Seperation of sex and state.

[AlAyeti]

Should the govenrnemt be in position to decide sexual matters or define what is and what isn't acceptable in regards to privately practiced sex acts?

Unless the issue is with children living at home and under the authority and responsibility of their parents, should "Government" be excluded from being involved in the sexual practices of individuals?

What a person chooses to do in private should stay in private as long as it is not an illegal behavior. Should laws be passed giving "cultural status" and cultural recognition to an individual under the label of a "Culture" if it is private and independent behavior defined by individuality and not birth ethnicity?

Much is made of the personal choice of religion, and how that effects a persons way of viewing society, but nothing is more personal than sexual behavior in regards to how it effects a persons views on his or her in society. All people engage in commonly occuring sex acts no matter their ethnic or country of origin. Can an individual sexual practice be embraced by a group of people and then be elevated to an exclusive cultural indentity?

Why should leguslative governemt be in the business to define a persons civil rights by their sexual behavior?

If government becomes involved in defining personal rights practiced in private, should the people vote or be allowed to amend the laws that govern society as a means to define and/or re-redefine societal norms practiced in private and between "Consenting Adults?"

Or should government be seperated from sexuality and have nothing to say about an adult persons private behavior?

[Cathar1950]

(The Criminalization of Christianity is now a book for a reason.)

Yes to sell books to the paranoid.

Hate Crimes legislation is directed at one particular group of people that claims that homosexuality and pederasty is evil and wrong.

It is directed against hate crimes.
Your fairy tale is unfounded.

How did society get to the place that dildos, anal and oral sex can now classify a group of people as a minority to be protected, or to claim a cultural classification based on what should be private activities?

That is not what it is all about. It is about their rights. Like your right to worship.

Come on now. You are communicating to someone that is pointing out that evil is a reality.

Your not doing a good job except by personal example.

[AlAyeti]

Once it took hold every form of decency and morality crumbled. Dovorde, abortion, family destruction, fatherless children and a society that is so violent that only Biblical stories seem to represent a fact.

But of course, those sorts of things existed FAR before Darwin was even born.

Again, observation backs that up.

Your observation may support this, but my observation is a bit different.

I see horrible corruption and evil in both athiests AND Christians. The longer you deny the attrocities your own religion has wrought upon the world (both past AND present), the farther we are from putting an end to them.

///

Yes people in the church did horrible things. When have I denied that? Devaluing Christ is not what happened. What I oppose is the ignorant claiming that Christian started the Crusades or that the Inquisition was religion versus non-religion. Many good Christians went to the rack and had to become Catholics or die. The best ones were martyred. The more human ones made a bad choice.

I weigh the worth of atheism and Christianty in terms of history. Colleges and Hospitals speak for Christianty as does the freedoms delievered by Chrsitians in the Western world. John Locke comes to mind.

Russia, China, North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, and many other atheist communist countries speak for atheism's children. Yet, our most "enlightened atheists" ply their snake-oil at Christian founded Universities.

Atrocities and Sodom annd Gomorrah happened long before Chucky D. lost his daughter to illness. Yup.

But evolution has licensed godless abandon to the degree only mentioned in the Bible. Now, men are DEMANDING to marry men. Now children are flushed away like a bowel movement.

And the cannibalism of medical research is blaspheming life to a degree only thought of in science fiction and horror films.

And of course the Bible mentions the evil quite uncryptically.

Jesus had a saying: "Those that eyes let them see and those that have ears let them hear."

Yet, some want to legislate things that are evil into the law of the land. And, already have.

Empirical from a certain viewpoint and invisible to another.

[AlAyeti]

Cathar,

I own Origin of Species and The Criminalization of Christianty. I still have my biolgy books from "back in the day." No, I didn't go to a Christian school.

I certainly am not paranoid? Once I weighed the evidence, that is, was allowed to hear different views! I had a choice. I made it. Freely.

Can I go to a school in California or Massachusetts and tell the students there that homosexuality or anal sex or oral sex are practiced by immoral and degenerate people, practicing deviant sexual behavior? I'll use an anatomy or physiology book on the subject and leave my Bible at home!

I'd like an answer.

It is OK for GLSEN or LGBT (and Questioning Youth) organizations to teach children unatural sex acts by those that perform them. Is it OK for an opposition voice? This is still America right?

Your answers are eagerly awaited.

Again, I'll use existing science books. Or even ones printed a hundred years ago. Whichever.

Yet, Christians are portrayed as bigoted and ignorant totalitarians. Always denigrated in speeach and action by those that hate them.

You have gone to college I presume?

Yet, there is no crime laws to protect Christian children or students from these attacks.

[Cathar1950]

Can I go to a school in California or Massachusetts and tell the students there that homosexuality or anal sex or oral sex are practiced by immoral and degenerate people, practicing deviant sexual behavior? I'll use an anatomy or physiology book on the subject and leave my Bible at home!

I hope not. I don't think you should be telling children about anal sex or oral sex. Maybe your kids if they ask. I do not belive these groups are teaching about butt plugs and unnatural sex acts. Maybe tolerance is the subject?
There is a lot of bad examples in the bible and murder done in the name of God. It even blames God for murder and genocide.
Maybe it is best to leave your bible at home. At least don't let kids read it.

Again, I'll use existing science books. Or even ones printed a hundred years ago. Whichever.

What are you going to use the books for?

Yet, Christians are portrayed as bigoted and ignorant totalitarians. Always denigrated in speeach and action by those that hate them.

Not all Christians are that way.
I do not know of any one who hates you either.

Yet, there is no crime laws to protect Christian children or students from these attacks.

They are not being attacked. Why should there be a law?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Yes people in the church did horrible things. When have I denied that? Devaluing Christ is not what happened. What I oppose is the ignorant claiming that Christian started the Crusades or that the Inquisition was religion versus non-religion. Many good Christians went to the rack and had to become Catholics or die. The best ones were martyred. The more human ones made a bad choice.

You seem to portray Christianity as noble in all aspects, and always quick to take up charity for the less fortunate. On the other hand, your Muslim and athiest stereotype always seems to involve killing and corruption. As you know, the charity and oppressor roles of these groups are historically very interchangable.

True, you have never specifically stated Christians as always being honorable or humane. Yet, you have never acknowledged their attrocities, even when bashing other religions or worldviews for their darker periods in history. I believe that it is important us as Christians to accede to and speak against the attrocities both past and present brought about by members of our own kind, in order to prevent them from ever happening again. Is this not also the purpose of teaching history in schools?

In light of this discussion, I would like to present to you a summary of the "noble" history of Christianity:

- As soon as Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire by imperial edict (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.
- Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.
- Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]
- Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]
According to Christian chroniclers he "followed meticulously all Christian teachings..."
- In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.
- In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]
- The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
[DO19-25]
- Emperor Karl (Charlemagne) in 782 had 4500 Saxons, unwilling to convert to Christianity, beheaded. [DO30]
- Peasants of Steding (Germany) unwilling to pay suffocating church taxes: between 5,000 and 11,000 men, women and children slain 5/27/1234 near Altenesch/Germany. [WW223]
- 15th century Poland: 1019 churches and 17987 villages plundered by Knights of the Order. Number of victims unknown. [DO30]
- 16th and 17th century Ireland. English troops "pacified and civilized" Ireland, where only Gaelic "wild Irish", "unreasonable beasts lived without any knowledge of God or good manners, in common of their goods, cattle, women, children and every other thing." One of the more successful soldiers, a certain Humphrey Gilbert, half-brother of Sir Walter Raleigh, ordered that "the heddes of all those (of what sort soever thei were) which were killed in the daie, should be cutte off from their bodies... and should bee laied on the ground by eche side of the waie", which effort to civilize the Irish indeed caused "greate terrour to the people when thei sawe the heddes of their dedde fathers, brothers, children, kinsfolke, and freinds on the grounde".
Tens of thousands of Gaelic Irish fell victim to the carnage. [SH99, 225]


Makes me proud. And of course, this is not even including the Crusades (which, regardless of who started it, still arguably stands as worlds worst religious attrocity- millions of men, women, and children civilians killed, all over a little "holy" land. I would like to see anyone try and justify that... from either side's perspective)


Also, I found this of interest. Displays some very creative evangelical strategies of the early church:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon ... rture.html

Can I go to a school in California or Massachusetts and tell the students there that homosexuality or anal sex or oral sex are practiced by immoral and degenerate people, practicing deviant sexual behavior? I'll use an anatomy or physiology book on the subject and leave my Bible at home!

Morality is 100% subjective. Many people do not find homosexuality to be immoral- which makes plenty of sense in a way, considering the practice thereof harms absolutely no one.
To teach students that one who partakes in it is inferior, as you suggested, should rightfully be banned by hate crimes in my book. There are better ways to discourage it's practice than the use of the terms you suggested.

The Bible is not the only source of moral guideline. It was not even the first.

I would also like to point out that the science of anatomy and physiology are in NO way moral guidelines. Just because something is unnatural does not make it unethical. Under the same logic, would you consider the use of painkillers and other things of the like to be immoral?

I agree that there should be more laws protecting Christians. But that does not mean that the laws protecting unbelievers should be abolished.

On that note, would you mind providing some SPECIFIC hate crimes laws that prevent free speech? I don't doubt that they exist, but am rather skeptical as to whether they exist to the extent that you claim.

[AlAyeti]

P-P,

Would you list one place in the Gospel where these "Christian Atrocities" find support or license?

Now, Communist-Atheism does find support AND license from Darwinian beliefs, to eliminate any weaker lifeforms. That is documented. Victims are just not "fitter." Whereas victims of murders by "Christians" convict the Christian of murder.

The topic of cultures and beliefs come up often as round table discussions in many class rooms do they not?

How does a Bible-believing Christian dare speak anymore?

On anything?

Please tell me how? Without the Christian position being labeled as hate speech or, like so many do now, just labeled as ignorance and bigotry?

Two wrongs seem not to make a right in your little atrocities list, but somehow do to the anti-Christian position.

Unless the Christian speaks.

Now, a Christian student is silenced BY LAW to talk about anything in the Bible but the fluffy and warm and fuzzy.

Yet, sex and state are intertwined (like a pedophile and children) and yet, nothing can "question" that.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Would you list one place in the Gospel where these "Christian Atrocities" find support or license?

This is beyond the point. Fact is, CHRISTIANS such as ourselves commited those attrocities, and if we neglect to speak out against them, people are bound to assume that we condone them.

I believe this is the biggest reason Christians are so looked down upon by the general populace. We preach Biblical morals, but all they see is hypocrisy.

Now, Communist-Atheism does find support AND license from Darwinian beliefs, to eliminate any weaker lifeforms. That is documented. Victims are just not "fitter."

On the contrary, I do not believe Darwinian beliefs support such acts. Most other evolutionists will agree. If a life form is indeed weaker, then nature will take care of them. We should not take it upon ourselves to do nature's job.

How does a Bible-believing Christian dare speak anymore?

On anything?

Please tell me how? Without the Christian position being labeled as hate speech or, like so many do now, just labeled as ignorance and bigotry?

Now, a Christian student is silenced BY LAW to talk about anything in the Bible but the fluffy and warm and fuzzy.

Sorry, but these are not specifics. You have made it quite clear that you disapprove of such hate crime legislation, but I should like to see some evidence if you would have me (or anyone else) to believe likewise.

[AlAyeti]

P-P,

I would like to believe your rhetoric is just for effect.

Ridding prayer fron schools only attacked one specific religion. Whether a person is in "the majority" or the minority, everyone has the same rights.

The Cross was demanded removed from LA's city flag while Pomona remained. The goddess Pomona.

A review about David Limbaughs book about the relentless attack on Christians . . .

http://www.nrbookservice.com/products/b ... 4#continue



Looking honestly at the dominant influence of Christianity in America's colonial culture and schools, where the Bible was routinely used as a textbook, Limbaugh makes a compelling case that the education students receive today is not what the Founders would have endorsed. Indeed, they would have been outraged at what is taught -- and what the courts say -- in their name, under the pretext of the non-constitutional and woefully misunderstood phrase: "separation of church and state."

Limbaugh zeroes in on how activist judges misinterpret and misapply the Constitution to eliminate Christianity from American government and public life. He reveals a society-wide disinformation campaign that has successfully obscured, for many people, what the Constitution actually says about religious freedom. While allegedly promoting religious freedom, liberals actually suppress it.

Providing details of case after shocking case, Limbaugh demonstrates that the anti-Christian forces now controlling significant portions of our society aggressively target the slightest hint of public Christianity for discrimination, yet ardently encourage the spread of secular values -- including "alternative sexuality" and promiscuity.

///

I'm not paranoid. Far from it. I just have a mind that is open.

I also do fight for the rights of Christians to be free from what secualrism is doing to our society.

Now we see posts that want to eliminate Christians schools right here on good ol' debatingchristianity.com.

Oh yeah, the UC systems wants to discriminate against students coming from Christian schools. Today that is.

There is an anti-Christian agenda.

I think, quite easily seen by the many distasteful and insulting posters that go out of their way to denegrate Christians even with their signatures, while railing at me for presenting accurate descriptions of scientific observation.

This is more denegratingchristianty.com.

[Bugmaster]

Or should government be seperated from sexuality and have nothing to say about an adult persons private behavior?

Well, I would certainly say that. As long as it's sex between two consenting adults, I don't care how they do it, and neither should the government.

That said, I think I understand what the fundamentalists are thinking. And they're thinking something like this:

---
Marriage is not merely a social contract, or a government-sanctioned union; it's a sacred bond, a sort of continuous miracle granted to us by the LORD (in all caps, no less), for the express purpose of reproduction. Sex is a tool which we use to implement the purpose of marriage. When people use sex in ways that the LORD did not intend (gay sex, contraceptives, etc.), they engage in blasphemy. What's even worse is that, when such people get married, their ungodly sex acts profane the sacred bond of marriage, thus weakening it for everybody.

This means that, when two gay people get married (or have sex at all), they are actively destroying every straight marriage in existence, because they weaken the miracle of marriage itself. Clearly, then, the government should step in and stop them before it's too late.
---

Sounds far-fetched, I know, but I think this is really how these people think. At least, that's the only Biblically-justified reasoning for government-regulated sexuality that I could think of.

[Bugmaster]

It is OK for GLSEN or LGBT (and Questioning Youth) organizations to teach children unatural sex acts by those that perform them.

Who are these GLSEN and LGBT ? Presumably, they gay organizations of some sort... Do they have straight counterparts ?

Because I'd totally sign up to take a sex class from a sex professional (the gay ones won't work for me, though). I'm modest, I know I could use some pointers, and more theoretical backing :-)

Unless, of course, what you meant was "these organizations teach people that gay sex is ok", not "these organizations teach people how to perform gay sex", which I think you'd agree are two very different things.