Rufus_1611 said:
			
		
	
	
		
		
			I can but I won't point you to this proof anymore than I will point you to the fact that most of the cast of The Passion of the Christ were porn stars (Ps 101:3).
		
		
	 
 Well isn't that special.  When asked for proof... you "won't".
 
Please list the names of the cast of The Passion of the Christ who were in porn and the films they were in.... or "won't" you do that either?
 
I am aware of one actress who had been in porn movies.  When we discussed the issue here, I opposed the movie.  But not because of the cast.  The movie was based on Catholic add-ins, not the Bible, even down to the beating Christ got and the bloody towel that is supposedly now a RCC relic.  The movie was a grotesque distortion based on catholic myths and mysticism... THAT is the problem with the movie.  Few people knew or cared about the cast. 
	
	
		
		
			It is not commonly disputed that Gannon was and is what he is alleged to be. Further, it is not commonly disputed that he became a "journalist" after his other profession.
		
		
	 
 So which is it?  He was a prostitute and became a journalist or he is both?  Why are you afraid to cite proof?  Could it be that your sources are just as ridiculous as Marrs or maybe he is the only source? 
	
	
		
		
			All that is disputed is how much further beyond kissing and hugging the relationship goes between he and the president.
		
		
	 
It is only disputed because folks like you have read something into this incident without proof and begun to make foundless conjecture.
 
That is sinful.
 
That is wonderful. Praise God. 
 
	
	
		
		
			I would suspect though, you would see the difference between familial affection and the Bush-Gannon scenario.
		
		
	 
It entirely depends on the traditions and practices of a family.  Like I said, my wife's family are huggers.  I was a little taken aback by it at first because my family definitely isn't.  They hug friends.  They hug family.  They hug ex-boyfriends and ex-girlfriends in a friendly way when the relationship is cordial.  
 
Not entirely unlike how the French and Italians kiss one another on the cheek.
 
You are simply not entitled to make a conjecture on this and read something into that isn't there.  Christian character demands much more proof than that.  Seeing that Bush professes to be a Christian, you further have a duty to confront him directly or else keep your mouth shut unless you have definitive proof.  The Bible prohibits rumor-mongering every bit as much as it does homosexuality.  The love you should have according to 1 Cor 13 would prevent you from supposing the worst.
 
Marrs definitely qualifies as an "inventor of evil things".