First, I'd like to point out that though the Idaho Press-Tribune attacks Dennis Mansfield and others for "perpetually dividing society," saying, "It's always 'us' vs. 'them,' they turn right around and do it themselves by writing such an opinionated article. They chose sides, as a public newspaper, to go the liberal route on an old road that's very anti-Christian and anti-Bible. They purposely broaden the gap they want us to believe is so horrible to our society. The truth of it all is that Dennis Mansfield is not against homosexuals, he's against homosexuality. The Idaho Press-Tribune may or may not be against Dennis Mansfield, but they'd have a hard time convincing anyone they are friends, especially after publishing articles like the one mentioned above.

Secondly, I'd like to stand up for the true "Idaho way." So many stories from both the Idaho Statesman and the Idaho Press-Tribune suggest that the Idaho Way is some liberal standpoint, supporting everyone's right to do whatever they choose and that Idaho is some haven for the open-minded. If this were the case, Idaho's legislature would look much different than it does. In the opinion of the Idaho Press-Tribune, the thought of Dennis Mansfield running for Helen Chenoweth's congressional seat should send a "shiver" through our spines. Did they stop to think that they are writing to the people who twice elected Helen Chenoweth over Dan Williams, a very liberal-oriented politician? Did they consider the fact that Helen Chenoweth and Dennis Mansfield work hand-in-hand toward the same goals? Do the editors of the Idaho Press-Tribune realize that the Idaho people, especially in the Treasure Valley, are very conservative as a whole? Who makes up Idaho anyway? Is it eleven people with typewriters that just happen to work for a newspaper, or is it all the people of Idaho? Isn’t Idaho made up of folks who, in a landslide defeat, elected a sold-out Christian to be their new governor? Isn't it the people who decisively sent Mike Crapo, another Christian, to the U.S. Senate on their behalf? Isn't Idaho made up of the people who elected Larry Craig to the U.S. Senate, knowing he too is a Christian against homosexuality and abortion and all those issues Dennis Mansfield stands against on behalf of Idaho society? Aren't we, the readers of Idaho newspapers and viewers of the television news, the very same people who voted in the Idaho legislature that almost unanimously decided against homosexual marriages being recognized by the state of Idaho? Were they not casting their vote that day on our behalf? Did we not re-elect virtually that same crew back on board after they cast that vote to once again steer this ship we call Idaho? Just what makes the Idaho Way the Idaho Way? Is it what gets published in the newspaper or is it how Idahoans as a whole feel about issues in their state?

In regards to writing this about a "news" paper organization, I hate to be the one to break the "news" to them, but the majority of Idaho is pro-Dennis Mansfield and his right-wing agenda. I'm sure the majority of Idahoans agree that Hewlett-Packard does have a homosexual-oriented goal in their "Diversity" campaign. The majority of people in this state are not so blind to the fact that homosexuality is the only one of HP's so-called diversities with which a person is not born with or will inevitably become. That sticks out in the crowd it’s joined together with. We don't choose to be blonde. We don't choose to be black. We don't choose to be old. We don't choose to be Hispanic. We don't choose to be tall or short. Gays do, however, choose to be gay. And, seemingly, Idaho newspaper people choose to be a proponent of the liberal agenda and promoters of propaganda rather than journalists of the news. Only people who want to turn away from such an obvious agenda will turn away from such truth. And, the Idaho Press-Tribune has chosen to turn away from this truth about Hewlett-Packard’s gay agenda, which to me, doesn’t seem to be hidden at all.

Additionally, know that when the media attacks any public figure that it also comes against all those who support that person. If the Idaho Press-Tribune would like to lose subscriptions to their paper, they would simply need to continue their entourage of liberal propaganda. Going even further, I challenge them to tally the results of such an article as the one being addressed here.

Getting to the bottom of the issue at hand, however, (the real reason for writing this address), is that one group believes homosexuality is anti-Christian and ultimately leads to the ruin of society while another group believes there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and that it will never damage society. If we look at it any other way, we're dishonest with ourselves and with everyone around us. If we look at the facts and are honest with ourselves as a society, we cannot deny that homosexuality has and is hurting cultures at large. If we understand that homosexuals have a life span of about 47 years, we are forced to reason that that lifestyle has something to do with that. If we take into account that the majority of people with AIDS are homosexual or bisexual, we have to wonder why that is. If we find that the most sexually promiscuous group of all people, by far, are homosexual men, significantly adding to the spread of AIDS and various other diseases, we have to, as a society, concur that homosexuality is very much a degenerating factor to our well-being.

As for "homophobia," I have nothing to fear. The Christian Right never uses the term "homophobia." Living my lifestyle, statistically, I have better odds of winning the same lottery jackpot two days in a row than I do of contracting AIDS even once. The gay man has to worry about it constantly. For example, in my church, there is not one person who is HIV positive, but if you go to any local gay bar, I’m sure you can easily find the disease you’re fearing. The truth of the matter is that the fear of homosexuality and AIDS is not a fear aimed at ourselves, but rather a fear on behalf of society as a whole, and namely the people in high-risk categories, such as homosexuals and IV drug users. If that's hate coming from Dennis Mansfield, I’d love to see what he does for society when he loves a particular group.

When reading pro-gay and anti-gay articles, I always look for the similarities among them all, to see what people are using as their weaponry. What words have the folks at the Idaho Press-Tribune used in dealing with Dennis Mansfield's stand against Hewlett-Packard's "diversity campaign?" It seems they attempt to point out that the Christian Right is always trying to "divide society." Other than that, it's pretty much a simple, straightforward bash on Dennis Mansfield, followed up with a propaganda call for the public to take up our elective arms against such homophobia and extremism if and when he runs for public office. The real, underlying issue is never truly addressed in the Idaho Press-Tribune article. But then, it never is. That would be too painful for the liberal agenda. The fact is that Hewlett-Packard does support homosexuality, giving marital-status health benefits to homosexual couples, though no marriage is recognized. They do require the "couple" to be living together, however. Hmmm, sounds like special rights, discrimination, to me. I mean, would I, as a heterosexual HP employee, get marital-status benefits if my wife and I only lived together but weren't married? Some common words used for attacking Christians when tied to issues like anti-gay are, in addition to homophobia and extremists, we are also closed-minded, self-righteous, people-haters, etc....And almost invariably, the proponent for liberality will misquote the Bible in refuting a Christian. (Since the majority of Christians don't read the Word like they should be these days, this has typically proven to be a useful tool for the leftists' propaganda). Concerning the Bible quote from the Idaho Press-Tribune, however, whereas the writer stated, "Have they never heard of the Golden Rule: 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'?" I have to say that these editors really need to study the Bible more before using it to refute a popular Christian. I would strongly suggest learning about what Jesus had to say about idolaters and fornicators and to learn what He meant by it. I would suggest reading Romans, Chapter 1. Then tell Christians in the Treasure Valley that to hate homosexuality is not the Idaho Way.

I'm telling you that hate is a relative term. I hate murder, but I pray for the murderer. I hate disease, but I pray for those who are sick. I hate suffering, but I care for those who suffer. I hate hunger, so I feed those who are hungry. I hate homelessness, but I pray and help the homeless. I hate homosexuality, but I pray for the homosexual. The sinner isn't the sin. I hate when the media ties the two together to support their liberal agenda. When the Christian Right says "anti-gay," we're thinking anti-homosexuality. The media, however, simply takes it to mean that we hate gay people. Then, without fail, they put us up against the words of Jesus Christ, unknowingly mocking what they don’t understand. I have a few accurate Bible quotes concerning Dennis Mansfield and his attacks on the sin of homosexuality:

When you see Dennis Mansfield from a proper perspective, you can realize he is a man who cares deeply about the society around him. He loves the people individually the media says he hates. He wants to see society flourish in morality. His agenda isn't to take away the freedoms of eleven people at a newspaper or anyone else in this state. He simply wants us to live a Godly way, which he terms the Idaho Way. Idaho is too great for hate...of what? Hate isn't a family value. It isn't? It can be; it just depends on what the family hates. In the case of Jerry Falwell, the Christian Coalition, Idaho Senators and Representatives, Focus on the Family, and Dennis Mansfield and the Idaho Family Forum, to hate the sin of homosexuality is a family value.

P.S.- Since when did any Christian claim to be righteous by himself or herself? The very center of the Christian faith claims that we have no righteousness within ourselves, which is the whole reason why we all need Jesus, Who was the only Righteous One. So how is Dennis Mansfield a "self-appointed force of righteousness"? Do you think, maybe, that he's reading his Bible and using that as his basis? What a concept that would be.