Some members of my family have posted their thoughts and comments on the "Guestbook" page.  Rather then delete them, I decided to allow them to stay so long as certain rules are followed.  I also think it would only be fair to have the opportunity to respond publicly for the benefit of other readers.

First rule, Don't preach to me.  I have not arrived at my decision about the notion of a god willy nilly.  A reasoned analysis of everything I've seen and read has convinced me that the whole system is built on a myth.  As such, your quotes and comments from the bible, or what you believe god says, is irrelevant.  I realize this will create tremendous problems in your efforts to communicate.  I hope this will force you to start thinking a bit more rationally. 

That is not to say that I won't accept your own personal opinions BASED ON your belief in god.  I simply won't accept quotes from the bible as "proof" or justification for insulting my words, my decisions, or my actions.


Second rule, I will not accept any form of ad hominum attack on me or any members of my immediate family.  I am more than willing to consider what you have to say.  I would like to respond to your points or arguments.  However, if you want me to seriously consider your input, you will remove the insults and personal attacks from your correspondence.  I don't intend to edit your comments.  If there is any form of personal attack, the whole comment is deleted from the site. I know from personal experience that this will be difficult since personal attacks are such an integral part of my father's style.  But it can be done.

Having said that, I look forward to the opportunity to talk.  What I've done is copied qualified posts from the Guestbook section to here.  If I have a response to something said, it will follow each of the posts.

*********************************************************

COMMENT: From:  Paul the Apostle "nate's biological uncle"
Date: May 21, 2009

im back, so anyway, i see you call me crazy, unfortunatly insults don't phase me, since your atheist i won't give you my 5 paragragh long *God hates speech*
but i will offer you some logic for your noobish to the truth ways, youve never seen an atom up close but on camera, and ever anti-matter or space but on camera, it makes sence to your mind, but you can see tiny creatures and cells, but not closely, youve never seen God, he makes sence, and youve seen miracles on tv, youv got a bible, but sence your carnal mind finds atoms more appealling you forgive the up close evidence of atoms stigmata but are blind to the truth of God, God makes sence, seems impossible so you ignore it, atoms you have not seen up close, but people will say theyve seen them and catch it on tape, like God's miracles, but accoring to your carnal mind you don't see God because carnal sences don't detect him, as it is written, the light shineth in darkness, but the darkness perceiveth it NOT.

RESPONSE:  I realize I've violated my own rules by letting this one through.  However, this post existed prior to me adding the guidelines so I think it would be fair to let it stay.  And, difficult as they are to ferret out, there are a few attempts at points here that I'd like to address.

I don't know for sure who you are.  You refer to Katherine as your mother in a future post, so I think it would be more accurate to say you are “nate's biological niece or nephew”.  Let me see if I can make "sence" to you now.  The essence of your argument is that things can exist even if they can't be perceived.  Since I'm willing to consider the existence of certain things like anti-matter or atoms, I should therefore be willing to consider the existence of god.  I agree.  Sorta.

First of all, it's never a good idea to tell a person what they think or believe then set out to knock it down.  You don't know for sure if I believe in anti-matter, etc.   That's called a straw man argument and it is a logical error.  But I digress.  What I ACTUALLY believe is that there are many, many things about the world and the universe that we don't know.  I also believe that there are ways to discover these things.  That process requires the development of a hypothesis followed by testing and research to determine the accuracy of the hypothesis.  Someone postulated the existence of atoms.  Tests have been conducted over the years that demonstrates the "truthfulness" of atoms.  We can "see" them in many discernable ways and can predict with great accuracy how they will perform.  While the atom is still a theory, just like gravity is a theory, it's been "proven" so often that in real world practice we can behave as though we see them.

Now take that same process and apply it to the existing arguments that god exists.  At best, we have a group of writers some 1700 years ago piecing together a lengthy, error-riddled, theory about the existence of a particular god.  Bear in mind here that this particular "theory" was only the latest in a long, long line of theories going back to the Pantheistic notions of ancient Greece and Rome and before.  From that point, the whole attempt at logical proof collapses, as it must. All you have as proof is, well basically, the hypothesis.  If we can call the bible a hypothesis.  In other words, the bible argues that god exists then uses the words in the bible as the "proof" that god exists.  It's called circular reasoning and is another logical fallacy.

Believe it if you will, but understand the nature of your belief is not logical and there exists absolutely no proof of its truth.

***************************************************************

COMMENT:  FROM:  Katherine Rose Phelps-Griffin
Date:  May 21, 2009

In response to "The Insolent Braggart" your desire to "live as one people" is understandable and would not we all? Apparently you are not in touch with the reality that some of us are. There is just one little problem with your simplistic notion, that is, that the homosexual agenda is militant and extremist in nature and not to be taken lightly. Track down a copy of the Homosexual Manifesto, published in the late 1980s, read it, and it will give you, as a man, the creeps! Do you think God destroyed Sodom and Gommorah without real good reason? Everything God does is perfect, by definition. Everything man does is imperfect by definition, as we are born in and with sin.

As a general proposition, I understand that it is not pleasant to have people talking to you unpleasantly. However, there are times that it is necessary in order to be truthful! Further, I would add that the older I get, the more I realize the truth of what God has said about faith and hope being good and important, but that they are WORTHLESS without charity. Thus, I think the real issue is what is meant by charity? I believe included in the notion of charity is the idea of warning "your neighbor" to flee from the wrath to come. That is one manifestation of loving your neighbor as yourself. Do you actually think that it is pleasing to our creator to disobey concerning the one wife one husband for life issue and all of the other sexual immorality that goes on, apparently without a thought for the ramifications of those actions?! God has said that the ultimate result would be the degradation of homosexuality, and that those that are at that level of debasement have surpassed all other levels of disobedience and perversion. Natural affection for your children, those of you who have children and actually are with them to guide and protect them, should dictate that you want to protect them from the ever increasing number of sexual perverts, who are everywhere. Thus, a logical extension would require that you would oppose and fight against homosexual behavior, and get over acting like their conduct is taking place in a vacuum. Speaking of taking place in a vacuum, the childhood that Nate speaks of is not as simple as he would have you believe either, and he fails to tell about the fact that there were parameters within which all of us children were required to function, if for no other reason, the need for organization with that many individuals. Further, there was considerable consistency in the application of the punishment for disobeying those rules that were imposed, or for failing to meet the standard that was set. Much of what took place was a result of the shortcomings of all of the individuals that lived in that environment and the jockying for acceptance that is inevitable when there are that many children and only one mother and one father. With seven children of my own, I know the deceit that these little humans are capable of and the ability to sway the thinking of either my husband or myself, UNTIL we get to the bottom of the truth of a matter, IF THERE IS TIME AND OPPORTUNITY. I am not going to pretend that Nate did not endure a lot of mistreatment from a lot of people in that environment, as that would be unfair and untrue. I alone have the greatest authority to speak on this issue, I believe, as I was conscious of attempting to protect Nate from at least some of the unfairness, whether I accomplished that or not. I am not sure of the name of the person who posted the statement about the perspective of each individual being different in a given family or situation, but I believe that is absolutely the truth, and for that reason the complications in understanding each other and why certain things happen is multiplied geometrically. My point is, that it is all too complicated for a person to get to the bottom of, and all things will be revealed and the truth will be manifested at the Great White Throne Judgment, and until that time, it is CRITICAL for many of us to have faith that our creator, the only true, living God, WORKETH ALL THINGS WELL and NOBODY IS GETTING BY WITH ANYTHING ULTIMATELY. Many of you have told Nate that he is a hero, their hero, and well that may be. What about those poor souls that are sexually abused and damaged, it is hard to imagine the pain they endure in their lives after such trauma. Although there are supposedly parallels in the fallout from physical and emotional and sexual abuse, I contend that the greatest of all damage is that caused by sexual abuse at an age when a person cannot comprehend what is even taking place. Those homosexuals that you apparently want to "get along with" and "who deserve equal rights" are guilty of FAR worse perversion then those that sexually abuse and damage those unable to defend themselves in any way, children. I do not care about what any of you think, I for one am not interested in hanging out with or getting along with, or making argument for someone capable of that sort of damage!

Nate, I think you are disingenous when you characterize the situation with your wife of twenty some years coming to an end because you had a personal crises. You are the man, you are supposed to guide your house, in that you are the one that is held accountable to God for what happens to your wife and children, especially spiritually, and you cannot do that by taking off and abandoning them to live with another woman. Give me a break! There is surely a way that you could have stayed and taken the position that you were not going to speak of religion in any regard, if the issue was whether there was a God and whether religion was appropriate or not or if you were concerned with your children crying because they thought they were going to go to hell.

In response to all of you who have a problem with the notion that if you are not with those that oppose homosexuals, that you are going to hell, where is the harm in having that monster nipping at your heels?! If it is not true, good enough, if it is true, what better motivation to cause a person to be more diligent in making their calling in election sure?

The bottom line is, we are all going to stand before God and either be held accountable for our sins, or by an act of an all powerful God, of a gracious and undeserving nature, have our sins forgiven absolutely, as if they never existed. The knowledge about who those individuals are that God has chosen, is solely with God the father, who has allowed this knowledge to be with his Son and the Holy Spirit alone. Therefore, cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils! Really! Try this! Remember that we cannot depend on our understanding of things, because we are humans, and thus incapable of thinking like God. You speak these great swelling words about not believing anything that you cannot prove and you do away with faith completely. The nature of faith is a belief in that that is not seen, smelled, heard, felt, or tasted.

Speaking of logic, does it make sense to you that we send all of the people that we do over to fight wars against tyrants that threaten our safety and lives, when we embrace to our stupid breasts even greater and more dangerous tyrants in the form of homosexuals who destroy the soul after damaging the body!?

Instead of fighting against those that are fighting against such danger, why not either shut up or try to help!

Another thing Nate, with all due respect, you have either never respected or you have forgotten the duty to honor your parents, which I believe would include NOT talking about things that are really not anybody else's business.

Are the fear and hope you speak of tangible, Nate?

Finally, if your fear is of man, you shall stumble, and as well, if your hope is in man you shall stumble. Therefore, why not just admit that without the existence of an omnipotent being, there is no hope?!

Sincerely,

Your sister Katherine

This spirit is not broken just yet!

RESPONSE:

First, It's nice to hear from you Kathy.  It's been a long time.  I've thought of you often, and with affection, over the years.  I didn't realize you were married.  I think I knew about four of your kids.  It's surprising to hear you have seven. At least one of them appears to have a serious hate on for me atm.

You have much to say, and most of it I disagree with.  But that's the sort of thing that happens when one person rejects the entire basis of another's belief system.  Anticipating one of your reactions to that comment, I'd like to make the point that I DON'T reject the notion of morality, simply the notion that it flows from the christian god.

I would like the opportunity to respond to some of the comments and observations you made.

HOMOSEXUALITY:  As justification for your anti-gay beliefs, you seem to place great emphasis on this manifesto that was produced back in the 1980s.  I’ve heard prejudice defined as an attitude looking for evidence.  We were taught from our earliest memories that gays were evil.  That created the prejudice in our minds and hearts.  Now you go out and “prove” your prejudice true by finding this manifesto.  The manifestation that I see, by and large, is people like you and I who just happen to feel natural affections for those of the same gender, nothing sinister, nothing threatening humanity.   

Furthermore, you flow so easily into the argument of comparing homosexuality with pedophilia.  I can’t think of a single person who would argue that the sins of the catholic church in that regard have any relationship whatsoever to the sexual activity of two consenting adults.  The argument fails.  

DIVORCE:  If there exists a valid argument in opposition to the “one man, one woman, one lifetime” definition of marriage, it is the marriage of our parents.  To uphold this random standard at all costs subjected us, and continues to subject you and your offspring, to the bitter, hateful, violent ideology of our father.  It took the righteous power away from our mother to remove us from that danger and insist that our father change his behavior.  I reject your biblical standard of marriage, period.  Having said that, I don’t think you know me well enough to discuss the whys and wherefores of my divorce.  And it is supremely irrelevant to the basic issue that I pose on this website.    

Now I want to address a specific paragraph in your post where you said:   

“In response to all of you who have a problem with the notion that if you are not with those that oppose homosexuals, that you are going to hell, where is the harm in having that monster nipping at your heels?! If it is not true, good enough, if it is true, what better motivation to cause a person to be more diligent in making their calling in election sure?”  

Where is the harm?  That question casts a glaring spotlight on the seared conscience of our family.  In light of the truly horrible, insensitivity that our father and siblings have displayed over the last 18 years, the answer to such a question is self evident.  To taunt and torture a widow at the grave of her husband, to ridicule and laugh at the devastated parents who are burying a loved one…where is the harm?!?  Really Kathy?  

If you honestly believe that your salvation is contingent on the level of hostility that you display toward gay people, fine!  But it is another thing entirely to impose that requirement on others in the world, and it is truly evil to make that imposition at such a devastating moment in a person’s life.   Then to argue that if it’s not true, good enough…oh my god!  If there is even the slightest chance that it’s not true, if there is an ounce of humanity coursing through their veins, such behavior should be despised.  

Moving on, you made this point in your comments:   

“… the childhood that Nate speaks of is not as simple as he would have you believe either, and he fails to tell about the fact that there were parameters within which all of us children were required to function…,”  

I disagree Kathy.  I said repeatedly throughout my speech that my father couched his behavior in meeting biblical standards.  This argument is much like the one our sister Shirley raised in a recent post on another website.  The essence of this argument, as I understand you, is that discipline is necessary in raising children and therefore what our father did is justified.  So…you would advocate stoning a disobedient child?  How about breaking their bones?  Where exactly do you draw the line Kathy.  The point is NOT whether a child is better prepared for life if it learns discipline! 

Again, the nature of this argument flows from the extreme, hateful rhetoric that we heard throughout our childhood.  As difficult as it is, you must think for yourself now Kathy.  In what twisted universe does the violent behavior of our father equate to loving discipline?  And why, in the name of all that is holy, would you consider worshiping a god who would condone his actions?  

One final challenge to your comments.  Near the end you said:  

“Another thing Nate, with all due respect, you have either never respected or you have forgotten the duty to honor your parents, which I believe would include NOT talking about things that are really not anybody else's business.”  

It’s another one of those subtle arguments that helps perpetuate violation and abuse of women and children Katherine.  You should see the heart of that argument and violently reject it in light of your personal experience in that home.  I honor that which is honorable.  There is no honor in that situation until this puss-filled wound is lanced and exposed to the cold light of day.  If we could look at our father’s life and see that his actions in our youth were an aberration, and he had acknowledged his mistakes and made an effort to undue the damage, maybe there’s an argument for honoring. 

The truth is Kathy that at every stage of that man’s life he has willfully and deliberately violated and abused all those around him.  His theology and campaign today is just the latest iteration of that cruel nature.   Therefore, I will continue to beat this drum as a counter measure to that man and his system.
    *************************************************************