Will Christians be protected from Gay social goals?

[Mere_Christian]

Once gay marriage is legalized in most states and forced on those that will not legalize it by the power of Democrat majority in Congress, how will Christians be protected from Gay Activists desiring to force Gay Culture and gay sex on every aspect of Christian life?

[Goat]

From Page 2 Post 15:

You cannot have gay culture and Christian truth dwelling in the same place.

I contend that until such time "Christian truth" can be shown to be, you know, truth that Christians should live their lives as they see fit, and allow others the same.

Marriage is a man and a woman, per "Jesus," that would qualify as Christian truth. Marriaeg as a man and a woman for the definition of family is a biological truth.

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

My question is about what YOU secularists will do us Christians when we stick to Biblical truth over pop culture?

There are many Christians that will disagree with you about what 'Biblical' truth is. Some might say that you are not showing love to God, because you are showing discrimination and Hate against your fellow man. Are not gays 'The least of your brothers'?

I personally will continue to laugh in amazement that folks would believe ancient tales that have little to no corelation to reality.

If I laugh at two gay guys you lefties don't like that. Haven't you actually made it illegal? I'm not sorry that fultility in same-gender sexuality trying so hard to be equal to biologically sound sexxuality is fun to watch. Makes for great comedic fodder.

'Lefties'?? So, you are equating political leanings with religion now? What about those churches that welcome gay couples ?

What I wouldn't do is condemn them or restrict them from doing so.

When they want it taught in PUBLIC schools you better believe it IS going to be condemned. Restrictions without doubt.

You mean, things like evolution, and physics, and biology, and you know, science and knowledge, rather than superstition and hate?

I notice the threat of forcing us to become secular businesses and THAT wll force gay culture ON US and into our Churches.

And exactly how will that 'force Gay Culture on you and your Churches'? That sounds like the 'slippery slope' logical fallacy, or just plain paranoia.

[Amos]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

[JoeyKnothead]

From Page 2 Post 20:

You cannot have gay culture and Christian truth dwelling in the same place.

I contend that until such time "Christian truth" can be shown to be, you know, truth that Christians should live their lives as they see fit, and allow others the same.

Marriage is a man and a woman, per "Jesus," that would qualify as Christian truth.

Unless Jesus can be shown to be "divine" I contend there's no reason to think he was anything but an individual with an opinion.

Marriage as a man and a woman for the definition of family is a biological truth to kids that want a mom and a dad the traditional way and honorable way.

This does not address heterosexual, or homosexual couples who forgo children.

If I laugh at two gay guys you lefties don't like that.

Please don't place words or emotions onto me. I personally find sex with men horrible, however I contend what they do in the privacy of their own quarters is their business.

What I wouldn't do is condemn them or restrict them from doing so.

When they want it taught in PUBLIC schools you better believe it IS going to be condemned. Restrictions without doubt.

How dare our public schools teach respect for all!

Public businesses should be bound to public law.

So much for the First Amendment. I see that that too cannot exist within gay culture.

Discrimination has never been declared to be a form of free speech.

>I point out here a misquoting of my original statement, and correct my original statement here:

Hmm, that is spread in public schools by GSA's run by adult gay actvists? Do we get to present a counter point to gay activism?

Yes. Only thing is you must present factual, verifiable information. That's why the God issue is not allowed.

I'll stick to anatomy, biology and physiology to make a mockery of gay culture as a sensible sexuality. Hmm, logic and reason and my Bible closed and on the desk.

It just cracks me up that folks will look to any loophole, any small crack, any small opening to express disdain for those they don't accept.

I contend bigotry makes a mockery of religion.

In school sex should be taught as consequences to biological sexuality.

Yes. Not as something "wicked".

Homosexuality can only be a violation of human sexuality. Zoologically as well.

Why?

That excludes homosexuality as a pop culture and places it squarely in absurdity.

Your opinion is noted.

Anatomy, physiology and biology are squarely on my side here.

Why?

Nor should folks be restricted based on the unproven, unprovable tales of an ancient culture.

Like Greece? How does licentiousness make a society better?

Because it upsets so many - pardon the pun - anally retentive people.

Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!

I would contend folks already have the right to do their otherwise harmless acts.

There's a large quilt with a lot of people's names on it that shows how deadly sexual deviance and licentiousness actually is. Ever seen what they write on the box of cigarettes?

Are people having sex with cigarettes?

The fact those folks chose to engage in acts that ultimately led to their deaths seems to indicate my position is correct.

I contend those who are trying to restrict such rights should stay out of their bedrooms.

"Gay," and "Lesbian" are labels to denote sex acts forst and foremost. I'd say that I'd rather see homosexuals stay out of the public sphere with their desires and behaviors being front and center.

"Christian" is a lable to denote (some) folks who can't seem to mind their own business, and seek to infect their own superstitions onto others. I contend these folks should "stay out of the public sphere with their desires and behaviors being front and center".

I suppose we'll have to leave it to the observer which of us has the better proposition.

The rectum and palate have designed purposes sceintifically. Excluding any sexuality at all.

That they can be used for sexual gratification would then require us to conclude this is part of such "design".

Scratching an itch feels good until the flesh is raw and becomes infected. This natural too? We are thinking animals sir.

Some moreso than others.

Your analogy fails to address the specific points raised, and seems to me to be a straw man argument.

Why do you have to state "excluding any sexuality at all", when it is a fact that folks use these parts for sexual gratification?

Deviance and perversion then allows for the always present "Anything Goes" of liberal ideology. People die from such behaviors. Even innocent people.

If folks can't do what they like to do because it will kill them, aren't they already dead?

That you consider such acts as deviance or perversion can only be a relative measure of your own.

Umm, how about logic and not emotionalism to drive this position? The anus is not a sex organ. The tongue isn't either.

Sure seems like they are to me, you know, what with so many folks using them for sexual pleasure.

Licentiousness once again points the rational person to urge opposition to it.

You just hate that nasty old licentiousness don't you?

Your opinion is your own, you are entitled to it. I would contend other folks' opinions carry equal weight as to what they wish to do in the privacy of their own quarters.

It absolutely does. "You leftists" call we "anti-gay" Christians, haters and phobes. I've just proven that logic and science is ONLY on our side. We are not what you charge.

Please link to where I've called you this.

Otherwise, retract the claim.

There is no exception to what sexuality is for mammals. Consult the anatomy once again.

And again I say, the fact that folks find sexual gratification with such indicates they are being used as such.

Observation through science shows that sexuality is well-defined by anatomy, biology and physiology. Now, if you want to go with psychology . . . then we're reaching reality in gay culture.

So, where folks' psychology is they are gay, you would have them disregard such?

What's your point here?

Christians that oppose a European marrying a Asian can be shown science that supports the Biblical truth on reality.

Can the Bible, or you, show that donkeys talk? Snakes talk? Folks rise up out of graves after three days? Folks can walk on water?

What I see from the Biblical record is that miracles are extremely rare. There were lots of donkeys in the old testament time period that didn't talk. How many Israelites went to their deaths without any miraculous intervention?

You offer nothing to show such Biblical claims are true yet insist on some form of "Biblical truth" to speak against homosexuals?
I mean, I'm with ya, I ain't down with getting down with some dude. But surely human beings have a right to their own sexuality, right?

If so much of the Bible can't be shown to be true, then shouldn't there be some understanding that folks should be left alone in their own bedrooms, and let God sort it out?

No, no please, I'm very OK with reality guiding the Gays (GLBT's and progressives et al) versus Christians war going on.

That you consider it a "war" I find very disturbing. All I see are homosexuals starting to assert the rights the Constitution affords them to begin with.

Blah, blah, blah. It's a further stretch of actuality to show that homosexuality is NOT abnormal. It is proveably abnormal behavior. Scientifically so.

I would contend it is abnormal behavior to base discriminatory policies on a book that can't rise above the level of myth.
I would further contend it is Constitutionaly abnormal to discriminate against folks based on who they like to have sex with.

One man's "morals" is another's night with the hot twins.

Perfect analogy. Then stop calling we abti-gay Christians bad people. We're quite nice.

I contend it is not "nice" to enact laws and policies that discriminate against folks based on myth.

I contend that basing "morals" on ancient tales should come with evidence such tales are true.

Basing civil rights on a sexual perversion and lascivious licentiousness is even more twisted.

LOL. You do like them hundred dollar words, dontcha?

I personally have enjoyed quite a good bit of "perversion" (two sisters at once), a goodly amount of "lascivious" (Jennifer in NY), and a whole heaping bunch of "licentiousness" (any really good sex). I recommend it to all who seek it.

What I don't do is try to restrict what others do based solely on who they wanna do it with.

I don't know what porn you're watching, but I see no "beasts" in the porn I watch.

I'm talking about shattered lives of real people.

Boo hoo. Do what you will, don't come crying to me if you fall down.

How interesting that Sodom and Gomorrah seem to be a common city condition.

Those myths and fables sure look like the five-o'clock news to me circa April 24 2009.

No! Folks is folks? Well don't that just clabber your milk!

Ms. California anyone?

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

[Goat]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

[Mere_Christian]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

[Mere_Christian]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

This is the most amazing part of progressive-ism, those that espouse it always incessantly ask for proof when proof is well-established. It's creepy.

The New Testament was put together long before gay pride parades and the Humanist Manifesto started influencing pop culture.

Jesus when talking about divorce . . . divorce breaks up a marriage.

My question is about what YOU secularists will do us Christians when we stick to Biblical truth over pop culture?

There are many Christians that will disagree with you about what 'Biblical' truth is.

They are opposing Jesus and the writers of the NT not me. I look at them as the weeds Jesus said would be in The Church. Itching ears and all.

Some might say that you are not showing love to God, because you are showing discrimination and Hate against your fellow man.

It is pure hate to encourage others to sin. Jesus even threatened these kinds of people. I am not celebrating the sin of gay sex and encouraging anyone to engage in it. No millstone with my name on it sir.

Are not gays 'The least of your brothers'?

I don't know if any are tax collectors, but I know their actions and sexual behaviors are very pagan-ish. I'll treat them as pagans.

I personally will continue to laugh in amazement that folks would believe ancient tales that have little to no corelation to reality.

If I laugh at two gay guys you lefties don't like that. Haven't you actually made it illegal? I'm not sorry that fultility in same-gender sexuality trying so hard to be equal to biologically sound sexxuality is fun to watch. Makes for great comedic fodder.

'Lefties'?? So, you are equating political leanings with religion now?

Now? I have never even hinted that it isn't leftist politics poisoning the Christian Church and making the social world lascivious, licentiousness and in reality sick. Sick with disease and corruption. You've never been out in public?

What about those churches that welcome gay couples ?

Destined to fall away I glean from the NT text. I notice that schism follows liberal and gay theology hand in glove.

What I wouldn't do is condemn them or restrict them from doing so.

When they want it taught in PUBLIC schools you better believe it IS going to be condemned. Restrictions without doubt.

You mean, things like evolution, and physics, and biology, and you know, science and knowledge, rather than superstition and hate?

Evolution is literally merciless on same-gender sexuality. It is death and oblivion for the individual. Science wise that is. Homosexuality is aberrant behavior in evolutionary and biological perspective. You have to spin and spin reality to fit gay sex in normality. Occurence does not make a thing normal. Or it would be normal for chimps to wear pants.

I notice the threat of forcing us to become secular businesses and THAT wll force gay culture ON US and into our Churches.

And exactly how will that 'force Gay Culture on you and your Churches'?

Anti-Christians (the whole large club) will apply their secularism to Christian culture and its environment. Or hold out ghettoization.

That sounds like the 'slippery slope' logical fallacy, or just plain paranoia.

From Stonewall riots to keep child prostitution going to gay marriage as a civil rights issue? Homosexuality taught in school clubs nationwide????

It's not the Slippery Slope "theory" anymore, it is a bonfide Syndrome in reality.

[Mere_Christian]

Unless Jesus can be shown to be "divine" I contend there's no reason to think he was anything but an individual with an opinion.

Fair enough. I have no desire to preach conversion to the lost. That's not my gig. I just want Christians protected from those that desire to harm them. To me it's exciting interacting with people exactly like Lot's and Noah's fellow townsfolk.

No matter God or man, Jesus was quoted as saying that marriage is man and woman.

If I laugh at two gay guys you lefties don't like that.

Please don't place words or emotions onto me. I personally find sex with men horrible, however I contend what they do in the privacy of their own quarters is their business.

But it isn't in private and "you guys" have invented "hatye crimes" legislation to silence any dissent of gay authority. I'm just agreeing with the facts.

What I wouldn't do is condemn them or restrict them from doing so.

When they want it taught in PUBLIC schools you better believe it IS going to be condemned. Restrictions without doubt.

How dare our public schools teach respect for all!

They don't. Our public schools are infested with anti-Christians that have gone out of their way to be very disagreeable and insuting towards Christians.

Public businesses should be bound to public law.

So much for the First Amendment. I see that that too cannot exist within gay culture.

Discrimination has never been declared to be a form of free speech.

Neolgism is a craft used so well by the left.

>I point out here a misquoting of my original statement, and correct my original statement here:

Hmm, that is spread in public schools by GSA's run by adult gay actvists? Do we get to present a counter point to gay activism?

Yes. Only thing is you must present factual, verifiable information. That's why the God issue is not allowed.

I'll stick to anatomy, biology and physiology to make a mockery of gay culture as a sensible sexuality. Hmm, logic and reason and my Bible closed and on the desk.

It just cracks me up that folks will look to any loophole, any small crack, any small opening to express disdain for those they don't accept.

Cracks and loopholes? I could insert mockery here. I have great disdain for those that would seduce others for hedonistic reasons.

I contend bigotry makes a mockery of religion.

The only thing mocking religion are those that hate believers in religion. The vitriol is quite one-sided stacked on the anti's side. THIS website is a perfect place for proof.

In school sex should be taught as consequences to biological sexuality.

Yes. Not as something "wicked".

Sexuality and wickedness are quite common and connected. Ask a girl who "lost" her virginity to some guy that brags about it and breaks up with her days after the event. Ask a guy that is seduced by another guy that never told him he was gay until the moved were attempted or accomplished. Wickedness and sexuality go togther like obesity and food. Truth on all matters. Christians don't hide behind lies. Not for long anyways.

Homosexuality can only be a violation of human sexuality. Zoologically as well.

Why?

Deviance and aberration testify to that.

That excludes homosexuality as a pop culture and places it squarely in absurdity.

Your opinion is noted.

And labeled by "the left" as hate and outlawed. Hmm, how convenient.

Anatomy, physiology and biology are squarely on my side here.

Why?

Logic divorced from pasion and emotionalism makes the anti-gay position sound and reasoned.

Nor should folks be restricted based on the unproven, unprovable tales of an ancient culture.

Like Greece? How does licentiousness make a society better?

Because it upsets so many - pardon the pun - anally retentive people.

Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!

Yet you curb the rights of Christians to speak freely? Hmm.

I would contend folks already have the right to do their otherwise harmless acts.

There's a large quilt with a lot of people's names on it that shows how deadly sexual deviance and licentiousness actually is. Ever seen what they write on the box of cigarettes?

Are people having sex with cigarettes?

That response shows how effective my logic is.

I contend those who are trying to restrict such rights should stay out of their bedrooms.

"Gay," and "Lesbian" are labels to denote sex acts forst and foremost. I'd say that I'd rather see homosexuals stay out of the public sphere with their desires and behaviors being front and center.

"Christian" is a lable to denote (some) folks who can't seem to mind their own business, and seek to infect their own superstitions onto others.

"Christian" is an epithet applied to people that followed Christ Jesus as the Messiah. We have epithets to aplly to homosexuals . . . but THEY have applied neologism to make it seem so comfy and warm.

I contend these folks should "stay out of the public sphere with their desires and behaviors being front and center".

I suppose we'll have to leave it to the observer which of us has the better proposition.

Amen brother.

The rectum and palate have designed purposes sceintifically. Excluding any sexuality at all.

That they can be used for sexual gratification would then require us to conclude this is part of such "design".

Scratching an itch feels good until the flesh is raw and becomes infected. This natural too? We are thinking animals sir.

Some moreso than others.

Your analogy fails to address the specific points raised, and seems to me to be a straw man argument.

Hmm, I would say that you and the reader looking on know exactly how well I made my point.

Why do you have to state "excluding any sexuality at all", when it is a fact that folks use these parts for sexual gratification?

Deviance and perversion then allows for the always present "Anything Goes" of liberal ideology. People die from such behaviors. Even innocent people.

If folks can't do what they like to do because it will kill them, aren't they already dead?

Then why all the fuss to find a cure for AIDS? Go have fun and then pay the piper.

That you consider such acts as deviance or perversion can only be a relative measure of your own.

Until I get AIDS in an innocent way. That's no straw man argument sir. Again logic and facts are my support partners.

PART TWO LATER . . .

[Goat]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

I see no one 'forcing' 'same-sex' marriage on a "Public school system". I have yet to see any 'Public school system" force anybody to get married.

[Mere_Christian]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

I see no one 'forcing' 'same-sex' marriage on a "Public school system". I have yet to see any 'Public school system" force anybody to get married.

Christians are kicked out of public schools because of concerns about recruiting other peoples children into Christianity. What has replaced the Christians' influence is Humanism and Gay activism.

This is where so much of the tension comes from.

I'm speaking here as a parent.

[Mere_Christian]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

I see no one 'forcing' 'same-sex' marriage on a "Public school system". I have yet to see any 'Public school system" force anybody to get married.

Christians are kicked out of public schools (to speak about Christian culture) because of concerns about recruiting other peoples children into Christianity. What has replaced the Christians' influence is Humanism and Gay activism.

This is where so much of the tension comes from.

I'm speaking here as a parent.