Disgusting Women.

[P J C]

May God in heaven spread a slow painful plague through this evil slut whore's ugly Jew Hating Catholic Hating America Hating sorry excuse for a church.

[Rubystars]

I agree with Alan Colmes for once!

[P J C]

So do I. His retaliation was very justified. I would have even understood if he used an anti-christian slur.

[Sparky]

Is this woman being put on national television for any other reason than to get a rise from the audience?  Seems like tabloid journalism to me. 

[Lisa]

Those Westboro people are a bunch of evil nutjobs. 

[eb22]

    It's rare when I agree with Alan Colmes.  This is one of the very few times I agree with him.       

[AsheDina]

  She is not balanced in this AT ALL.  One thing though- this nation is totally debaucherous- sin run amok.

[q_q_]

Oh I remember these people.  This is the American Taliban.  And will you believe it, their church actually has a website:  http://www.godhatesfags.com/


This might have been fun to watch:
http://www.godhatesfags.com/written/fliers/20081114_prop-8-kansas-city-wichita.pdf

they don't kill anybody and they don't support people that kill anybody.

they are nothing like the taliban.

[P J C]

Oh I remember these people.  This is the American Taliban.  And will you believe it, their church actually has a website:  http://www.godhatesfags.com/


This might have been fun to watch:
http://www.godhatesfags.com/written/fliers/20081114_prop-8-kansas-city-wichita.pdf

Click the contact button at the top of the website and send them a nasty comment.

[Ulli]

I am not so shure, if this punishment issue works like this women said.

In the end, this would mean, that some people have to suffer because of the fags.

I think, that everybody is punished for his own sins. God is just, like we can read in the story of Lot.

[q_q_]

I am not so shure, if this punishment issue works like this women said.

In the end, this would mean, that some people have to suffer because of the fags.

I think, that everybody is punished for his own sins. G-d is just, like we can read in the story of Lot.

you mean the story where G-d destroys the entire city, and only a handful get out thanks to Abraham.

[Ulli]

I am not so shure, if this punishment issue works like this women said.

In the end, this would mean, that some people have to suffer because of the fags.

I think, that everybody is punished for his own sins. G-d is just, like we can read in the story of Lot.

you mean the story where G-d destroys the entire city, and only a handful get out thanks to Abraham.

Yes, God didn't kill Lot because he is no part of the wickedness, so if I generalize this, He will not kill arbitrarily US-soldiers for the sins of fags.

Of course He has his reasons, why He allowes this deaths. But His reasons are locked for us.

[muman613]

I am not so shure, if this punishment issue works like this women said.

In the end, this would mean, that some people have to suffer because of the fags.

I think, that everybody is punished for his own sins. G-d is just, like we can read in the story of Lot.

you mean the story where G-d destroys the entire city, and only a handful get out thanks to Abraham.

Yes, G-d didn't kill Lot because he is no part of the wickedness, so if I generalize this, He will not kill arbitrarily US-soldiers for the sins of fags.

Of course He has his reasons, why He allowes this deaths. But His reasons are locked for us.

Shalom,

I did a lot of learning about Lot & Sodom this Shabbat. There is a lot to understand here and it is not good to make generalizations. Lot was 'good' in a manner of speaking, but he want not really 'good' as he only followed along after Abraham. The only reason Lot was saved was because he was related to Abraham, not because he was 'so good' as some people think.

muman613

[q_q_]

I am not so shure, if this punishment issue works like this women said.

In the end, this would mean, that some people have to suffer because of the fags.

I think, that everybody is punished for his own sins. G-d is just, like we can read in the story of Lot.

you mean the story where G-d destroys the entire city, and only a handful get out thanks to Abraham.

Yes, G-d didn't kill Lot because he is no part of the wickedness,

Look in the text(you only accept that anyway!).
Lot offered his daughters to the men!

So of course he took part in the wickedness

And of course he chose to live in that bad society.

many suggest that he was not a bad guy.. but the society influenced him into doing that very bad thing.

so if I generalize this, He will not kill arbitrarily US-soldiers for the sins of fags.

Of course He has his reasons, why He allowes this deaths. But His reasons are locked for us.

Well how do you know he "will not kill arbtirarily .... for the sins of ..."
You just said "His reasons are locked for us".

I'm sure that not all in Sodom and Gemorah were fags, but many were, and i'm sure that many didn't see anything wrong with it, call them fag-enablers.  With the exception of Lot and a few close ot him, they were all destroyed.

Look at the story of Noah and the flood.


It is of course well known as a point in judaism that jews are rewarded and punished collectively.  All in the same boat, one idiot drills and it affects us all. An obvious case is Israel, where this can all happen very naturally.

[Ulli]

Yes Lot did.

But the two were Angels of G-d. So they were His legates.

I think he knew it, because there is written that he bows down before them to the earth. This is no regular salutation, but is only for kings and up.

Lot did all trying to guarantee the safty of them. So I think, that his action makes him not part of Sodom, but could be seen as righteous, because he was ready to sacrify his two doughters for the legates of G-d.

I don't agree with Lot's behaviour, because he has had first in my oppinion no right to sacrifice his daughters and second his faith seems to be weak if he thought that Angles need his help to get saved from a savagly fag-mob.

Althrough wrong his intention was at least honorable.


Before a few monthes I have read Hesekiel. I have looked it up. Chapter 18 says, that G-d will not kill the righteous for the wicked. But I think I have not all sources read to this issue so it could be there different sides of this topic.

[Abben]

what a pathetic women

[q_q_]

Pheasant,

desert dwelling people e.g. even arabs today, are very hospitable.

I suspect that if those men weren't his guests, he wouldn't have gone to such insane lengths to prevent them from getting "brutalized".

I wouldn't think that this act which was obviously wrong, would be a merit to him that got him out of there.

Infact, maybe other sodomites would also be protective of their guests - people whome they are hosting.  It would be a mark of disrespect perhaps if word got round that while staying under the home of
Mr Bilco,  they went through such terrible treatment.  Mr Bilco has a reputation , and in that hospitable society, one has to go out of one's way to make sure his guests are comfortable.   I think that's a more reasonable thing to read in.

Really you've read alot into it to come to that conclusion that you came to.

[Rubystars]

QQ if the crowd were a bunch of homosexuals then why would they have wanted his daughters anyway?

[Scriabin]

Disgusting Women?

Wasn't that the name of a late-eighties sitcom?

[muman613]

Disgusting Women?

Wasn't that the name of a late-eighties sitcom?

I think they still run Disgusting Women on TVLand from time to time out here...

muman613

[q_q_]

QQ if the crowd were a bunch of homosexuals then why would they have wanted his daughters anyway?

The act of anal sex between two men  is not just done by what we know as (male) homosexuals - people whose inclination is for males only, like we read about.

In the arab world you get very immoral perverts trying to show their physical superiority by dominating/humiliating a man they believe iare weaker.  

In Male Prisons too, there are no women, and there's lots of immoral perverts who are desperate, and do it to show superiority over another. They may do it as a gang too - less of an accomplishment. But maybe it gives them a buzz.

There could be alot of bisexual behaviour too. The following seems hard to believe in our western society. But unbelievably, I read that in Roman times  most people were bisexual, and julius caesar was considered odd for only liking women!

Whatever it is. The mentality of a rapist is totally different to that of a normal person. I doubt that it is pure sexual passion that leads them to it. So, even "straight" rapist types could rape somebody of their own gender. (maybe they often rape women because it's easier)

It is probable that in prisons or sodom and gemorah, or arab societies, what you have is bisexual behaviour with rape.

It could have been this society of sodom and gemorah, were a particular bunch of weirdos. i.e. it attracted a certain type of person. And they had their own culture which - thankfully - we don't have , at least not in the west!  

[Rubystars]

Thanks QQ. That seems to make sense, so they really were in danger.

[q_q_]

Thanks QQ. That seems to make sense, so they really were in danger.

Yes, but perhaps in a world of such brutality, perhaps getting raped was just a horrible inconvenience! Like going out and getting soaking wet. And Lot would have known who had his daughters and when they would have been finished with them they'd have returned them. So it would all have been within known limits.

Danger at that time is hard to imagine, but an example that stands out would have been when Lot was taken captive. He wouldn't have been able to provide for his family, and they could have killed him, and tortured him, indefinitely.
People probably also had to fight off wild animals. 

I know that in our society, people would rather fight to the death than get raped.  But it's concievable that in their society, their values were a bit different, and it was so common people didn't think of it is the most terrible disaster.

Still, Lot wanted to look after his guests.  Meaning treating them -really- nicely.  It looks to me like Lot saw it as an inconvenience rather than a danger.

It's hard to imagine the kind of dangers that they faced..

And maybe the girls were safer than his guests. Because the girls were known, and they were his, and in their culture, the girls would be returned to him.
Whereas foreigners would be treated without that "respect".

[muman613]

Hello,

Do you know that they would have been treated well? I have the impression, from what I have heard about the people of Sodom, that they still would have suffered. The people of Sodom inflicted punishment and pain on people for showing hospitality to guests. The fact that he handed his daughters over to them was not in the best interest of their safety. I think that Sodomites were prepared to barge down the door and pull the guests out. The reason that Lot offered to wash their feet after they agreed to stay over was because if they were discovered beforehand the townspeople would have noticed that their feet were cleaned and thus they were long-term guests with Lot.  This idea is expressed here:

http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/Parasha/orchards/archives/vayera61.htm
Avraham gives hospitality to three travelers. Not knowing they are angels the first thing he does is offer to wash the dust off their feet. Rashi says Avraham, thinking they are Arabs, knows it's possible they worship such dust and he doesn’t want to bring idolatry into his house. He first washes their feet and then he invites them to sit and eat. Rashi throws in at this time that Avraham’s nephew, Lot, was not so nit-picky about the idolatry because we see later on that Lot invites the angels in and then offers to wash their feet. So far so good.

Jump ahead to 19:2 where Lot does his inviting, "Spend the night and wash your feet," and Rashi now says Lot had good cause! He was living in Sodom where hospitality was a crime. If he was caught with guests with clean feet he may be accused of having housed them for a few days already. If their feet were still dirty it would be evident that they had only just arrived. This was certainly a situation Avraham did not have to deal with! Maybe Lot was just as concerned as Avraham about idolatry!? Lot just knows that rather than praying to idols one must choose death but for some Arabs to track a little dust into the house, what’s the big deal? Rashi, why did you portray Lot in a poor light before?

Because Hashem helps a person in the direction he wants to go! When Lot separated from Avraham, where did he go? To Sodom!!! Lot knew what Sodom was like and he knew, having been raised by Avraham, that housing guests was something he was going to do EVEN in Sodom. As noteworthy as that may be, the two Rashi's together tell the story as it is. Lot did not feel the need to distance himself from idolatry as Avraham did and, therefore, was willing to live in Sodom, even if it meant bringing idols into the house! According to your desires Hashem does provide! Which brings us right into our next vortlach…

I think that the fact that he handed his daughters over indicated a lack of moral character. This lack of character finally expresses itself in the fact that Lot sleeps with his daughters after Sodom is destroyed.

muman613

[q_q_]

Hello,

Do you know that they would have been treated well?

they would have been raped.

I have the impression, from what I have heard about the people of Sodom, that they still would have suffered. The people of Sodom inflicted punishment and pain on people for showing hospitality to guests. The fact that he handed his daughters over to them was not in the best interest of their safety. I think that Sodomites were prepared to barge down the door and pull the guests out.

indeedy.

I think most people nowadays would consider being raped "unsafe."

What with all these STDs going round nowadays ;-)

Regarding the feet.. I don't think the rashi(no doubt based on a midrash), that you quoted was that relevant.
If just trying to explain about why he washed their feet.. Well, I imagine that desert people always have.. and muslims today carry that tradition even to the west. Desert people e.g. arabs, they wear these sandals and walk alot, and their feet need to be treated well, relaxed.. It's even more crucial for them than it is for us in the west
And if saying he washed them after they came in. A plain text explanation is that he wanted them to come in quickly. What with the disgusting behaviour and dangers outside.