

Tard is too good for you. It is my sincerest hope that you haven't made children, but you are no doubt a world class breeder sow.

Moron.

that is the stupidest thing I have read in a while, so stupid I actually laughed. What leads you to believe that because he is gay he's going to have gay porn just laying around the house? Or do you just consider it typical for people to have porno that corresponds with their sexuality laying around in plain sight? That is outright prejudice.

Perhaps he thinks the children would be exposed to pornographic material not because the dad is gay but because one of the children testified that she already had been. Seems you are rushing to protect someone because they are gay and not looking at the fact that gay, straight or otherwise a bad parent is a bad parent and from everything I have seen on this case over the last several years this man falls into the catergory of a bad parent.

So......if Gay Dad happened to be HetroMan and was living with HetroWoman and the daughter found a Playboy, should HetroMan not be allowed to have visitation with his kids? No visits because the kids found some skin mag? What if the kids found a movie like Clockwork Orange or Pulp Fiction near the DVD player? Worse, the same, or OK?
Do we need some more laws that take away children from their parents if they have porn mags or movies in the house?