U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley to the United Nations

Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, cast a vote against a key resolution supported by most other countries.

Human rights groups are furious after the United States voted against a U.N. resolution condemning the death penalty and the way it is used to target LGBTQ people around the world.

27 nations voted in favor of the seemingly-uncontroversial resolution, but in a surprise decision, the U.S. was among 13 countries to oppose it. Joining them were governments with such stellar human-rights records as China, Iraq, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.   

Resolutions urging countries to abolish the death penalty are hardly new to the U.N. However, as opposed to past resolutions, this one specifically highlighted the unjust use of capital punishment against the LGBTQ community and other marginalized groups. Given the nature of the message, many expected the U.S. to vote in favor – or at the very least abstain from voting. Instead, Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, voted against it.

Immediate Blowback

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), America’s most prominent LGBTQ group, was quick to blast the current administration and Ambassador Haley. After the votes were counted, the group released a scathing statement:

“Ambassador Haley has failed the LGBTQ community by not standing up against the barbaric use of the death penalty to punish individuals in same-sex relationships. While the U.N. Human Rights Council took this crucially important step, the Trump/Pence administration failed to show leadership on the world stage by not championing this critical measure. This administration’s blatant disregard for human rights and LGBTQ lives around the world is beyond disgraceful.”

A rainbow flag on fire

The Crime of Homosexuality

It seems crazy to think that being gay can get you killed in some places, but that’s the startling reality. In as many as 10 countries around the world, homosexuality is a crime punishable by death.

“It is unconscionable to think that there are hundreds of millions of people living in States where somebody may be executed simply because of whom they love,” said Renato Sabbadini, executive director of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA).

He called the vote a “monumental moment” which showed broad international support for protecting LGBTQ rights. However, America’s decision to vote against created an unavoidable blemish on an otherwise encouraging outcome.

Is the White House Anti-LGBTQ?

A spokesman for the U.S. State Department insists that the vote had nothing to do with LGBTQ rights, and that the news reports were “misleading.” Officials claim that “the United States is disappointed to have to vote against this resolution,” and that the decision was due to “broader concerns with the resolution’s approach in condemning the death penalty in all circumstances and calling for its abolition”

That very well may be true, but the optics certainly aren’t good. The timing isn’t ideal either, as the White House is currently pushing for “religious freedom” legislation – a move that critics argue will provide a legal pathway to discriminate against LGBTQ folks.  

Is the Death Penalty Ethical?

All that aside, the vote also forces the U.S. to confront a tough question: why do we still use the death penalty? Most European countries have long since abolished the practice, on the grounds that it is inhumane. In fact, the U.S. is among only a handful of developed countries that still sentence criminals to die in a court of law. This interactive map breaks it down in detail:

Here in the U.S., the death penalty is given for only the most heinous crimes. The logic is that if a criminal is violent enough, they should meet violent ends. However, justice isn’t always just; over the years, there have been numerous people put to death who were later determined to be falsely convicted.

For their part, opponents of capital punishment argue that killing another humane is immoral, no matter their crime. Plus, they point out, the death penalty gives the individual the quick way out. Why not force criminals to spend life behind bars reflecting on their crimes?

Both sides make clear arguments, but unless we see significant public pressure to abolish the death penalty, things are unlikely to change. In the meantime, the United States appears determined to continue defending its use on the world stage.

Where do you stand? Is the death penalty a morally defensible form of punishment?



  1. Joe Stutler says:

    I’m not a fan of capital punishment. It diminishes us as a society.
    As for the death penalty for LGBTQ, that’s no different than a death penalty for race, height, eye color, etc.

    1. JOHN MAHER says:


      1. Sandra Lent says:

        Yes, well said Joe Stutler.

        1. John D. Partin says:

          I concur! Very excellently said, Joe Stutler!!!

    2. Rjr says:

      Just curious if you think Gods going to apologize to Sodom and Gamora?

      1. Guairdean says:

        No, He won’t, but it’s because the sin of Sodom has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Ezekiel 16:49 King James Version (KJV) Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

        1. Priscilla Ann Rutherford says:

          Finally! Someone who truly understands the reason for the destruction of Sodom! It had nothing to do with sexual orientation!!@

          1. Fer Guin says:

            People are stupidly uninformed…they just repeat things like a beaten parrot.

        2. truebluebethy says:

          Thanks for keeping us straight!

        3. Yvette Moore says:

          Well put! I get so sick of bigots using scripture to justify their disgusting behaviour.

      2. Michael Nason says:

        We are no God. We have no right for any reason to take life we can not give. And to support the death penalty for homosexuals Is disgusting.

        1. dotwilson@comcast.net says:


      3. Anita Rogers says:

        The Story of Sodom and Gamora was more than about sexual morality. It was about SIN not just sexual sin. Sex outside of marriage then was considered sinful in that context. Since this is a time when we denied homosexuals to marry then yes they were guilty of this sin. We were complicit with this sin by not allowing people who love each other to marry. This might also be thought as sinful when we deny people a chance to be redeemed. Nothing Jesus said makes homosexuality a top priority item to God. You can find old law’s of man that calls for the death of homosexuals. You can find some references from Peter about homosexuality, but he isn’t Christ and we aren’t Peter-ians.

        Somehow some Christians think Jesus got forgetful and just didn’t mention it. Maybe he was giving us a message that not allowing all to marry is sexual immorality?

        There were more sins that sexual sins going on in Sodom and Gomorrah. We just like to give greater weight to sexual sin.

        1. Daniel says:

          Anita Rogers,

          The story about Sodom and Gomorra was about sexual immorality. The people in the city demanded Lot to turn over the stranger so that they could get to “know him” To “Know” a person biblically is to have sex with them. The people of the city wanted Lot to give them the stranger so they could gang rape him. Lot refused to turn the stranger over to the people of the city so they knew him not. That is they did not get to gang rape and Sodomize the stranger against his will. For this God spared Lot and his daughters’ but not the stranger. Yet later in the story God allowed Lot’s daughters to get their father drunk and then they knew him. That is had sex with him. Was this willingly on Lots part since he was drunk or was it a rape of the father by the daughters? It was however incest to say the least.

          Morality and immorality as LBGTQ and non-LBGTQ’s go has nothing to do with that story. The Bible all kinds of sexual perversions and even a rape now and then. But the question one needs to determine is, ” who decided what is rape and what is the sexual perversions?” The bible provides details on this subject. That is why I am glad I am not a female! God instructs the unclean on how to become clean again. So short of the LBGTQ community banding together to rape a stranger I would say God gave them free will to chose how they live their life and the Death Sentence like that executed upon Sodom and Gomorra would not be rendered upon the LBGTQ people by God. Ergo nor should such a judgment be adjudicated nor carried out by any Nation upon said group. The Lot of them should be free to do as they please behind closed doors(consenting of course)

          1. Wendy says:

            That argument really doesn’t hold water at all. The euphemistic use of “yada” to refer to sex is always followed by something that makes it clear what is meant (Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived). It’s only used that way a few times, and always given specific context. It is, however, used hundreds of times to not mean “have sex with”. God knew David, even when he was in his mother’s womb. So God had sex with David’s mother? God also knew David, so that makes for a very weird story. According to Genesis 29:5, Laban was quite the player, and a homosexual (He said to them, “Do you know Laban, Nahor’s grandson?” “Yes, we know him,” they answered.). Genesis 42:8 is a bit confusing (And Joseph knew his brethren, but they knew not him.). Do a search, and look for all the crazy “Biblical knowing”. Positively shocking!

            If you want to find out what was going on in Sodom (not it’s real name…S’dom means “burnt” in Hebrew) read about it in the Mishnah. Burning infants alive in sacrifice to Molech, adult human sacrifice, cannibalism, murder of visitors to the city, unfathomable cruelty to strangers and the poor. That would cover the accusations in Ezekiel 16:49-50
            49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
            50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
            And Lot’s daughter didn’t “know” him. They “lay with” him. Incest, yes. But it doesn’t back up your claim about all the people of Sodom (and it was ALL the people) wanting to have sex with the angels.

        2. JD says:

          Remember that Yashua taught the word of the father Yaweah.Which would mean he taught all of his laws,safe to say he would have taught about the sin of homosexuality.Then to continue he said to follow the laws of man as well as the father.Which he also taught that just because you follow mans law does not mean it is right when it is in direct conflict with Yaweahs law.IE being gay and marriring another gay man may be manly legal but still scripturely sinfull.When we are grafted into the house of Israel ,saved, we are to put away those sinfull things..

          1. Carl Elfstrom says:

            My God doesn’t like your God,and doesn’t care much for Israel either.

          2. Carlton Doug says:

            Blah, Blah, Blah… more pathetic ignorance by one of the Sheeple.

      4. Dan Anderson says:

        Rjr – The fable of Sodom & Gomorrah was NOT about homosexuality, but of inhospitality and rape. Homosexuality is NOT about either.

        1. Carl Elfstrom says:

          Amen,Brother! I was first told the same thing by Rev. Lou Wiggs who started out being a Methodist minister and retired from being a Baptist minister, then founded both the MCC Church( not affiliated with MCCR) and the AIDS Coalition Of Coastal Texas,Inc. in Galveston.

        2. Wendy says:

          It’s not about inhospitality and rape either. Well, maybe tangentially about inhospitality, but only because strangers in Sodom were routinely cheated, stolen from, tortured, and killed. The mob, which was made up of all the people of Sodom, not just men, didn’t come to rape the strangers. The Bible, as is so often the case, leaves out parts of stories that were at one time very well known. According to the Mishnah, which gives details of Sodom, in addition to the things that were done to strangers, infants were burnt alive in sacrifice to Molech, there were adult human sacrifices, cannibalism (you know, all the detestable things mentioned in Ezekiel when God lists the sins of Sodom). The full list of sins is: 49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me.

        3. John D. Partin says:

          I would have loved to live in Sodom or Gomorrah.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            COWARDLY DOG!!!!, write posts under your own name, instead of mine, and stop hiding, if you have something to say about me, so that I can reply to you personally, and stop being so STUPID!!! as not to know that your icon is different than mine, which never changes, and proves that your post isn’t from me!!!

          2. John D. Partin says:

            Or do I have to talk about your mother and family next to get you to come out of hiding?!!!

    3. Rev paul collins says:

      Your so very right I’m not a fan of the death penalty next they will want to kill you because your not white it’s stupid

      1. Terry Satterthwaite says:

        I’m not a fan of the death penalty either. Next they’ll want to kill the un-born…oh, wait.

        1. Barney McComas says:

          Abortion, while terrible (whether or not one agrees it should be legal), is not punishment against the unborn. Please save your arguments on the issue for an appropriate article.

          1. Fer Guin says:

            See my comment above,…to which I will add: Ignorance in not only loud (especially in anonymity), but also abundant.

        2. John Owens says:

          LOL, Terry! Don’t you like how they try to regulate your speech so their contradictions are not so noticeable?

        3. Sara says:

          If you are so concerned about abortion and saving embryos’ lives you wouldn’t try to stop people from using contraception.

          1. John Owens says:

            Who is trying to stop anyone from using contraception?

          2. John Owens says:

            Never got an answer/

    4. Jared Sellers says:

      Finally someone with sense.

    5. Mark Ward says:

      Or for merely being an unwanted “tissue mass”!

      Frankly, there should be NO DIFFERENCE in outrage over some countries killing LGBTQwtf individuals, and countries which condone (or support/promote) abortion (especially past the point where medical science allows for the baby to survive outside of the womb!

      1. Carlton Doug says:

        Another ignorant Male thinking he has the right to tell women what to do with their bodies. LOL. Laughable! Step into the 21st century!!

        1. John Owens says:

          Spoken just like a brainwashed vagina-hat wearer.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            So, obviously, the opposite of “a brainwashed vagina-hat wearer”, according to him, is a man who does think that he has the right to tell women what to do with their bodies (in other words, a paternalistic and chauvinist pig!!!). If there is no way to avoid being insulted either way, that last charge is worse, by far, than the first one!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            No, you waste of oxygen. I just don’t think male chauvinists should have their tax money used to pay for the slaughter of innocents because of the bad behavior of other men and women.

            Your rhetoric is tired and very outdated, used to death, by stupid people who allow themselves to be programmed by the media. You are so Orwellian and cannot even see it.

    6. JD says:

      I don’t see where or how it diminishes us as a society.I am only for the death penalty IF there is 100% proof evedince the person is guilty not circumstantial evidence.Like other resolutions,which really mean nothing from U.N.,a dictator in Venezuela can continue to murder his country men.If and when he is taken down for his crimes his only punishment will be a vacation stay in a prison.All he has to do is claim homosexuality and he faces nothing for his crimes..Loop holes loop holes loop holes.

      1. Raul Aviles says:

        Good point

      2. John D. Partin says:

        I’m really very “surprised” not to be reading any anti-Nazi and anti-Klan posts from John Owens here by now because I thought that he would have written, at least, a hundred of them already!!! The neo-Nazis and Klansmen here are going to start getting the idea that he is afraid to death of them if he doesn’t start writing some posts against them very soon, since they have, no doubt, already seen my challenge to him to do so. I certainly understand his reticence about doing so because, though he can argue with and contradict liberals all day long and every day and never be in any danger from us at all, he can’t argue with and contradict neo-Nazis and Klansmen very much at all before they would decide to come after him and take care of this “enemy of the white race” (as they have done to many other people!). Since they already know from his other postings here that he is an MC member, he wouldn’t really be that hard to find, and so I can understand very well his reason for not writing any posts against them (and his fear of doing so!!!). Also, he has already said that he didn’t want to write any anti-Nazi and anti-Klan posts here or on their web sites because he didn’t want to be “put on the FBI’s watchlist for doing so”, which certainly indicates a great deal of fear on his part!!! “What on Earth makes you think that I am afraid of anything?”. That is what makes me KNOW!!!!! that he is afraid of the neo-Nazis and Klan here and on their web sites because, if he really isn’t afraid of them, then let’s start seeing those posts against them here and start writing against them on their web sites and PROVE!!!! that he isn’t afraid of them!!!! Until then, he, quite obviously, is afraid of them. Anyway, if he can, somehow, overcome his fear and reticence in this matter, I will be looking forward very much to reading those anti-Nazi and anti-Klan posts of his here very much and very soon!!!

        1. John Owens says:

          Why would you be surprised, Johnny? Do you think I care what you think? You don’t tell me about what to write. How would I prove anything to the Nazis and Klansmen, when they aren’t here? You are the closest thing to a Nazi I have found here.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            Who in here cares anything at all about what and your ilk care about?!!! NOBODY!!!! I don’t care about any of that or about telling you what to write about, but you said “What makes you think that I’m afraid of anything?” and so I’m still waiting for the evidence that you aren’t afraid of anything and of the Nazis and Klansmen, in particular, which you are still TOO AFRAID!!!! to come up with here!!! Anyone can say “I’m not afraid of anything!!”, but where is your proof that you aren’t afraid of anything? Until then, that is just BS!!! As I told you before, if you come out in here with anti-Nazi and anti-Klan posts, you will find out very quickly if Nazis and Klansmen are in here or not because any of them in here will come out of the woodwork like cockroaches to argue against your posts. So, if you’re really not afraid of them, what’s the holdup with those posts, which you should be writing against these racists, anyway, if you’re not a racist yourself and are against racism?!!! Refusing to write any posts against white racists in here seriously raises the suspicion and certainty that you are also a white racist or you would be writing against these bigots!!! If you really “think” that I’m “the closest thing to a Nazi I have found here”, you really don’t know anything about Nazis, anyway, because there are absolutely NO!!!! Nazis who are in favor of gay rights or gay marriage or equal rights for all people or Democracy or equal treatment under the law or against capital punishment or genocide or dictatorship or “white supremacy”, as I am. They agree with you and your ilk about all of that (“surprise, surprise, surprise”)!!! Another proof that you are really on the Nazis’ and Klansmen’s side and “think” the same as they do!!! So, if you don’t even know what a Nazi is or believes, that might be another reason why you aren’t contradicting them here, since you don’t know what is contradictory of Nazism and white racism. Smarten up and educate yourself on that score!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            You care, Johnny, and you try to tell me what to write:

            “So, if you’re really not afraid of them, what’s the holdup with those posts, which you should be writing against these racists, anyway, if you’re not a racist yourself and are against racism?!!! Refusing to write any posts against white racists in here seriously raises the suspicion and certainty that you are also a white racist or you would be writing against these bigots!!! ”

            Those are your words, doing exactly what you just lied and said you weren’t doing. What a dip!

          3. John D. Partin says:

            Quoting my words back to me still isn’t writing anti-Nazi and anti-Klan posts here. Only writing those posts is writing those posts and proof that you aren’t TOO COWARDLY!!!!! to write them. Everything other than that is evasion, smoke screening, deflection, and COWARDICE!!! Write what you want and nobody cares, but until you write against Nazis and Klansmen here, you are TOO COWARDLY!!!! to do so.

          4. John Owens says:

            Johnny!!! Why would anyone write an anti-Nazi or anti-Klan comment on a blog about homosexuality, the death penalty, and the UN? That would be stupid.

            You are still trying to tell me what to write, and still not understanding why I am not writing. You are acting like a NAZI sympathizer.

    7. J says:

      Thank you good person.

      1. John D. Partin says:

        MORONIC!!! John Owens!!!!! NO!!!!! Nazi sympathizer would be suggesting that you write or waiting for you to write any posts against Nazis or Klansmen because that, quite obviously (except to you!!) would be a contradiction in terms and they just wouldn’t do that!!!! It is STUPID!!!! of you to “think” that this blog is only about homosexuality, the death penalty, and the UN because there are many other topics being covered in this blog and even if it were only about those topics, that wouldn’t (and doesn’t) stop anyone from talking about other related matters or whatever they wish. If closed and narrow mindedness is really the “right” way to go, according to you, then pull out all the stops and go all the way with that, as the Nazis and Klansmen have done, instead of only half-heartedly as you are doing now, but if it isn’t the right way to go, then just say here that it isn’t the right way to go—-for the right wing as much as you say it about the left wing. That isn’t telling you what to write, but only expecting you to be consistent and give evidence of not being afraid of what you say that you “aren’t afraid of”, instead of, as you are doing here, evading, smoke screening, deflecting, ducking, and dodging once again!!!

      2. John Owens says:

        Yes, Moronic. Thank you. I didn’t want to get into name-calling again, but yes, if that shoe fits you, by all means, wear it.

        Yes, YOU are acting like a NAZI, by trying to tell me about what things I can write, and by demonizing everyone on the right, by telling lies about me, Trump, anyone on the right, as though you are the Fuhrer. Yep. NAZI. Sure, you cry a lot about being against them, but, methinks thou doth protest overmuch. What hidest thou?

        1. John D. Partin says:

          Once again, for the cheap seats and the children’s table, where you are sitting, if you actually think that Nazis and Nazism are wrong, then just say that you think that they are wrong, without my or anyone else’s having to tell you what to write and entirely on your own or using what other people are talking about or topics in the blog as excuses for not just coming out and telling us what you think about these Nazis and Klansmen!!! What does whatever else is being talked about here have to do with anything or with your just coming out and telling us that you hate Nazis and Klansmen and their stupid “thinking” and actions, if you actually do?!!! You don’t hold back on anything that you ever want to say about left-wingers or liberals or gay people or Catholics or Muslims or anybody else here or in the rest of the world that you are against, but let it all hang out and unload both barrels on them!!! So, why don’t you follow suit when it comes to Nazis and Klansmen and offenses on the right, instead of keeping silent about them and giving them a pass?!!! Do you really only think that offenses are being committed on the left, but no offenses are being committed on the right and that everything done on the right, just by virtue of its being done by them, is automatically “right”, “good”, “reasonable”, and “fair”?!!! Are you really that lop-sided and one-sided in your views?!!! If you’re not that lop-sided and one-sided, then just come out and say that these Nazis and Klansmen and other wrong-thinking right-wingers are wrong, instead of always only harping on liberals, left-wingers, gay people, and the rest that you harp on and prove that you aren’t lop-sided and one-sided, if you aren’t!!! When you always come up with excuses for not arguing against wrong “thinking” and actions by right-wingers, why should I or anyone else believe that you aren’t actually in agreement with these wrong “thinking” and acting right-wingers?!!! If you weren’t, you would be showing your disagreement with them by arguing against them, ON YOUR OWN!!!!, without my or anyone else’s pushing you into it!!! It is just that simple!!! The proof is in the pudding of your own actions and words what you are really against in the Nazis and their ilk and what you actually agree with in their “thinking” and actions. Nobody tells me what to write, but I write what I want and denounce ALL Nazis and Klansmen in here and the rest of the world!!!! That isn’t protesting overmuch, but, rather, just the right amount!!! What hidest thou that keeps you from denouncing these stupid racists as much as I’m doing here, if you really think that they are wrong and don’t secretly agree with them?!! Come out with that denunciation of these right-wing idiots, if you actually disagree with them, but don’t expect anyone else or I to believe that you really disagree with them when you always find excuses for not expressing your disagreement with them and say that “anyone who tries to get you to come out against them is trying to tell you what to write”!!! That is just ridiculous!!!! Just come out against them already and be done with it, and be an equal opportunity curmudgeon and cantankerous old fool against the right as well as the left!!!! I’ll make it easy for you: just agree with my denunciation of them, if you’re really TOO AFRAID!!!! to say anything against them yourself!!!!!

          1. John Owens says:

            If I didn’t think NAZIsm was wrong, I wouldn’t say you act like a NAZI. My father killed NAZIs. He went to concentration camps and told me people who were still alive had to be handled very carefully because their bones would break. I DID speak on the blog about the white supremist politician sometime back.

            But you still do not goad me into writing anything just to prove something to you, because you are a hand-wringing hysterical nut-job, who thinks like a NAZI.

          2. John D. Partin says:

            Your once upon a time having made some token, half-hearted, for appearance’s sake sometime back comments about the white supremist politician, just for show, while 99% of the time ONLY!!! arguing against and denouncing liberals, left-wingers, gay people, Catholics, Muslims, and other people isn’t a very convincing or realistic demonstration of “being against Nazism” at all, since you show much more real opposition than that to all of these other people and even swastika-armbanded and Sieg Heiling devout Nazis themselves might complain, occasionally, against other Nazis or Nazism itself, without that being any more of a real attack on Nazis and Nazism than you showed toward them!!! You have far more reason than I do to be attacking Nazis and Klansmen and their ilk every day or nearly every day in here, without anyone’s having to “goad you into it”, since my father wasn’t in World War II and didn’t kill Nazis or go to the concentration camps or have to handle people very carefully because their bones would break. If that had been my father’s experience with the Nazis, I would be even more furious against the Nazis than I already am!!! If I’m against Nazis and Klansmen without that having been my family’s or father’s experience with them, you should be a thousand times more against them and speaking out against them than I am!!! It isn’t “acting like a Nazi” at all to expect you and urge you to speak out against these racist idiots far more than you are doing, but is just the demand of morality for you to do so!!! So, why are you content with just a once-in-a-blue-moon and token comment against these real Nazis (not just people, such as myself, who keep urging you to do the right thing and speak out against these Nazis and Klansmen consistently and not just for show!!)?!!! How does that honor the memory of your father?!!! It isn’t being a “hand-wringing hysterical nut-job” to speak out against these real damn Nazis or urge you and all other reasonable people to do the same, but is only what we should all be doing, anyway!!! It isn’t about “proving anything to me”, but only about speaking out against evil on the right, among Nazis and Klansmen, and not only “evil” on the left, as you perceive it.

    8. Stevie says:

      I totally agree. It becomes a slippery slope.
      You may be for Capital Punishment for LGBTQ, but then when Capital Punishment is considered for something that you are – I guarantee you won’t be for it any longer.
      Wait for it…..wait for it….

    9. Robert Purk says:

      Romans chapter one says homos deserve death

      1. John D. Partin says:

        And Mein Kampf said that all Jews “deserve death” and that “therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord’s work”. “All homos deserve death” and “all Jews deserve death” are both not from God, Who is love, but from man making “God’ say what he wants “Him” to say!!!

      2. John D. Partin says:

        And Mein Kampf said “all Jews deserve death” and “therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord’s work”. “All homos deserve death” and “all Jews deserve death” are both, clearly, not from God, Who is love, but from man, who makes “God” say whatever he wants “Him’ to say.

        1. John Owens says:

          WOW! Deja vu!

          1. John D. Partin says:

            An EXCELLENT!!!! reply deserves repetition!!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            That’s it, Johnny. Try to keep your sense of humor.

  2. Guairdean says:

    The Whitehouse response was to an all out ban on the death penalty. It had nothing to do with sexual orientation. There are times, as a society, when the only choice is to permanently remove a violent influence. Society must be protected, and if ending a life is the best way to achieve that protection, then that is what must be done. Incarcerating someone for life is no less cruel than ending that life. Prisons must be used as instruments of correction, not places of exile, and most assuredly not the places of training for offenders that they have become. If a violent offender can be rehabilitated, then every effort must be made to help them re-enter society as a functional human being. If no rehabilitation is possible, then society must be protected.

    1. Trav says:

      Thank you for pointing out what this story and so many others in the media have failed to do. I’m disappointed that the headline for this story is as misleading as the headlines in many of the mainstream media outlets. This was not a vote “against” homosexuals or their rights. The US vote had absolutely nothing to do with the gay community. The US voted against it because a yes vote for this UN resolution supported a ban on ALL capital punishment. Meantime, it is still a legal sentence in our country for those convicted of first degree murder. There’s no way to resolve those two positions, so it was not a resolution the United States COULD vote for. We can argue the merits or the horrors of capital punishment until one side changes the other side’s opinion. (don’t hold your breath.) But to cherry-pick small aspects of a much larger resolution as a way to beat on the administration is dishonest at best.

    2. Roger says:

      A life sentence can be reversed if new evidence proves false conviction. Death penalty is irreversible.

      1. Trav says:

        Fair enough. And this is why the death sentence is not actually carried out very frequently. But when you have someone like Dylan Roof, who clearly did what he did and admits it, I see no reason we should be burdened with caring for him for the rest of his natural life. A person like him is dangerous and beyond redemption. We don’t do enough to save the lives of so many others in this world but we should be concerned about taking his?

        But I digress. My point is that the US vote resolution was not an anti-gay vote. But with headlines like this in the way that the mainstream media is reporting it, most people wouldn’t know that.

        1. truebluebethy says:

          I liked your post 8:49 am above. In this current post 2:49 pm, the words, “beyond redemption,” strike me, because it is our “job” as an evolved society to not judge. No one here on this earth has the authority to judge if another is or isn’t beyond redemption, only the very person is able to find, create, enter, become redeemed. Ours is an aggressive and arrogant society who produces people like Dylan Roof and then can not take responsibility for it, but instead places the blame of his actions on him. While he may have come into this life with a propensity toward violence, all life is is a dance, with our society propogating the behavior.

          1. paulg78 says:

            No one knows how to “fix” a mass murderer like Dylan Roof and make him a trusted member of human society. He, and others like him are beyond our skills to repair, regardless of how they got broken. If he is not responsible for being broken then neither is anyone else responsible for breaking him. So yes, let’s examine our culture and figure out how to make ourselves better people. And let’s admit that no one is entirely responsible for who they have become … but this is not a reason to reject reward and punishment since experiencing consequences is the way we learn.

  3. Chuck says:

    My sources tell me there is more to this than most people realize. California just very recently legalized the spreading of HIV Aids and donating HIV blood… In other words, they made it just a misdemeanor, even if infecting others was fully intentional. So, what will happen next is a 200% rise in HIV/AIDS in California and any other state that adopts this insanity. The legal defense would be discrimination against the LGBTQ community, and that is why the UN bill was not signed as it would lead down a slippery slope.

    The UN cares NOTHING about anyone. They are in the business of normalizing insanity, and causing international degredation. The UN is also working to make pedophilia “normal”. Great people they are.

    As far as other countries executing homosexuals, that is outright wrong! However, Id like to see the UN do something about Christians being executed in these countries as well.


    1. Sara says:

      The state of California, counter to whatever cockamamie news you hear or see, is not spreading the HIV/AIDS virus or donating blood infected with the HIV virus. What are you smoking?????

      1. Beth says:

        Didn’t California just make it a misdemeanor instead of a felony to knowingly infect someone with AIDS? That’s like pointing a gun at someone and shooting. It may or may not kill you but the intent is to cause harm.

        1. Sara says:

          Again, what are you smoking???? Who on earth would believe such drivel?

          1. John Owens says:

            People who actually watch the news instead of The View?

    2. Rick Knight says:

      You need to check your news sources so you don’t sound like a moron. California is not spreading aids to anyone. Learn the facts before posting.

      1. AKConiferious says:

        learn the facts before posting?? you must be new around here..

        1. Heather says:

          Sadly, AK, you appear to be correct. Evidently sensationalism, falsehoods and intentional misdirection are the only things that fly here. I had hoped for better and was left quite disappointed in the writer, the editor, and a good portion of the citizen comments. Sad.

      2. John Owens says:

        Right. It’s Hepatitis A.

      3. John D. Partin says:

        But Fox “News” and InfoWars and their ilk are Conservative versions of The View and The National Enquirer and not real news, either!!!

        1. William Tarrest says:

          You are certainly correct about that, too, John D. Partin!!!

        2. John Owens says:

          Who on this blog watches INFOWARS? I haven’t heard anyone say they do, but that network keeps being mentioned.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            Who said anything about only people on this blog watching INFOWARS?!!! I was referring to right-wing extremists and far right conservatives, generally, which aren’t all found on this blog, such as Cesar Altieri Sayoc, Jr. (the MAGA Bomber) and Robert Bowers, who killed 11 Jews in the Tree of Life synagogue, and certainly did watch right-wing propaganda and “news” programs, such as INFOWARS and http://www.gab.com!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            Seems you know more about those news outlets than any conservatives on the blog. Are you trying to PLANT information about them?

          3. John D. Partin says:

            Or more than any conservatives on the blog, such as yourself, will admit to knowing about those right-wing “news” outlets. Not admitting to knowing about them and not knowing about them are two different things. Liberals must know about right-wing “news” outlets, in order to know our enemy!!!

          4. John Owens says:

            I never said I didn’t know about them, Partum, but you bring them up when no one else has, almost as if they are part of your paranoid obsession.

          5. John D. Partin says:

            An actual paranoid, such as yourself, Owens, is in NO!!!!! position to call me or anyone else here or in the world a “paranoid” because that is the whole pot factory, again, calling one kettle “black”! People on this blog watching INFOWARS, but just not admitting to watching it, are who are watching it, in answer to your question.

          6. John Owens says:

            I’m not the one who keeps using umpteen exclamation points all through longer-than-necessary immature rants, Partum.

    3. Carlton Doug says:

      Seriously? Put the Koolaid down and pull your head out.

      1. John D. Partin says:

        I use as many exclamation points as I believe are needed (“umpteen” is a made up word, anyway!) to emphasize whatever I feel needs emphasizing and to express my detestation of it!! You aren’t the exclamation point police, anymore than the authority on anything else, except being a conservative IDIOT!!, to tell me how many exclamation points or anything else I can use here. Also, any post longer than one word is “longer than necessary” to your pea-sized “brain” and you prove yourself to be the immature one here by writing “Partum” again!!!

  4. paulg78 says:

    This opinion says “… the United States voted against a U.N. resolution condemning the death penalty …”. It would be hypocritical to vote otherwise since the U.S. allows the death penalty. The opinion also says the State Department explanation “very well may be true, but the optics certainly aren’t good”. If it is true, then the title of this opinion (U.S. Refuses to Condemn Death Penalty for LGBTQ People) is false. And the optics aren’t good only if the truth is distorted. As to whether the U.S. should allow the death penalty, I say yes … but only when guilt is certain, e.g. when a person is caught in the act, e.g. for a mass killing. That’s my answer until someone comes up with a way to “cure” a sociopath.

    1. JOHN MAHER says:

      YEAH WE got ONE in the W H, ORANGUtRUMP DOTAR !!!

      1. John D. Partin says:

        I think the way you type is sexy.

        1. John D. Partin says:

          I already wrote to you, COWARD!!!!!, in your other post about me, that if you want to say something about me, you should be MAN!!! enough to put your own name on it, not mine, and not so STUPID!!!! as not to notice that your icon before your post is different than mine, which proves that it didn’t come from me!!!

    2. Heather says:

      I agree Paulg78. This article was so incredibly slanted that it is very difficult to even take seriously. I have a gay daughter. I’m not a hater. That said, our laws need to be consistent and equal. If you commit a crime for which the current laws demand the death penalty, then your sexual orientation is not even remotely relevant. Making special laws that only apply to a percentage of the population is it’s own kind of discrimination. It is wrong no matter how you look at it.

  5. Tom says:

    The only basis for capital punishment that i seriously consider is for treason…but that still begs the question as to education, parents, rehab, etc…Tom

    1. JOHN MAHER says:

      the ONLY BASIS for CAPITAL PUNISHMENT is 100% GUILT and that is IMPOSSIBLE !!!

      1. Paul Gilbert says:

        I agree with your basis. But we know who did the killings in Colorado Springs, Chattanooga, and Charleston to mention few incidents where the killer survived. Yes, 100% is impossible but isn’t 99.99% enough?

      2. Tom says:

        I do not know what everyone means by “100% guilt”…and what actions to apply it to…Tom

        1. paulg78 says:

          I was referring to how certain it is that a person committed the crime, not to any concept of moral responsibility.

          1. Tom says:

            Paul…perhaps because i am a lawyer, i see “guilt” as a multi-faceted issue…while the actual act is important, the context is also very important…as far as responsibility is concerned, i believe everyone is 100% responsible for his or her acts…but, on point, consider euthanasia, where there is an act to cease another person’s life…yes, the act took place, but is there guilt?…Tom

      3. JD says:

        How is 100% impossible?Its been proven In S.C. And in other states.S.C. Some years back young man walked into a convienyent store shoots cashier looks at camera flips off camera goes home bragged to friends what he did.Sounds like 100% to me.I am not for the death Penalty in circumstantial evidence cases.But when you shoot and kill someone and people wrestle you down that’s 100%.

  6. Pastor BStevens says:

    Mr Pence certainly praises this ideal believe
    me if he had two choice mr Pence would line up every gay person and execute every one that’s his a Godly ideal . We know what’s coming that’s a reality check watch this Religous rights act become a act of hatred tword any person not praising his satanic Jesus .

    1. John Owens says:

      That’s amazing that you know what someone else would do because you know what is in their mind.

  7. Miranda Allison Young says:

    There are dozens of reasons why the death penalty should be abolished, but I will not go into that now. However, two reasons stand out above all others. It is inhumane and it unjustly targets minorities. I have been against it all my life (I am 79) and always will be.

    1. Wendy says:

      At a federal level, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 815 white people have been executed, 503 black people have been executed, 120 Latino people have been executed, and 23 others. Not really targeting. At a state level the numbers get interesting. California has a huge number of people on death row because the last execution was in 2006 and because a lot of the crimes are gang-related. If you read through the crimes, there’s really no difference in the types of crimes that white people and minorities committed. They’re all heinous. http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-me-death-row/

      1. Paul Gilbert says:

        Interesting link to the 747 people on California death row. I would like to see the death penalty limited to mass killings where the perpetrator is known (not just proved beyond a “reasonable doubt”). I wonder how many of the people on death row would meet those criteria. The link you provided had a link to the few who have actually been excecuted. http://graphics.latimes.com/towergraphic-see-13-men-executed-california-1978/. It says the last guy on the list organized more murders while in prison. I guess the possibility of committing another crime while in prison is an argument for the death penalty.

    2. Paul Gilbert says:

      I agree that there are many reasons to oppose the death penalty. What if the death penalty were limited to mass shootings when there is certainty about who committed the crime? This would eliminate many of the problems with the death penalty as currently administered. Mass shootings cause extreme harm and we don’t know how to “fix” the sociopaths who commit these crimes. Would you be willing to accept such a compromise?

  8. Wendy says:

    The official statement from the State Department was:
    “The United States unequivocally condemns the application of the death penalty for conduct such as homosexuality, blasphemy, adultery, and apostasy. We do not consider such conduct appropriate for criminalization. We would absolutely oppose the use of the death penalty in those cases. As Americans, we promote democracy and human rights and those are a part of our values that we share in our hearts as Americans. We voted against that resolution because of broader concerns about the resolution’s approach to condemning the death penalty in all circumstances; and, it called for the abolition of the death penalty altogether. We had hoped for a balanced and inclusive resolution that would better reflect the positions of states that continue to apply the death penalty lawfully, as the United States does.” http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-department-defends-us-vote-against-death-penalty-ban-at-the-un/article/2636429

    So the people who are protesting the government’s position are protesting the fact that the US unequivocally condemns the death penalty for homosexuality and doesn’t use it to do things like silence people with troublesome political views. Odd things to protest.

    1. Paul Gilbert says:

      Good point, Wendy. As far as I can tell you are right. And, if so, the title of this post (U.S. Refuses to Condemn Death Penalty for LGBTQ People) is false. I call on the author to change the title to avoid violation of the church’s tenet to “do that which is right”.

      1. John Owens says:

        Yep. More fake news. Not what I expected from ULC. I could get this from NPR.

        1. Harry Waters Jr. says:

          Please refrain in this newly sacred space of calling in phrases such as these. Tbere are other fiirums that support such views. I am a newbie here and feel quite a lot of discomfort with entitled vitriol. Peaceful observation and procession.

          1. Heather says:

            Nothing inappropriate was stated Harry. Calm down.

          2. John Owens says:

            Harry considers that vitriol? He needs a safe space.

          3. John D. Partin says:

            But he has no problem with the fake news and Republican propaganda coming from Fox “News” and other Conservative “news” outlets. He is definitely picking and choosing which “fake news” to reject and which really fake news to accept!!!

          4. John Owens says:

            A) Johnny P, I have not quoted Fox News, and I have said, repeatedly, that I do not watch network news. So, there you go, LYING AGAIN AND AGAIN, as you do so regularly, making up shit about someone. I mean, DAMN! If I was half as bad as you pin-heads lie and say I am, YOU WOULDN’T HAVE TO MAKE SHIT UP all the time.

            B) Why don’t you reference some fake news Fox and any other conservative outlet has put out? I mean, since you know so much about it, and all.

    2. Heather says:

      Yes, this has happened before. You are absolutely correct Wendy. The UN periodically tries to force the USA to follow blindly but the reality is that they are no different. They tack all these little extra rules on their blanket rules and expect us to just fall in line. That’s a flat no. If we wanted to be under their rule, we would live there. In this country, the people make decisions. This “ruling” is ridiculous and trying to shame America when they are really trying to force us into a law the majority of America does not agree with is ridiculous. It doesn’t matter if the UN does not approve. It matters if Americans approve. If Americans do not approve, they need to say it at the polls themselves rather than allow the UN to dictate our laws to us. I personally have no use for Trump, because I think he’s an idiot, but I overwhelmingly support the decision, whoever made it, to tell the UN–NO WAY.

      1. John D. Partin says:

        As for fake news that Fox news has put out, “Donald Trump’s close relationship—on air and off—with Sean Hannity hasn’t stopped the President from mocking the Fox news star behind his back for being such a suck-up, according to three sources who have independently heard this mockery. These sources asked to remain anonymous in order to discuss private conversations with the president, and in one case to avoid incurring the ire of Hannity, whom they called a ‘perfectly nice guy’. Trump’s many radio and TV interviews, always touted as ‘exclusives’ and rarely making any news, have been widely derided by media critics and political observers as simpering propaganda. And the president himself, a man famous for demanding relentless validation and unwavering loyalty, feels the same way. Trump has repeatedly—and sometimes for a sustained period of time—made fun of Hannity’s interviewing skills, usually zeroing in on the low quality laziness of the host’s questions, the three people with direct knowledge tell The Daily Beast. ‘It’s like he’s not even trying,’ Trump has said, one source recalled, right before the president launched into a rough imitation of Hannity’s voice and mannerisms to complain that the questions about how ‘great I am’ give him nothing to work or have fun with. Another person who’s heard Trump make similar comments since his inauguration says they remember the president calling Hannity’s softball questions ‘dumb’. This source recalled a round of ripping on the TV talker’s interview style and cloying devotion to Trump that lasted long enough that the source glanced at their watch and started to feel sorry for Hannity” (www.thedailybeast.com/even-trump-cant-stop-mocking-sean-hannitys-dumb-softball-questions?ref=home). If even Trump himself feels that way about Fox news’ major star interviewer and so feels that Fox is really fake news and non-news and just sucking up to him, as well as that’s being the view of these media critics and political observers, how can JO wonder why I and other people here also consider Fox “news” and their ilk to be actually fake and suck-up-to-Trump “news”?!! If Trump could hear or read JO and other Conservatives here talking about him, he would also consider all of them to be suck-ups, too, and make fun of all of them as well, the same as he makes fun of Sean Hannity, and about that, Trump would finally be right about something!!!!! If JO really doesn’t care about or believe any of the “news’ coming from Fox or accept it, why is he standing up for them and asking me to find some fake news from them?!! That is a lot of caring and trouble about something that he, supposedly, doesn’t care about at all!!! Anyway, here is the fake news from Fox, as requested, right from Sean Hannity’s own mouth, as even Trump and these media critics and political observers have admitted!!!!

        1. John Owens says:

          None of that is NEWS, Johnny. Sorry. You failed. You get a big fat zero on that one.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            “News”, according to you, and actual news are two entirely different things, since you are a stupid conservative and so never get or understand anything correctly, and are a BIG FAT ZERO!!!! yourself!!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            You were supposed to find where FOX played some fake news, the way CNN and MSNBC do, but all you did was try character assassination, since that’s all you have.

          3. John D. Partin says:

            There is all kinds of bad news about Trumpelstiltskin, but since you refuse to accept any of it, anyway, one piece of it is as good as another for you, and Sean Hannity’s being a suck up to our “President” is as much a news item (and reported by news agencies) as any other. Hannity assassinated his own character and we just noticed that, that’s all!!!

          4. John Owens says:

            Not talking about BAD news, Johnny. FAKE news. Fake news. Fake news. Can’t do it, can you? Didn’t think so. Stop deflecting.

          5. John D. Partin says:

            Just like your IDOL Trumpelstiltskin, you “think” that any actual news that doesn’t agree with you and contradicts you is “FAKE news, fake news, fake news”. Bad news isn’t fake news, but is just news, or there would hardly be any news at all, except about garden club meetings and such trivia. “Fake news”, according to you, and actually fake news are two different things.

          6. John Owens says:

            Deflecting and lying again, Johnny. You lie that I have an idol. Conservatives do not have idols. A few heroes. No idols. That is what socialists do. Like you, I mean. Apparently you do not know what News is, so you do not know what fake news is. That is understandable, since you are a liberal, and liberals only know what they are told to know.

      2. John D. Partin says:

        His problem is also that he considers anything true that anybody says about him to just be “all made up” and so refuses to accept reality about himself. But, then, why would he be any different from all other Conservatives, since they all do that same thing, as Trump. most of all, proves by doing it hundreds of times every day?!!!!! That is just how these Pharisaical Conservatives are and have always been and will always be!!

        1. John D. Partin says:

          “Knowing only what you are told to know” sums up the conservative “mentality” and agenda perfectly, since you “know” and believe implicitly everything that pours out of Trumpelstiltskin’s mouth, without question, because if you didn’t, you couldn’t possibly go along with the over 6,000 lies (and still counting!!!), according to The Washington Post, that have poured out of his mouth since he stole the Presidency!!! Stolen with the assistance of the outmoded Electoral College!!! They are obvious lies to everyone else who really listens to what he is saying and compares his statements to reality, even if they aren’t obvious lies to you or admitted to be obvious lies by you conservatives, who don’t really listen to what he is saying and compare his statements to reality—in other words, SUCKERS!!!! Why would he care about lying to you people when you swallow hook, line, and sinker everything that he says and just won’t listen to anyone who tells you that he is clearly lying?!! YOU WERE BORN TO BE LIED TO!!!!! I don’t blame him at all for taking advantage of gullible fools, such as all of you, because you were born to be taken advantage of!!! It isn’t his job to smarten you people up, especially when you are of so much more use to him dummied up, as you are!!! It is your job to smarten yourselves up and not fall for obvious lies and swallow them hook, line, and sinker, or just go on being lied to and taken advantage of and used, if that is all that you are good for!!!! Of course, you will, in self-defense and to deflect the charge of your being a SUCKER!!!!, say that “Oh, no, it is you liberals who are being taken advantage of and believing lies”, since that is what SUCKERS!!!! always do, in order to shift the attention off themselves and focus it on other people, but the FACT!!!! (even if you don’t admit it to be a fact) of his verified lying incessantly since becoming “President” speaks for itself about which of us is really believing lies here—-AND IT IS YOU!!!! Why would such a blatant and incessant LIAR!!!! as Trumpelstiltskin be a hero to you, unless you “think” that lies are “heroic” and “virtuous” and just calling them the “truth” actually makes them the “truth”?!!! People, such as you, who “think” that liars are “heroes” clearly don’t know the difference between these “heroes” and actual heroes!!! You may not, again, admit to his being an IDOL to you, the same as you don’t admit to every other actual FACT!!!, but as long as you are believing everything that he says without question and swallowing it all hook, line, and sinker, an IDOL is what he actually is to you because that is what people do toward their idols and your denials of that are worthless and more self-deceit on your part!!!! If only socialists have idols, according to you, then you must be a socialist because Trumpelstiltskin is your de facto IDOL, no matter what you say!!! If he isn’t your IDOL, he will pass for it until the real thing comes along!!!! You conservatives are like members of a religious cult toward Trumpelstiltskin and believe everything that he says, the same as cult members do toward their leaders, and disbelieve everyone who speaks against him, the same as cult members do toward those who speak against their leaders!!!! Now, come on with more of your usual evasiveness, deflection, smoke screening, and other tactics to shift the attention off yourself and put it on me or liberals or some other people, as you always do!!! You are so predictable!!!!

  9. Bro. James the Apostate, OSHSF says:


    Today, any resemblance of Lincoln’s ‘government of the people, by the people, and for the people’ is fading fast.

    While we’ve conveniently been divided, and diverted from discussing systemic racial injustice, to passionately debating the NFL and Flag Idolatry, the real threats to The People are taking place under the deceitful guise of “Religious Liberties” under the direction of AG Jeffrey Sessions and those Religious Right advisers who conspired with foreign governments and colluded to get #Fake45 elected.

    This stance to NOT condemn criminality of LGBTQ persons was just the beginning for the actual intentions of the radicalized religious right and neo-fascists controlling this vassal president.

    In the recent post by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, New Trump Administration Policies Are A Blueprint For Using Religion To Discriminate (http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/new-trump-administration-policies-are-a-blueprint-for-using-religion-to) the troublesome executive orders clearly reveal the malicious intentions of those behind it, and those who are being targeted by such unconstitutional discrimination. (https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1001886/download)

    If one day, when one minority faction/sect of any religion is exalted to supreme authority by the government, and given special rights and exemptions over any other laws/religion(s)/people, you’ve woken up in a Theocracy.

    If one day you realize, all separate branches of government have been hijacked by radicalized neo-Fascists and religious zealots, who refuse to respect the human decency and inalienable rights of any others, and when those with any moral compass or conscience acquiesce to the radicalized religious and neo-fascist authorities, you’ve probably woken up in a Theocracy.

    Now, we all see exactly who/what was elected. Trump is nothing but a vassal puppet for the Radicalized Right and their treasonous intent to subvert our secular Government.

    Today, Abraham Lincoln’s own party is destroying his higher vision and any hopes he described as he said:

    “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

    Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

    But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

    For today, all resemblance of Lincoln’s government is fading fast.

    #PerilousTimes #EndofDemocracy #AmericanTheocracy #SadDayForAmerica #VassalDotard

    1. Wendy says:

      They did unequivocally condemn criminality of LGBTQ persons, as stated in the official statement by the State Department. What they did not do was vote for a complete death penalty ban. That was also part of the resolution. The American people have repeatedly voted to keep the death penalty, so the only way to maintain a government of the people, by the people, and for the people was to vote against the resolution and release this statement: “The United States unequivocally condemns the application of the death penalty for conduct such as homosexuality, blasphemy, adultery, and apostasy. We do not consider such conduct appropriate for criminalization. We would absolutely oppose the use of the death penalty in those cases. As Americans, we promote democracy and human rights and those are a part of our values that we share in our hearts as Americans.”

    2. JOHN MAHER says:


      1. John D. Partin says:

        Another COWARD!!!! and IDIOT!!!! has surfaced out of the garbage dump, TOO COWARDLY!!!! to use his own name for writing posts about me, instead of mine, and TOO STUPID!!! to figure out or care that his icon before the post is different than mine, proving that it isn’t from me!!!

    3. Carlton Doug says:

      Finally! An enlightened opinion!!
      Thank you, Bro. James!

      1. John Owens says:

        The enlightenment of Lucifer, perhaps.

        1. Bro. James the Apostate, OSHSF says:

          If you actually read your texts and could think for yourself, instead of regurgitating everything you’re being fed, you might understand ‘lucifer’ (noun/non-proper) from the original source of their English Bibles (Latin Vulgate), appears only once and refers specifically to the Bright Morning Star/Venus in a direct chastisement of Nebuchadnezzar II. “Lucifer” has nothing to do with “The [proverbial] Devil”/”Satan”.

          Yet another prime example of the kind of idiotic dysinformation on which fundamentalists continue to base their ‘firmly held beliefs’. Oh the Fairy tales they create to incite fear and control their naughty (adult) children.

          1. John Owens says:

            Yeah, James. We’ve all gathered you have an over-inflated opinion of the depth of your own knowledge, but you should realize you if you knew what you are saying, you would actually keep quiet. YOU are the regurgitator, and you don’t know scripture, and just because you are ignorant does not mean historical things are fairy tales. Talk about your idiotic disinformation…. Apostate kinda tells it all.

  10. Sara says:

    I am grieving for our country and counting the days until this foul administration has run its’ course. I’m also doing everything I can to democratically and maturely fight the monstrous, bigoted and just plain stupid things that are passing for federal government these days.

  11. Paul Gilbert says:

    To the author of this post: It seems that Wendy has shown the title of this post (U.S. Refuses to Condemn Death Penalty for LGBTQ People) to be false. Assuming her information is correct, please change the title. It seems to me that putting out false information is not in keeping with the church’s tenet to “do that which is right” … would you agree?

  12. Dr. Keith Bridges says:

    The U.N. resolution should have targeted abolishing the death penalty for any crime, including being Christian, not specifically LBGTQ.

    1. Wendy says:

      The UN is always voting on resolutions to completely abolish the death penalty. The US always votes against them. This particular resolution called on any states who have “not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that it is not imposed as a sanction for specific forms of conduct such as apostasy, blasphemy, adultery and consensual same-sex relations.” That implies that any state that votes in favor of the resolution will at some point abolish the death penalty. That’s why the US voted against it.

      1. John Owens says:

        You are a voice of reason. Thank you.

  13. Miguel Capelo says:

    100% For the death penalty for pre-meditated murder… On one condition… If ever new evidence appears that exonerates the person put to death, then everyone in the JURY and the JUDGE must be put to death. Cool? As for being gay – even if being gay was a “choice” I would support it, because what consenting adults agree to in the privacy of their homes IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS WHATSOEVER. Don’t like gays, leave them alone… don’t like porn. don’t watch it… don’t like drugs, don’t do them… don’t like your rights being taken away, leave mine alone too…

  14. Rev James Gibb says:

    Well I can only assume the wider issue that Nikki Haley is talking about is the death penalty in general which is non discriminatory. What I mean is the only sane explanation for her to vote against this ruling as I understand it is to avoid any misunderstanding in the states where gay people can be sentenced to death for crimes committed, not for just being gay.
    As the law in the states is so easy to manipulate it is not beyond reason that some clever lawyer could get a gay murderer off by some very clever interpretation of this ruling, has Nikki merely been thinking along these lines and not communicated the US policy very clearly.
    Without debating the actual death penalty I can only say in my opinion that the death penalty as I understand it is for heinous crimes and not for sexuality, race or beliefs and I believe Nikki and the US government know this, never in my wildest nightmare could I imagine the president condemning a person for anything other than a crime, unfortunately she has not communicated well and as everyone knows it is very hard to quantify what you mean after you have said it and it comes out in this way.
    It would be a good time for the president or his team to publicise the exact way in which they are thinking, there must be gay people in the Whitehouse, senate and in lots of places within the government, stand up and explain what the policy is, you can only get reprimanded for not communicating properly and next week people will be tearing a strip off someone else.
    I personally know someone in Scotland who worked for the president in Scotland and she says, yes I said she says he was a perfect gentleman, approachable and really quite down to earth. That does not sound to me like the kind of person who would discriminate in this manner.

  15. Léo Torres says:

    I’m having some concerns with the presented map. Brazil’s placed in the “except in extreme cases” category. Actually, the law over here says there’s no death penalty.

    Unfortunately, what occurs is a real state persecution of poor black people (specifically poor black young men). Our police kills these young men but it’s not in an official basis. Actually that can be proved when we see the number of so-called “acts of resistance”, the official way of pretending the policemen were only protecting themselves, even when the “menace” was a 12 year old boy going to school.

    1. Paul Gilbert says:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Brazil says the death penalty “… is still possible during wartime, according to the Article 5, XLVII, “a”, of the Federal Constitution.” You could correct it in Wikipedia if it is wrong.

  16. Léo Torres says:

    And regarding the death penlty as a whole: I’m 100% against it for the simple fact that if there is a chance of one single innocent being killed by mistake, that makes the death penalty unusable and unethical.

    Prision for life would be semi-accepted, given that the innocent should have his whole life to try and come up with new evidence of his/her innocence. But even about that I’m not completely sure.

    1. Daniel says:

      “For the wages of sin is death” How many times has God issued a death sentence in the bible? Destroyed man and beast? It is best served that the death penalty remains and that it is delivered swiftly even if an innocent be put to death as God so rightly demands as a deterrent to others! “Sins of the father punished 10 generations?” “God & Genocide” Jesus, the most innocent was given a death sentence so all could be saved! Did Jesus have doubts? Did he want’ to Die and suffer for humanity? The answer lays in a question Jesus asked of God “Father, why has thou forsaken me?” Jesus states he will return, he states death will come to those sinners along with eternal damnation. Jesus, demands that mankind acknowledge he is the Son of God and that mankind worship God thru Jesus or death shall surely come along with eternal damnation to hell. Most all religions have Gods that dish-out Death and Suffering in this life or the next if you fall short of the required total submission to the ways of that religion.

      So there you have it in a nut shell. The Death sentence is a tool that when rendered, should be carried out swiftly and publicly as to hold the greatest effect of deterrence and compliance with the rule of law even if it means an innocent life is taken as with Jesus of the children of generations of war and genocide. Conform, Submit, or face the Consequences’. “Thou Shalt not “Murder” Murder being the true and correct translation of that commandment and in the proper context. To kill (not murder) and killing is duly authorized, demanded of and justified by most all God’s and Jesus throughout the bible and other religious text as a deterrent, as a punishment, and for survival of mankind.

  17. Chaplain Bill says:

    I see a lot of comments here based only or for the most part on your display of the question. That is par for the course here in America, we read a short news blurb and go off tilting windmills. If you really wanted an informed discussion you would have attached a link to the original resolution so we could all be better informed before commenting.

    1. Wendy says:

      The problem is that the full text of the resolution is almost impossible to track down online. Security Council and General Assembly resolutions I can find because the UN website keeps those current. The Economic and Social Council resolutions are current only through July 25th of this year. If you search by subject and search Human Rights, you don’t get resolutions. I finally managed to find it by searching on a short little direct quote that I found in an article online. As you can see, voting in favor of the resolution requires agreement with a lot of things the US does not agree with, and there is a built-in understanding that the death penalty will be abolished. And the LGBTQ issue is just a tiny part of the whole thing.

  18. Debra says:

    The article does not make it clear (probably intentionally) whether this was a vote to abolish the death penalty in all cases or just the cases where the only charge was homosexuality. It could well be that the issue was death for things like murder in which homosexuals would not be excluded, and twisted to make it sound otherwise. Seeing how things are reported and distorted nowadays, I wouldn’t get my panties in a wad unless I had read the actual text of the resolution that they were voting on.

    1. Wendy says:

      It was absolutely intentional. The resolution was definitely worded in a way that would mean that any country voting in favor of the the resolution that was still using the death penalty would be agreeing to abolish the death penalty entirely. The LGBTQ part was just a very small detail. Here’s the full resolution. If you want the full effect, you have to read all the referenced resolutions. It’s…challenging. And mind-numbing in parts. I tried giving it a peppy, enthusiastic voice in my head, but it kept reverting to a drone. https://gallery.mailchimp.com/67191046cd42cbb7c7d4196b0/files/c6713f88-7192-4a3b-9da5-bafc1ac04a90/The_question_of_the_death_penalty.pdf

  19. Mike says:

    Before we act as if the United States is condoning the death penalty for gays, we should do a little reading and research. The author of this article should be ashamed of themselves for this misleading false article. As well as this website. I don’t mind you publishing touchy articles but this is propaganda. You may fool me and a lot of these people with this, but you are not fooling God. You will stand in judgement one day. You have a platform to spread Christ’s love or the devils hate. Be careful with what you post!

  20. Ezekiel says:

    When the death penalty was first decided on people at the time based it on the old testament ( eye for a eye) mentality under the law that’s why God destroyed sodom and gamora. But now we live under the Gospel of grace ( the new testament) and our lord and saviour payed the price for all mans sins. So with that being under stood the penalty of execution needs to be changed. America has more people incarcerated then any other country, why is that? There are certain members of our society that are capitalizing on human flesh (privatize prison) which in my opinion the worst thing possible ,let’s just open the door for satan to take over!

    Instead of prison officials taking head counts, they should be more concerned about rehabilitation. Not to say that if someone commits murder and then claims he asked God for forgiveness that he should be set free. But he should be able to live out the remainder of his life incarcerated and help other people on the inside discover Yeshua Hamasheiah as their saviour and allowed to spread the Gospel of grace to others that have no knowledge of Christ.

    1. Sara says:

      The “Eye for an Eye” edict in the Hebrew Bible was totally misconstrued, probably willingly in the day, by those who wanted their doctrine to appear superior, more just or more righteous. Poppycock!! It’s not a directive for violence, war, torture or whatever retributive actions people take to settle scores, That interpretation is dead wrong, yet it’s still alive. It really means that a person can only take an equal remedy for an offense done to him or her. If you steal my cow I cannot burn your house down. I am only entitled to get my cow back or be paid its’ valid value.

  21. PT,krystiona McCulloh says:

    Truth sets us free. Homosexuality, is a sin condemned by God, however it is also a sin to physically harm those who practice it so as to cause death and or by any other act of cruelty. I will not stand for homosexuality in that unless the homosexuals start working for what they want and think they should have I feel no obligation to incorporate and or give them what they spend no time laboring for but disdaining. Instead of critising Christians, lets understand that God condemns all sin. Homosexuals openly not only are disdainful of marriage and the log standing excepted sexuality of men and women, they have completely disrespected men women, children and families for their causes. Men taking what belongs to women, wearing dresses, and makeup looking at our husbands and sons, to commit acts appalling even to the natural mind. The truth is, is that a law does not change commerce, hair care and clothing, and perfume, made for women style and who, what, where, when, why, how were not made for a man and or homosexuality. I am a human being not just a sex my feelings are personal to me, Clothing made for the bodies of women, as well as skin care and healthcare, as well as for emotions and feelings and spirits and hearts never having to be substituted or replaced by and or for sin.
    My desire for the male members in my family is my business, no I will not allow a man just because he wants to have sex with a man accessibility to my family members, what they work for they’re wives children, peace love and joy to be be subjugated, coveted, demanded of by some man because of his lust. Yet the lack of acknowledgment and respect for the women and men, that work for their families, and clothing, and style, and hearts desire, by blatant acts of hatred and disdain for the order that heterosexuals choose to live is enough. Saying something in an effeminate way does not make less cruel, so the “oh honey never’s” and the ribald vulgar declarations about heterosexual relations, and marriage are still slanderous and hateful and rude. We all should mind your own business. We are allowed to condemn sin, but being cruel to someone for doing right, is never acceptable. God is love, have a blessed day, everyone.

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      PT – Why do you think that homosexuals use make-up and dress in women’s clothing? That is NOT homosexuality.

      If one of your children admits to being homosexual, what are you going to do? Remove them from the household and banish them?

      How is the fact that two people of the same gender who love each other harming anyone? How do you think they will die because of that homosexuality?

  22. John R says:

    It would be nice if articles like this provided the text of the UN resolution (or a link to it – see web site below) so that those of us who would like to have an informed opinion can read the resolution and come to our own conclusions about its reasonableness (or lack there of). All I really know from reading this article is that the LGBTQ community objected to voting against the resolution. Having researched the resolution, which drones on extensively in bureaucratic babel, I would take it to be generally against the death penalty, with a highlighted concerned for those in disadvantages circumstances (which included apostasy, intellectual disabilities, ethnic and sexual orientation). Sexual orientation was not the focus of the resolution, and there is nothing that addresses “targeting”, but rather that the death penalty was disproportionately applied to the disadvantaged individuals (where sexual orientation is listed as but one example). I would concur that a country which still uses the death penalty could not vote for the resolution (obtaining would have been a better choice in my book).

  23. Austin Lineback says:

    Listen, I’m an Apostle of Yeshua and of the father Yehweh, and I am gay. I’ve healed the sick, casted out demons, performed miracles and father God has blest and ordained me as his gay apostle. Watch my YouTube channel and subscribe please feel free to contact me. I demonstrated the power of God in Jesus’s name. If he hates gays then he has to hate me and Adam in Genesis as well. He made both of us in his image, male and female.
    Watch my YouTube channel and subscribe please.

  24. Tigerz says:

    God didn’t say if a man is with another man MAYBE he’ll die. It states surely they will die. And what do you think ‘send them back to me’ means? Only one way to go back to God. Death. Homosexuality is against nature. Make all the excuses you want but queer acts are NOT acceptable to God and if we send the offenders back to God, as we’re supposed to, then the filth will cease. Humans consistently think they’re smarter than their Creator but I’m sure they’ll wish they’d obeyed when the time arrives.

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      Tigerz – are you going to also kill those unruly children as prescribed in the Bible? How about those who wear polyester blend clothing? If you happen to think a person is a witch, are you going to kill them as well?

      How is homosexuality AGAINST nature, when it is found, just in the mammalian populations, in over 1500 different species of mammal? You do realize that it is heterosexual parents who produce homosexual children, right?

    2. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Let’s hold down Tigers and sodomize him. He’ll be doing drag shows in no time!

      1. John Owens says:

        Spoken like a true Sodomite

      2. John D. Partin says:

        Ohhhh! I wish you guys would do that to me!

        1. John D. Partin says:

          For whatever idiot fake posted this using my name and for all other idiots here who believe that it came from me, there is a blue icon beside my name in my actual posts, not a green one!!!

    3. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Tigers,don’t forget,there’s also such a thing as straight bashing. Come to my neighborhood sometime and maybe you’ll get a chance to find out exactly what I’m talking about. And bring your god with you. My God is much more powerful than your god and doesn’t like your god at all!

  25. Ronald Ward says:

    Thou shall not kill. God made us the way we are. God will always love us Nothing can separate us from the love of God. NOTHING.
    SO it shouldn’t matter your race or sexual preference. Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

    1. Daniel says:

      Thou Shalt not Murder is the correct context. You kill to eat. You kill to protect. You kill in war as ordered. You kill as a deterrent. You kill as punishments. You murder for envy, opportunity, malice, and evil motives. God is Love. God gave mankind free will. But is it free will if there are conditions and consequences? Is Gods love given unconditionally? Can one love a child a demand they submit to your authority or suffer the wrath of God (death, pain, suffering) a good beating in the name of Love? Free will and love given with fear of XYZ is a nothing more than a power play and need to control.

      Now if the bible stated God is Love and God Love’s you unconditionally but dose not condone your actions and will not support those actions then I would say Gods love is blind.

      Gods love is nothing to the sinner and the sinner is nothing to God without Jesus Christ. So it is Jesus that separates us from Gods love and it is the sins of man that separate mankind from the savior.

      “For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him shall not parish but have everlasting life.”

      Do you see the condition of Gods love. When God is done with you he is done with you. God is also a Vengeful God. God will as he has in the past rain his wrath through plagues, pestilence, famine death, destruction eternal damnation of those whom do not submit their will unconditional to Gods will.

      That is how it is. To hell with you if you can’t live how God demands! That is free will and love proffered at the end of a gun!

      That is similar in a majority of religions. God loves so much he allowed aids and other ills. Allows the sins of the Father to curse 10 generation. Condones and demanded Genocide of so called nonbelievers.

      The list goes on. Do not just read Gods word. Study it, research it, and put it all in to context.

      God will pass judgment and there will be no love lost in that Judgment.

  26. Austin Lineback says:

    The straight people are infected as well. And they are infected because they play both sides of the sexual nature and sometimes more than a real gay person. They just hide behind the straight nature.

  27. LtBil Drat says:

    Either you’re for the death penalty for certain crimes or against the death penalty for certain crimes. It applies the same to everyone. Nobody is exempt. Nobody is favored. I’m for the death penalty across the board no matter who you are. Crimes include premeditated murder, murder involving another felony like robbery etc, gang rapes.

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      LtBil – how about the killing of unruly or intoxicated children? The Bible demands that.

  28. John Mathews says:

    This story does not contain all the facts. The resolution banned the death penalty in all cases, everywhere in the world. The death penalty is legal in the United States in many states. Had this resolution only banned the death penalty for being a homosexual, the Ambassador to the United States, Nikki Haley, would have voted for it. As with many bills in the U.S. Congress, many are voted down because of riders added to the legislation. This is what happened concerning this vote.

    Discrimination against homosexuals is heinous in every circumstance but, please, let us get the whole story before passing ill-informed judgments. And reporting stories without pertinent facts is irresponsible.

  29. Bill Fox says:

    It is unlikely that capital punishment will be banned. If it isn’t banned, it can be applied to any crime.

  30. John Owens says:

    Just another example of Trump-bashing and leftist propaganda through distortion of the facts. If this administration were so evil the left would not have to lie and distort to make it seem so. Get a grip.

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      John – what lies do you believe have been told by “the left”? Please be specific.

      1. John Owens says:

        Dan, don’t be obtuse. The whole premise of the article discussed here is a distortion of the facts. But, since you think asking for specifics is so intellectual, let’s see… “You like your doctor, keep your doctor,” “We were under sniper fire at the airport (paraphrased)”, “The death penalty does not deter murder,” “poverty causes crime,” then there is the whole “collusion” fiasco, which is going to hurt democrats much more than Trump, “We discussed our grandchildren on the tarmac,”(EVERYBODY on the planet knows that was a huge lie)… it goes on and on, um, Tea Party being racist, Trump being racist, an overhaul of Obamacare amounts to genocide, the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill debacle, “I did not have sex with that woman,” …, Planned Parenthood provides mammograms and doesn’t sell baby parts…

        Suffice it to say, if the left is saying it, it is totally false or so twisted as to be deceptive.

      2. John D. Partin says:

        Dan Anderson, “the Left”, according to right-wingers such as John Owens, or even actually the Left (and so what?!!) don’t need to distort or lie about ANYTHING!!!! in the Trumpelstiltskin “administration” because he is doing far too much lying and distorting on his own to need any help from us!!! He has already told 6,420 false and misleading statements in just his 649 days so far in office, according to The Washington Post, and he is just getting warmed up!!! So, when did the Donald become a left-winger, since he is always lying and doing what left-wingers do, according to John Owens?!!!

        1. John Owens says:

          If they don’t need to lie, why does every other paragraph democrats say contain lies, Partin? It’s just like you, and every other automaton on ULC here, you lie constantly. If you don’t need to lie, why go to the extra trouble?

          1. John D. Partin says:

            Because everything other than John Owens’ constant stream of lies is considered to be “lies” by him!!!! He has been believing his own lies and living in lies for so long that he doesn’t know the difference any more (if he ever did!) between lies and the truth, and “thinks” that lies are “truth” and truth is a “lie. “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter” (Isaiah 5:20). He is a right-wing automaton, who “thinks” that it is everyone else who disagrees with him who is “really the automaton”!!! If it’s “every other paragraph Democrats say containing lies”, in his distorted and sick view, it is actually every letter and syllable of every word that Republicans and Conservatives say that are truly lies and, once again, the whole pot factory’s calling a single kettle black and their judging everyone else by themselves!!! He goes to the extra trouble of telling all of his lies because he couldn’t tell the truth or do anything other than lie if he tried, since it’s all that he knows, and he doesn’t even try to do so!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            All that stuff you are using to describe me is describing YOU, Partin, and you know it, but you are just doing what the left does, and accusing me of your sins and flaws. Still making my case for me. Thanks.

    2. Carl Elfstrom says:

      I am proud to say that I am a Republican, but do’nt like Trump, and never did. But there’s nothing I can do about him being in office and bad mouthing him won’t do any good. As a patriotic American I can only support our President whoever he happens to be. I’m not saying I wouldn’t sign an impeachment document, but I wo’nt say anything bad about him. I just ca’nt see a reason for it.

      1. John D. Partin says:

        Carl Elfstrom, I like and support most things that you write in here, but can’t go along with your view that we shouldn’t say anything bad about Trump, which is really just telling the truth about him, and call him on the carpet for his lies, actions, and demeanor. Of course, we should, since that is just holding him to account, as he should be held. That is the reason for it. Supporting “our President, right or wrong” makes no more sense than supporting “our country, right or wrong”, instead of, sensibly, supporting the President and the country when they are right, not when they are wrong. Trump should be impeached because he is incompetent and unfit for office!!!

        1. John Owens says:

          Telling the truth is not exactly what you do regarding President Trump, John. Putting him down is not the same as telling the truth. Always finding fault is not either. If you want to tell the truth, that means you must acknowledge when he accomplishes good things, which you do not, and not even talk about bad things unless you have facts, which you do not. All you have is spite, and hate, and you think it is springing up from inside of you, but it is not. it is being broadcast into you.

          Your knowledge of our law is deficient. You cannot impeach a president for being incompetent. If that were the case, we would be a military dictatorship because so few presidents have been competent. You saying he is unfit for office is not grounds for impeachment, either. What I am saying is right, that is, correct. Not because I am saying it. It simply IS.

          1. John D. Partin says:

            Putting Trump down is exactly the same as telling the truth about him when down is where he is and belongs and I’m merely accurately describing his condition. There are some few good things that could be said about nearly anyone (such as Hitler, the Devil, John Owens, Trump, etc.), but that doesn’t make the truth of the vast and overwhelming majority of bad things about these people not the truth. Hitler and the Nazis brought Germany out of the Depression; the Devil got us out of the Garden of Eden and made us stand on our own two feet, for better or worse, instead of being kept people and God’s babies and playthings forever; John Owens might be a fairly competent motorcycle rider; Trump may have done a few good things, too. None of that makes the truth of the Holocaust or Nazi occupation of Europe or the misery and death caused by the Fall of man in the Garden of Eden or John Owens’ homophobia and xenophobia and small and narrow mindedness or Trump’s siding with Putin (the leader of a hostile foreign power) against his own intelligent agencies, befriending Kim Jong Un (another leader of a hostile foreign power and human rights violator), taking the side of the Saudi Arabian prince and government just because of oil and jobs (get the oil and jobs from another country that isn’t ordering the murders of our citizens!!!) when they ordered the murder of an American citizen (Jamal Khashoggi) unimportant or not the truth!!!! Some presidents are far more incompetent than other presidents (such as Trump) and so it certainly is a good idea and practice to get rid of the most incompetent presidents. When Clinton was going to be impeached just over a sexual scandal. incompetence in a president is certainly far more of a threat to our government and society than that was and so deserves even more to be a reason for removing a president from office!!!! That wouldn’t make us a military dictatorship, as Owens asserts (more scare tactics!!!), but merely a country that tries its very best to put and keep the right man in the highest office in the land. If you want to have, at least, a fairly competent manager at your local McDonald’s or Burger King or KFC or diner or some other restaurant, so that the food isn’t getting screwed up there, how much more sense does it make to have a fairly competent president in office, in charge of running the Executive Branch of our government, instead of saying, as Owens does, “Well, that just doesn’t matter at all!!!”? His view is simply ridiculous, as usual!!! Trump, quite clearly, isn’t even adequately competent for the office of President of the United States and so should be impeached and taken out of that office and it given to a more qualified person. This isn’t hate and spite, but just common sense, logic, and reason about the matter. Trump’s own words, actions, and demeanor in office have proven to me that he is unfit and incompetent to hold that office, without anyone else’s having to “broadcast that idea” to me. I came to this belief entirely on my own, from the actual evidence of his lies, actions, and demeanor. John Owens, once again, despite his denials of it, “thinks” that he is “correct about Trump” just because he is saying it—and whatever he says about anything, according to him, is “correct” merely because he says it, whereas my knowing about Trump is based on the actual evidence. It simply IS TRUE!!!!! CASE CLOSED!!!!

          2. John Owens says:

            No, John. The case is not closed. Sometimes honesty demands criticism but honesty is not demanding one fourth of the criticisms YOU level at anyone who does not share your philosophies. What I say is true, and what you say is not. Just deal with that, like a big boy.

      2. John D. Partin says:

        John Owens is like a little kid, saying “I’m rubber and you’re glue, and what you say bounces off me and sticks to you!!!”!!! How very immature he is!!! No doubt, the Pharisees before him also thought that what Jesus accused them of was “really describing his own sins”, the same as JO says about me!!! It’s an old Pharisaical and right-wing tactic and trick and not taking responsibility and owning up, LIKE A MAN!!!, to his own faults!!!

        1. John D. Partin says:

          “What I say is true, and what you say is not” is just more of that childish “I’m rubber and you’re glue” nonsense!!! John Owens, quite obviously, doesn’t even know what it is to be a big boy or a MAN!!!! even for himself, when he is babbling this childish drivel in a post in here to me or anyone else!!! So, how could he reasonably advise anybody else about it? He can’t!!! “First remove the beam from your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye”. Honesty demands many times the amount of criticism that I and everyone else are heaping upon this “President” Donald J. Trumpelstiltskin, and not a fraction less!!! Grow the Hell up, John Owens, a whole lot before you advise anyone else about that or tell them to “just deal with it”!!

          1. John Owens says:

            Oh. Thank you for that wonderful, illustrative mature example, Partum.

          2. John D. Partin says:

            “Partum” is just more evidence of your childishness and immaturity, Owens, as is everything else that you write to me or anyone else in here, because distorting and mocking people’s names is exactly what little kids do!!!

          3. John Owens says:

            …and saying that rubber and glue nonsense is mature, I suppose?

  31. Austin Lineback says:

    Watch my YouTube on God’s verified homosexuality

  32. BC says:

    Lgbtq is a sin. They should be killed. Amen

    1. Austin Lineback says:

      BC needs someone to love him and help him find acceptance for who he truly is and quit hiding behind God who doesn’t promote his hatred or fears.

      1. Carl Elfstrom says:

        Maybe BC is just projecting something he’s scared to see in himself. I hope it doesn’t cause him to commit suicide. Or has he not thought of that yet? Is it no wonder that one of my all-time favorite movies is Silence Of The Lambs.l?

    2. Dan Anderson says:

      BC – You are trolling, aren’t you. They said the same thing about those who were left-handed. Do you think all “lefties” should be killed as well? How about those men who sit on a chair or sleep in a bed which has been inhabited by a woman who happened to be having her menstrual cycle? I take it you also believe that if anyone teases a bald-headed man, they should be mauled to death by bears, too?

      Please post where in the Bible you think that it is a sin. Hint: It is not Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, 1Cor 6:9 (Unless you are using a modern bible and not a KJV1611, nor is it in Romans 1:26.

  33. Henry smith says:

    Male 53 pastor Assemblies Of God pentecostal church Manchester England.
    I am also a practicing gay male and proud to be openly gay all my congregation are so accepting with myself and my husband.
    So many homophobic in here as the saying goes.
    Let those without sin cast the first stone.

  34. Austin Lineback says:

    Male 53, watch my YouTube on God verifies homosexuality. He verifies that he is okay with it.

    1. John Owens says:

      Good grief!

  35. Carl Elfstrom says:

    Male 54 ULC Minister in Galveston, Texas. I have a close friend and relative who has been happily married to another man for 21 years. One of my great-grandfàthers was from Manchester. He was known as Sir Ernest Grave. My hat’s off to you sir. Congratulations!

  36. deneige Roland says:

    It’s wrong in so many ways to put somebody on the death penalty for what gender they love I wish people would be a little bit more civil and not act like a bunch of apes smashing everything that they don’t understand. We say we are all equal has humans but when are we going to show it this isn’t the first issue that came up. I’m more afraid to ask the police for help than coming out about what gender I like. do people need a another reason to be afraid of the police than they do already. I say we should deal with the real problem we have already rather than something that is not a problem at all some of my best friends are gay or lesbian or even bi like me.

  37. Robert Purk says:

    Homos should be put to death . Romans chap 1

    1. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Robert Purk, you sound like the kind of homo you’re talking about. Self destruct.

    2. Dan Anderson says:

      Robert – Romans 1:26- is about a fertility ritual to the goddess Diana which ended in an orgy and had NOTHING to do with homosexuality. It might help to learn the historicity of the writings before condemning something.

      To use your arguments but even more accurately, the bible also states that unruly children should be stoned to death as well as those who wear mixed fabrics, anyone who does ANY work on the Sabbath or anyone who touches the skin of a dead pig.

      1. John Owens says:

        Actually, I think if you touched a dead pig you could wash in water and be unclean until the setting of the sun.

        11:26 The carcases of every beast which divideth the hoof, and is not clovenfooted, nor cheweth the cud, are unclean unto you: every one that toucheth them shall be unclean.
        11:27 And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even.
        11:28 And he that beareth the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: they are unclean unto you.

  38. secretary3rd says:

    Is this the one that the UN wanted to outlaw the death penalty because a few European nation not longer kill its killers. The Saudis weekly be head a few of its citizens it has little to do with who your having sex with.
    There are some really nasty creatures in the race of humans. Those that deal in the sex trade, drug trade, animal trade. The serial killers that usually slaughter women.
    I see no reason not to lynch them after a fair trail.

  39. revconner says:

    This might sound stupid, but I said it once in a dream to my father and God of sorts…and I’m going to elaborate on it now. I will not follow any country, person, Deity, or Entity who could persecute, torture, or murder someone or people for an act of love that harms none.

  40. Dawn Pisturino says:

    When Obama went to Kenya, the Kenyan government warned him not to interfere in their treatment of LGBTQ. The same holds true of other countries. Muslims are not going to change their beliefs about LGBTQ because the UN passes a resolution condemning them. The U.S. has no right to interfere in the beliefs and practices of other countries.

  41. Carl Elfstrom says:

    Trust me Dawn, nobody is capable of changing the way anyone believes about anything. We might give lip service to the people we are trying to please, but only we can change our own beliefs. For example: I say and do everything my girlfriend tells me to. If I don’t she’ll punish me.

  42. Carl Elfstrom says:

    I’ve given y’all enough valuable advice on this subject and am switching to another article now. Be there or be square!

  43. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

    Killing is wrong I am stuck on the fence with this I think they shouldn’t be killed but put in jail like they use to be because I am against gay marriage. I love them but I do not and will not agree with their view of marriage and I will stay that way until the day I die, or until the Lord comes back. That’s the way Christians are we have to love them but we don’t have to agree with their view of marriage.

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      Timothy – You believe homosexual people should be imprisoned? For what crime have they committed?

      So what if you think gay marriage is wrong, even though the Bible does not even address it?

      Disagreement, according to your claim, means a reason to put someone in prison? I do NOT understand your thinking.

      1. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

        Dan Anderson – I am saying my opinion here I just said what was at the top of my head here. Look did you know what happened to the gays back in the 1950’s – all the way to Washington’s time? They were either lynched, or thrown in jail. I don’t want them killed but them showing their butts about crap and forcing service upon those who disapprove and threatening is short of worthy for jail time. If a person put a gun to your head and forced you to do crap what would happen to them Danny boy? They would be thrown in jail because of them putting a gun at your head, and threatening you to do things. See I am not saying all of them do that but those ones who are the ones who need to put in jail if not that at least fined for threatening another person.

        1. Dan Anderson says:

          Timothy – I was around in the 1950s. You mention that you think that they are “forcing service upon those who disapprove” remind me also of the 1950s and into the 1960s, but with “people of color”. Should all of the “negroes” have been put in prison, too? Same type of bigoted discrimination.

          What is with the “Danny boy” comment? Are you attempting to insult? It doesn’t work. How about this be kept in a mature, adult manner and not play games.

      2. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

        Dan Anderson – I am saying my opinion here I just said what was at the top of my head here. Look did you know what happened to the gays back in the 1950’s – all the way to Washington’s time? They were either lynched, or thrown in jail. I don’t want them killed but them showing their butts about crap and forcing service upon those who disapprove and threatening is short of worthy for jail time. If a person put a gun to your head and forced you to do crap what would happen to them Danny boy? They would be thrown in jail because of them putting a gun at your head, and you to do things. See I am not saying all of them do that but those ones who are the ones who need to spend a night in jail or at least fined I mean fining them I am okay with because I just don’t want a threat happening to my fellow Christians. I am not saying its the gays she be jailed but maybe spend a night in there because of a threat to another human being. Gays are not the only ones that make threats it straight too. See I just think the should at least spend a night or two in jail and that is enough time for them to think about how threatening is a big no no.

        1. Wendy says:

          You are one extremely sick person.

    2. Wendy says:

      So do you think all gay people should be put in prison, or just gay people who get married? I mean, either thing is ridiculous, but I’m curious.

      1. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

        I don’t think that all of the gay people married or not should be put in jail. I don’t wish for them to end up in prison because that is wrong. Look sister Wendy I am a very very very very strong Republican man and I believe gay marriage is wrong because its a sin. See when I hear that I get angry because it is allowed now and I liked it they way things were before it was allowed. I have tried to ignore it because it is just more gasoline going on the fire. When that happens I wish that they would be put jail but you are not suppose to wish anything bad upon another human being. Like I said I am a very very very very strong Republican man and it is easy to make me angry because half of them have snooty look on their face and that makes me angry because they rub it in a little. So no I don’t want them to be put in jail married or not

        1. Wendy says:

          Still extremely sick, and pretty contradictory in your statements.

          1. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

            Look I try to say what sounds good in my mind while I am putting it down as a comment. I didn’t want it so sound sick or contradictory I just try to ease down before I get into an argument with someone. I leave you on a high note sister Wendy I will let you to try and figure out what I mean.

        2. Dan Anderson says:

          Timothy – you claim that being gay is a “sin” – as if there is anything anyone can do about the sexual attraction they were born with. If you are going to talk about biblical teaching, maybe you should take a quick course on the historicity of the Bible. You might learn that what you THINK it says about homosexuality ISN’T about homosexuality. A few examples would be as follows, and you may not agree with it because you may not have actually studied the Bible in depth, academically/objectively:

          Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 – about the condemnation of Canaanite religious ceremonies which would use male temple prostitutes in these religious services.

          Romans 1:26-31 – about Paul’s writings about a Roman pagan fertility ritual to the goddess Diana, praying for better crops and increased calvings. This ceremony ended in an orgy. THAT is what Paul was writing about.

          1Cor 6:9-10 – The term “homosexual” was not even listed with the myriad other “crimes”/those who would not enter the “kingdom of heaven” in KJV1611. It is a fairly recent addition to the writings.

          How about Genesis about Sodom & Gomorrah? Not about homosexuality but of inhospitality and rape, of which God supposedly had warned those communities numerous times.

          Now, why do you think it IS about homosexuality?

          1. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

            Dan look my whole comment I leave is about this topic which is United States Refuses to condemn death penalty for LGBTQ people. I am staying on topic I am not going on about other stuff like you I remain focus on the topic and not go all over creation and say things about stuff that doesn’t relate to the topic. Look I don’t want to argue Dan you seem like a nice guy and I don’t want to argue. I want you go on and when you move on I will too.

          2. atatakaidanjp says:

            Timothy – I was staying on subject about how homosexuality is NOT a sin, as you claimed it was. I even gave references from the Bible which most people use to say it is to show you why it is not. That is not drifting off topic at all.

          3. John Owens says:

            Not an argument, just a point here, it wasn’t JUST about homosexuality (same-sex fornication), but the Bible did not EXCLUDE it as a cause, either. Surely no one here will debate that the Bible DOES teach that fornication in any form is a sin, whether heterosexual, homosexual, incestuous, non-consensual, or bestial. But, Sodom and Gomorrah was about all manner of wickedness (you can read injustice and immorality of all kinds) , INCLUDING inhospitality and homosexual rape. There was no respect for private property rights, either, and Lot was a judge in the community, yet a mob tried to break in to violate his visitors.

  44. Austin Lineback says:

    I am gay, but I don’t really believe in gay marriage. Nor do I believes in transgender people or the messing with God’s design. But you’ve got people out there with mixed sex organs. A woman with a man dick and born that way and a man with a woman pussy, also born that way. So do they deserve to be unhappy or not married or have love? Whom are we to decide? Lev.18:6 says, we are to stay away from those who are nearest of kin, relatives. So if we stay away from our relatives for sex, gay or straight, then God’s law is satisfied. No sin has been committed.

  45. Austin Lineback says:

    If your going to hide behind God and justify your actions or comments, then God said those who commits adultry should be killed or imprisoned also. Using God selectively to promote a hate crime is illegal. And if your not using God but saying that it is wrong, that’s a personal opinion. The U.S. Constitution guarantee my right to pursue peace and life and happiness however I see it as long as it violates no one.

    1. Minister Timothy Calrstead says:

      Look man I don’t want to argue with you. You believe what you to and I will do the same and that’s how we will keep the peace her. So I wish you the best!

  46. Austin Lineback says:

    If you believe more than what God says, that is the problem with society in general. The Father only believes it one way. That’s his, not mine or yours or theirs

    1. Dan Anderson says:

      Austin – Then, taking the Bible as the “Word of God” and should be followed regardless of it making sense, you are for the stoning of unruly children, any friends or family members who leave the Abrahamic faiths, or anybody lifting a finger of work on the Sabbath. When is the last time you stoned anyone?

  47. Bill Fox says:

    The US does not execute sexual perverts, not even child molesters.

    1. atatakaidanjp says:

      Bill – First, homosexuals are NOT sexual perverts. Second, why would the US NOT agree to the resolution given that they do not murder homosexuals? In case you have not figured it out yet, the item voted on was to CONDEMN the killing or jailing of homosexuals just because they are who they are.

      1. John Owens says:

        atatakaidanjp, Bill didn’t SAY homosexuals are sexual perverts. You are reading an emphasis that is not implied. He is only saying we don’t EVEN execute sexual perverts, not that homosexuals ARE perverts. Just pointing that out for you.

        1. atatakaidanjp says:

          John – Thank you for your input. I would prefer hearing it from Bill to see if he meant as you stated.

          1. John Owens says:

            He never did clarify, did he? Sorry. Perhaps you read it correctly.

  48. Minister Norman says:

    Read this story before and (sadly) found it very misleading, and so just ignored it; figuring the “debate” would be likewise, mostly off topic anyway.

    ULC you did this, and too many times now! Stop it! You’re better than this.

    Please, leave the Tabloid sensationalist BS garbage to the likes of FOX news, MSNBC and the like: All those Shouting Heads! Then perhaps the discourse here would do likewise; though with some I seriously doubt it!

    Anyway, after re-reading this “Story”, and then reading the comments, I figured I would chime in…

    The US protest of this UN Resolution was not (as many have said) about anything Anti-LGBTQ (and when and why was the Q added, and YES, for crazy-ass Quence, uh Pence it was likely all about his Anti-everything that isn’t a conservative “christian” restriction; but I digress), anyway, it was (The actual US Statement anyway), only about the Death Penalty, and not about LGBTQ Rights.

    I am against the Death Penalty, because I do not believe we have any right to kill anyone; especially after any “danger” has been removed… Not if we are truly “CIVILIZED”! And why isn’t every “Christian” with me on this? The Bible you profess, very clearly states, and with ZERO ambiguity (and there’s your 100%): “Thou Shalt Not Kill”, and that commandment does NOT then add qualifiers; demonstrated Christian hypocracy throughout history, aside!

    As for LGBT(Q) folk and their Rights; live and let live! Gay folks seem to just want what everyone else wants and has (to some measure or degree, anyway), the FREEDOM to live their lives outloud. And what’s wrong with that?

    As for you Bible-Thumpers: First off, I don’t see the Bible as the “Unerring Word of God” anyway, and anyone who’s actually studied it (or perhaps actually even read it) wouldn’t either. Secondly, last time I looked: WE DO NOT LIVE BY YOUR RELIGIOUS LAWS; Thank God!

    Finally, the problem I see with this (and most) UN Resolution(s) is a problem CREATED (out of patchwork cloth) by most Politicians: They always seem to tack on everything under the sun to every single piece of legislation; or then dumb it down to pointlessness!

    It’s just sad that Resolutions, Bills, even Spending Measures, and especially our LAWS can’t just be about what they’re supposed to be about; minus all the baggage, pork, and special interests; why can’t they just state or ask for what they claim they actually want? (Because they don’t?) More productive legislation would certainly get done if they did!

    And, perhaps we’d then have a clear vote on the Death Penalty and on so many other issues confronting our society; unconfused and uncomplicated by hyperbole, greed, and too many Special Interests; Legislation plainly stated and evenhandedly passed; and then perhaps also, more even handedly administered! I won’t hold my breath.


  49. John Owens says:

    Not to single anyone out, but for you people who go on and on in a long, rambling comment, a simple rule of thumb: everything else being equal, shorter is better. Just saying.

    1. John D. Partin says:

      Everything else isn’t equal, though, and entire mountain ranges of BS!!! being poured out here from many different people on the right, except according to them, can’t be adequately answered by merely a thimbleful of response against it!! Shorter isn’t always better, when it doesn’t do the job. Just saying.

      1. Iconoclast says:

        So, you like long ones. That’s what you’re saying. Different “strokes”.

        1. Iconoclast says:

          You can make them change easily, and they do repeat after time.

Leave a Comment