WOW! Semi-Retired minister! Remind me to never set foot close that church..The Bible also says Judge not... I AM a Christian, always have been and how dare anyone, especially a "minister" try and slander my beliefs because of my voting records. I AM a democrat, I AM a Christian, and the two are not mutually exclusive. This is one of the most horrible articles that I have read, even worse than Megawatt (just kidding) Everyone has an opinion, but don't cast judgements on all of those who don't believe they way you do. I think that even some republicans can find the offensive nature of this. A "minister" what a joke.

"Uuuuh, I think that's what Mr. McClellan is trying to say."

Uhh, I think you're wrong...

Since the official Democratic platform supports both the aberrations of abortion and homosexual sins, any vote for any Democrat who supported the party platform was a vote against both church and state.

my apologies mega--didn't mean to get my definitions confused. Thank you for not missing the point of my comment. You are always all over articles that are, "liberal" in nature, i can't say that I ever read one that was this offensive..but then again, I am an emotionless, immoral, corrupt liberal.

Perhaps you are correct. Minister or not I would be offended. I am just shocked that he subscribes to these beliefs and is a minister. I am sure his congregants are not 100% republican. (or perhaps they are depending on the church) I suppose I would just hold him to a higher standard. However, as i said, minister or not, that is a very harsh letter.

Anyone who thinks that "Christiam Morality" is all that saintly should consider that this is the week of the 30th anniversary of REVEREND Jim Jones slaughter of over 900 innocents at Jonestown. In the same paper as Reverend McClellan's screed was an article reportiing that 20 more children had been removed from the custody of the "Tony Alamo Christian Ministries." Add to that the fact that San Angelo is closely identifed with the FLDS child abusers who quote scriptures to justify their perverted world view.

Now the Reverend McClellan worries about the "Islamification" (is that even a word?) of America. I read that 25% of all registered voters in Texas believed, up to the time of the election, that Barack Obama was a Muslim. I would guess Jasper is one of those.

The framers of the Constitiution may have been wise men but, . . . they believed that black people were 3/5 of a person and that women were property and no one but landowners could vote. We have ammended the Constitution many times to fix their lack of vision and will continue to do so into the future.

The good news is that the good Reverend is "retired" that means he is old and will soon die and take all of his hate and bitterness out of the world with him.

Thank you Jasper for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. I eagerly await some answers to the following questions that puzzle me:
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may 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?
2. 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?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual un-cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. 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?
5. 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, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. 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?
7. 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?
8. 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?
9. 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 pig skin gloves?
10. 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. 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)

Very funny post, Shorebreak ! I think those are some of the same questions we have all asked at one time or another. I'd like to hear those answers too.

I too am a good Christian woman and a Democrat. And, I think we all might have to wonder what would Jesus be ? Democrat or Republican ? He hung out with unsavory characters and prostitutes. He believed in giving to those who had nothing. He believed in healing the sick no matter who they were or what their disease was. He was a Jew living in the middle east, so he must have been darker skinned and with dark eyes. He wore long hair and a beard. He had a funny name and talked to someone that nobody else could see. He was a carpenter by trade--middle income by today's accounting. Gee...I could go on and on.
Personally, I am offended by retired (thankfully) Rev. McClellan's post. Who is he to decide who is a Christian ? I believe that Jesus died for my sins and is my personal savior--and in my church, professing that and believing that makes you a Christian.

The phrase "Separation of church and state" may not be included word for word in the first amendment, but that does not mean such separation wasn't the intended result. Clearly that amendment was meant to establish freedom of religion, and not just for Christians, but for everyone. It was a protection against the establishment of a state religion and religious coercion by the government. The gist is that Americans are free to practice any religion they like, or none at all, and the government has no say unless or until our practices infringe upon the rights of others. Basing our laws upon the Judeo-Christian Bible is tantamount to establishing a state religion and goes directly against the intentions of the framers of our constitution. Many of the most prominent "founding fathers," including Thomas Jefferson and James Madison(if you don't know why they're particularly important, look them up), were deists and unitarians. It does not follow that they'd have based any legislation upon traditional Christian values. The mention in the Declaration of Independence of man having been "created" in no way implies Christianity specifically, as almost every belief system includes a creator deity. I do not believe that either the DOI or the Constitution mention Jesus or YHWH specifically at any point.

In response to darques,

That is very unseemly of you to wish for someone's death, but I am glad to know that Mr. McClellan will go to heaven.

Shorebreak,
While I am sure that you must think yourself to be terribly clever, your post actually just reveals your ignorance. Try reading the Bible from cover to cover and not just pulling verses out of context with no wisdom or understanding on your part.

Darqes,
Actually, McClellan will NOT die, but his soul shall live forever with his Savior. While it is true that he is very adamant and passionate about moral and Scriptural matters, your words "hate" and "bitterness" couldn't be less applicable to describe him. He cares for the souls of others, is a true "neighbor" to those he encounters, and you'd probably be very surprised to know of all his kind acts to complete strangers who are VERY different from him. He truly tries to practice the concept of "hating the sin, but loving the sinner." He DOES understand that all people (including himself) are sinners, and that is what motivates him.

You stick with your biblical interpretations of salvation, and let the rest of us enjoy our Christitanity as we know and profess it.

Did you ever notice, WTXlady4sure, that when the self-righteous get called on the carpet they can only reply that one is either ignorant or confused for questioning them? That is because they feel threatened and are unsure of their own belief system. It's a standard defense mechanism on their part that's been around for ages.

Well looking strictly from a debate point of view, Shorebreak list several specific points and references... everyone else is just doing the typical bible thumping "Nu-huh!". If his points are so wrong, why doesn't one of these people who think they know the bible better than him actually cite some references to support your arguments? Probably won't happen... usually the bad bible thumpers either don't know the bible that well, are too lazy to have an intelligent debate, or are just too full of fire and bluster to think coherently.

So please, feel free to actually take some time and put as much thought into your answers as Shorebreak put into his questions.

Another interesting point is that today, we have conservative Christians who take passages from the New Testament, the Revelation of John mostly, and interpret those passages as having something to do with modern times or the future. Sorry, the Revelation of John was written for people living in the 2nd century who were being pressured by Rome. It was written in a code that only they would understand. It is apocalyptic literature that is open to interpretation, but only for that period of time. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with us today. In fact, the Revelation of John was such a controversial book, it was left out of many, if not most, early manuscripts of the New Testament. The bishops who, after much bitter fighting, decided, more or less, what should consist of what we call the New Testament (in 381 AD) thought at first to toss the Revelation of John as being unworthy of inclusion in the sacred material. In the end, however, they stuffed it in to bring up the rear. The only people who use it are the end-time theorists and ultra-conservative Christians who like to write novels and books about how everyone except born-again Christians are going to get cooked when the savior comes back. Given that, it's completely understandable why those conservative Christians might think Obama's positions on abortion and gays "threaten their freedom" and why indeed, they would label the President-elect, and those that support him, as "aberrationists", as Mr. McClellan has done.

People are free to believe whatever they like, but the most important thing is to keep religion and the power of the state separate. Religious leaders should not have any power over anyone other than those of their congregation who are willing to toss common sense out the window and do whatever they are told to do by their religious leaders.

As an agnostic, I find all religions to have man's fingerprints all over them. You want to believe that God "inspired" religious writings? OK by me, as long as you don't try to tell me that I have to believe it too. No religion should be able to dictate beliefs or behavior to people who don't believe in them.

so true housemouse.can't wait for god megs response.

"The choice is yours and yours alone ma'am. Of course, you should know that there may be dire consequences involved with your decision. According to the Holy Bible, the only unpardonable sin is the final rejection of God's gift of salvation through the death and resurrection of His Son, Jesus Christ."

Thanks for the education mega. It just crystallized for me; the Bible uses scare tactics too.

Jasper is giving his opinion, which is called Freedom of Speech. And just as he gives his, doesn't mean anyone else can't give theirs.
That being said, I'm one of those dumb people who beleives in God, but won't contend to make anyone else.
However, because I beleive in God, doesn't make me good or democrat or republican , or athiest, agnostic,or any other religion. I actually didn't vote this year at all. My reason is mine alone, personal, just as my faith is personal and mine alone.
I would have to say, If Christ walked in my house right now, it would completely devastate me, because it's not about being GOOD Christian. It's about LIVING as he ask us to. That to is personal, heart issue.
I would never get an abortion, I don't beleive in two men or two women being married.
But each of those decisions are an individual decision.
The constitution is wonderful. But within the constitution there is the judicuary, who are the Supreme Law makers of this great nation.
Without laws, you have Chaos. We are NOT Christ at this time. We are only a light to shine for others. No one can be accountable for someone else's actions, just our own.

There is a beautiful song called, "His eye is on the Sparrow" So if God knows all, see all, and has his eye on the sparrow, I know he watches ME. God knew before the constitution, or the forefathers of this country, what words they would write. He knew long before Obama or Mc Cain were born what every word, every action out of thier mouths would be. I'm at peace at all times, because I know GOd already knows.

well meg one thing i do know is i don't need any advice from the likes of you.i do not hate people who are different than me as you do.i know you will say you don't hate, but your post prove otherwise.

I'm not "rejecting" anything. As an agnostic, I simply see no evidence for the truth of the things you state with such finality. By that standard, it's as if God were saying "Love me...or else!" Well, you can have compliance through fear, but love...not so much.

I like to think that if there is indeed a God, he, she or it has been misinterpreted through all of the many "holy books" of mankind, and really does have our best interests at heart, even if it isn't always apparent on earth. Actually, the concept of reincarnation makes far more sense than the traditional "one strike and you're out" beliefs. But I really can't see any evidence to make me say that any one religious belief is any better than another, or any truer.

A voice of reason! Thank you.

like i said you are a hater,and about as goofy as little bush.true so true.

What is the matter mega? Feeling persecuted again. Maybe you should follow your own advice and find another hobby if you cannot take it.

Well then, stop whining.

There you go again. Maybe that is why we seem to zero in on you. Your facts are usually wrong or misrepresented.

It appears you have your political persuasions mixed up. With the party you are in, you had better watch your back.

(This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of user agreement.)

You overlooked the facts, once again. Regardless where the information came from, the facts are indisputable. (The web site was provided by Google.)

You slur that was deleted implied being gay was a liberal issue.

poor little baby.

A true far right conservative. Blame it on someone else. Sorry, I did not have anything to do with your post being removed. You did it all on your own.

Like I said, maybe you need to take an introspective look at yourself as it is your posting style that gets you edited. You are always hateful and insulting.

I did not know the other articles and links on the site had obscene words or other links you find objectionable. I only provided an article to show the gay side of the Republican Party since you implied being gay was a liberal condition.

Leave it to you to explore the seedy side of the link.

For the record: Liberals actually read and believe all those pretty words in the Declaration of Independence about "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and in the Bill of Rights about freedom of speech, religion, assembly, privacy, and all the rest of it. We want to live in the country the Founders described. We believe that the nation's founding documents expressed a uniquely powerful moral contract between the people and their government, and an audaciously positive vision of people's ability and competence to shape their own future. When we get annoyed, it's usually because we believe so much in America's astonishing promise—and our own responsibility for realizing it—that we're sorely disappointed when the country falls short of that standard. We really want to believe we can do better. Conservatism, by contrast, tends to take a dim view of human nature, prefers hierarchy to liberty, and isn't completely convinced people can or should be trying to contravene the will of God or their betters by trying to arrange their own futures. This tends to lead to a selective reading of the Constitution (as well as the Bible), and—as we've seen in the Bush years—a far more flexible attitude toward its interpretation.

Where oh where did mega go. No trace is left on the website.

I wonder when and as whom he will materialize as next. Or, did the SAST pull his plug for good?

Well good Christian brothers and sisters in Christ. What a great letter as it brings out the best in men/women especially those calling themselves Christians (Many will come in my name). Several of you are misinterpreting the bible and are unaware of its origin or use adulterated new age bibles. What I see are many Christians apathetic toward evil, we are to fight evil, we are to come apart from evil, we are to abhor evil.

If you condone evil you are part of the Christian problem of today. You are the diluted Christian, I would rather ye be hot or cold, not luke warm....spew you out of His mouth. That is why Christians accept what the world throws at us. We are in the world, not of it.

EVERY Christian should be against abortion and homosexuality. To say, I would not get an abortion myself, but..... and then go and cast a vote FOR abortion and homosexuality is contradictory as a Christian. From such come apart.... But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Me thinks many Christians lack the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13, John 4:10) And by the way, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the only unforgiveable sin.

I know, judging, ever heard of righteous judgement?

vietnam vet,

What gets me is that we are not debating some profound theological issues here.

Isn't it interesting how humans have the intellectual capacity to reach the most refined levels... or the ability to act like animals and lose all sense of reasoning.

I once heard, "you cannot act like the animal without becoming completely animalistic." Indeed, the very act of condoning murder of an innocent life or homosexuality is all rooted in depravity.

You know, the author of confusion deceives himself into believing there is a backdoor entrance into the temple. Indeed, the road to The Truth is so very narrow.

Ponder on that boys.

Truthisanabsolute, I agree and Jesus said, "MY sheep hear my voice." Problem is not enough Christians hear him.

Christian's should step back and ask themselves, "would God give place to this and should I sponsor the acceptance of it being a Christian?" If God says its evil, then why should a Christian be greater than God and approve it? "Even the very elect will be deceived in the last days." Christian's are you one of "The Deceived"?

Adding to the commentaries I would like suggest that if any Christians have any doubts about who you are in Christ please read the following and rededicate your life:

PRAYER OF SALVATION (Repeat the following OUT LOUD) Heavenly Father, thank you for your Son, Jesus. I know that He shed his blood and died on the cross for my sins, that He rose in three days and sits at your right hand. Jesus, I renounce the things of Satan, forgive me for all my sins and come into my heart. I ask the Holy Spirit to come into my heart to guide me into all truth. I ask this in the name of your Son, Jesus. Amen. John 3:3, 5-7 (KJV)

Our Founding Fathers were probably aware of abortion, but it wasn’t illegal in 1787 (it would become illegal about 60 years later), so they would probably not have much of an opinion of the procedure or the opinion would be something along the line of: that belongs to women. As to homosexuality, that is a more difficult item. There were gay people at the time but they were not discussed in polite company and the word didn’t exist at the time. The last point may sound silly, but if you don’t really have a name for something then it is difficult to talk about it. The Founding Fathers may have been against it, but probably not totally, since liberty, to many of them, meant freedom from intrusive laws. Meanwhile, the explicit goal of Christian Reconstructionists, the most extreme among right-wing Christian Nationalists, but all adherents of Christian Nationalism support the general goal of amending the U.S. Constitution to transform it from a document designed to create a secular, civil government into a religious document designed to reflect "God's standards." These groups stress the need for the need for a constitutional human life amendment which toyally bans abortion, and an amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Advocacy of such positions are characteristic of those who deny that there is any legitimate separation between private religious doctrine and civil regulation of public affairs. Our Costitution is not only the basis for the separation of church and state, but also civil, secular society today. The absence of any separation between religion and civil law is what you find in theocracies — and only theocracies. What this means is basically advocating changing America from a secular government to a Christian theocracy. Definitely not what our Founding Fathers intended for this nation.

Speaking of our founding fathers, funny how Jefferson only mentioned separation of church and state once... and that was in the form of an informal letter.

Yet, my oh my how liberals love to boast of such as being some foundational tenant. Say Purple, since you purport to be authority on the Constituition and the likes, I challenge you to produce one authoritative document on the aforementioned.

Truthisanabsolute; you are correct and if people want to learn the truth about seperation of church and state the should visit wallbuilder dot com. Teach your children the truth not what you uninformed sources tell you.

We are spiritual beings having an earthly experience.

To: Shorebreak
The new testament overrides the old.

Agree to disagree. Your journey is solo, your destination is up to you.

God gave us free will..........vengence is HIS.

You have NO control over other people's choices, you can pray for them, but not judge them. You NEVER know why anyone goes through what they go through, GOD does know.

Proclaimed Christians, are we not to become more Christ-like? Love unconditionally? Pray for our enemies, turn the other cheek, etc. I don't believe that means when we feel like it....

We cannot know what the founders would have thought about the "values issues" that are wedge issues for cultural conservatives today: abortion, gay rights, stem-cell research, the right to die, but we certainly can infer what Jefferson would have thought about claims that the Ten Commandments and the Bible are the foundation of American law. The religious right's attempt to rewrite the history of the nation's founding is not some abstract debate of concern only to constitutional scholars but an integral part of a larger assault on all secular public institutions. If the Constitution really were based on the Bible, for instance, how could there be a valid legal argument against teaching creationism in public school biology classes or adding Bible courses to public school curricula? And if the founders intended to base the government on Christianity or monotheism, they failed to spell out their intentions in the Constitution itself. There was certainly ample precedent for doing so, not only in the Articles of Confederation but in nearly every state constitution.