Skip to main content

Hi EH,

Was this discussion, DON'T ASK DON'T TELL deleted. If so, why? On the Forum we should be able to discuss any and all issues which affect our country and our daily lives. We cannot expect everyone to agree; but, we can discuss.

If a person or persons on a particular discussion start getting a wee bit too nasty -- delete them; but, not the whole discussion.

And, a discussion should NEVER be deleted because it goes against YOUR personal belief system. If that were true; then I would ask that all atheist postings be deleted.

However, that would not be right either. I may disagree with our atheist Friends; but, I would never want to see them nor their thoughts deleted.

Please, EH, censor when anyone becomes too offensive; but, please do not censor what we can discuss -- especially when we do it in a civil manner.

Appreciate your help in this matter.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Last edited {1}
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by David L.:
It doesn't surprise me that you didn't find the post offensive. Roll Eyes
Hi David,

I am not sure I understand what you mean. Please do explain in more detail.

When Forum members begin to get nasty and offensive toward other members; I find that offensive. But, having a discussion of whether we should have gays in the military should not offend anyone.

Personally, I believe gays in the military can create a dangerous environment -- both to young recruits and in battle, when everyone must trust and depend upon that person or persons who have your back.

Again, this is just my opinion. Others may feel differently. That is why we have Forum discussions.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
I was just about to read that thread too. I haven't been on in several days. The first day I get on here, that thread was deleted, and so was the Ghost thread that I was in the process of reading. :/

Not sure why either one were deleted (didn't get to read the rest of the ghost one). Hopefully EH will reply to give an answer.

~Amanda
Well, for starters, every word that Jetturd uttered was offensive. And your post wasn't any better when you basically insinuated that all gays are some type of leech going around hitting on every man in sight.


quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi EH,

Was this discussion, DON'T ASK DON'T TELL deleted. If so, why? On the Forum we should be able to discuss any and all issues which affect our country and our daily lives. We cannot expect everyone to agree; but, we can discuss.

If a person or persons on a particular discussion start getting a wee bit too nasty -- delete them; but, not the whole discussion.

And, a discussion should NEVER be deleted because it goes against YOUR personal belief system. If that were true; then I would ask that all atheist postings be deleted.

However, that would not be right either. I may disagree with our atheist Friends; but, I would never want to see them nor their thoughts deleted.

Please, EH, censor when anyone becomes too offensive; but, please do not censor what we can discuss -- especially when we do it in a civil manner.

Appreciate your help in this matter.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
He most certainly did insinuate such when he began his tirade with comparing homosexuals with swimgers, pedophiles and "beastialist" [sic].

Jetboi got an earful of crap from several vets and active duty members of the military alongside non-sodomy obsessed individuals who aren't vets or in the military -- myself included.

If one fans the bellows expect the flames to rise.

Evidently some can dish it out anonymously but not take it at all -- the hallmark of a bully and sucker puncher who turns his back into the crowd after decking someone unseen.

It is too bad that the thread no longer exists so that all can see what Jetboi and Bill both posted and see if it isn't offensive in extremis and would not be tolerated aimed at any other group in the world save Muslims and Democrats and Socialists, where no lie is too ludicrous not to be spread.
Our friend "Slice" always shuts down "his" threads when they do not go the way he wants them to.

Here are the FACTS about rape, sexual assault and harassment in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Sexual Trauma in the Military Reserves and the National Guard
27% of men have experienced military sexual trauma
60% of women have experienced military sexual trauma
3.5% of men have experienced military sexual assault
23% of women have experienced military sexual assault
11% of women have experienced rape
1.2% of men have experienced rape
Service branch with the highest percentage of women reporting sexual trauma: Marine Corps
20% of women seeking care at VA facilities have experienced sexual trauma
1% of men seeking care at VA facilities have experienced sexual trauma
8.3 percentage of women report lifetime PTSD related to MST
More than half of the incidents took place at a military work site and during duty hours
The majority of the offenders in these cases were military personnel
Factors that increase risk of sexual assault for active duty females include presence of officers who condone or allow sexual harassment and unwanted sexual attention
Sources:

Department of Defense: 2006 Annual Report on Military Services Sexual Assault [pdf]

Department of Veterans Affairs, "Military Sexual Trauma Among The Reserve Components Of The Armed Forces"

American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 2003. "Factors associated with women's risk of rape in the military environment." Sadler, Anne, et al.

Please notice that rape occurs 10 times more in women than in men. Following Bill's line of thinking, our daughters are far more at risk than our sons. ANY sexual assault is criminal and should be dealt with accordingly. Male, female, black, white, gay or straight the same rules apply to everyone.

This is another example of Bill trying to find enemies among American soldiers who live and die for this nation. That is very similar to Fred Phelps and his views.

*Notice we now have 2 threads on the same subject again!
Last edited by meanasasnake
I have of late begun to think of "slice" as a grave misnomer, preferring to insert "pile" -- as in "hot steaming stinking rancid pile of (inset favorite offal or excremental effluvium here)".

But that is merely my opinion, and since I discount the veracity of the Genesis account of creation, and view talking snakes as neither more than moral fable nor any more profound than Pandora and her box, I am sure that to the Salvation Assured™ crowd will take exception, but that I take for granted.

I left the wonderful wacky world of fundamentalism literally as soon as I left home, for the better, I assure all -- for my own spiritual journey unemcumbered by screeching legalistic prissy practitioners of the odious Superfundamentlist Protestant variety. What a joy discovering that there were clergy who praeched to people and not at them!

What a joy to discover that the church is for the living and not the dead and that one is allowed and even encouraged to think and research and not memorize! Selah.
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
having a discussion of whether we should have gays in the military should not offend anyone.

Yes! It should offend & does. First & foremost, they are Soldiers!!!
Those men & women, no matter if gay or straight is fighting for your freedom so you can have the right to say the goofy things you say.


Personally, I believe gays in the military can create a dangerous environment -- both to young recruits and in battle, when everyone must trust and depend upon that person or persons who have your back.

So you truly believe that a gay man or woman wouldn't have the back of a fellow soldier? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Roll Eyes
Actually, I had a fantastic childhood. Minus the religious indoctrination and boredom from being force sat on a pad free bench for hideous hour long sermons and then people who I saw in stores as very nasty individuals gather on the steps and stare at the sinner who had dared to show up in their blessed house.
My grandfather raised me, and he was a very popular old coot with a great set of cronies who held court at Miss Annie's in Saint Joe with a pile of newspapers and was still bitter over FDR's untimely death and Claude Pepper losing the Florida senate race to George Smathers!
Swimming in Blue Water Creek, family Sundays at my great-grandfather's in Peppertown with all the fixings and trimmings, black berry picking, hog slopping and being terrified of the two milk cows, Jersey and Holstein in the barn. Playing kick the can and hide and go seek in the barn when the cows were out to pasture . . . being able to read at 3 and amazing adults when my folks showed off my prowess, mispronounced words and all . . . all day badminton tournaments with my sister . . . ah, all so fair and wonderous.
Then they sent me to school and it went downhill rapidly!
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
Actually, I had a fantastic childhood. Minus the religious indoctrination and boredom from being force sat on a pad free bench for hideous hour long sermons and then people who I saw in stores as very nasty individuals gather on the steps and stare at the sinner who had dared to show up in their blessed house.
My grandfather raised me, and he was a very popular old coot with a great set of cronies who held court at Miss Annie's in Saint Joe with a pile of newspapers and was still bitter over FDR's untimely death and Claude Pepper losing the Florida senate race to George Smathers!
Swimming in Blue Water Creek, family Sundays at my great-grandfather's in Peppertown with all the fixings and trimmings, black berry picking, hog slopping and being terrified of the two milk cows, Jersey and Holstein in the barn. Playing kick the can and hide and go seek in the barn when the cows were out to pasture . . . being able to read at 3 and amazing adults when my folks showed off my prowess, mispronounced words and all . . . all day badminton tournaments with my sister . . . ah, all so fair and wonderous.
Then they sent me to school and it went downhill rapidly!




I admire your knowledge of the english dictionary, but where are the fancy adjectives in this answer. No offense intended.
I think that either Bill Kristol or Pat Robertson told them. Maybe it was the Holy Ghost, who knows? Why should logic or empirical evidence ever interfere with a right wing talking point?

Why not post blanket statements denigrating entire classes of people instead, isn't it what Jesus wants us to do?

This infatuation with gay sex is so appalling on so many levels! I doubt the #1 rent boy in NYC thinks about it as much as some here do!

Why not just substitute "pork eaters" for "gay", the injunction is in the same silly tribal wish list of taboos!

Evidently, when a point interferes with one's own personal lifestyle, then it is OK to parse your way out of it!

Woe be to ye pork and shrimp and clam eaters! You are unfit to serve in the military! Unfit, immoral and related to child molesters, porn stars, and Bill's "beastialist." The wages of sin is death! You wallow in your filth and flaunt your chosen lifestyle with your "Memphis in May" and "Crawfish Jamborees!" Have you no shame? The Word of the Lord is ETERNAL!

Do not allow our boys to be seduced into a lifestyle filled with filthy swine and tasty yet spiritually corrupt shellfish! And watch out for rounding the sides of your beards and not giving the Levites their tithe!

Repent and turn away from your chosen lifestyles! Yes, it is chosen, pray and you can become fully kosher.

Dangnabit! I need a ham n cheese sammich about now with some shrimp bisque.
quote:
Originally posted by moondancer323:
Personally, I believe gays in the military can create a dangerous environment -- both to young recruits and in battle, when everyone must trust and depend upon that person or persons who have your back.
Please explain this ridiculous statement....


What makes gays any more dangerous than the average person who has sex? I'm sure gays don't think about sex anymore than a heterosexual person. In fact, I've known more heterosexuals with sex addiction than gays.

This is the twenty-first century and besides the Village People said it best, "In the navy..." Need I say more?
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
There are all kinds of crazy people in Mass. with suckers who give them money for websites.

That is why "normal" people live in NH, Maine, or Rhode Island up there, or up in the Berkshires.

This group needs to meet up with Gill Bray and yourself and bomb some old folks homes or whatever it is y'all do for fun.


Whats the matter Neal ,cant say enough in one name ,you have to have two ? Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by tnt5862:
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
There are all kinds of crazy people in Mass. with suckers who give them money for websites.

That is why "normal" people live in NH, Maine, or Rhode Island up there, or up in the Berkshires.

This group needs to meet up with Gill Bray and yourself and bomb some old folks homes or whatever it is y'all do for fun.


Whats the matter Neal ,cant say enough in one name ,you have to have two ? Roll Eyes




lol Big Grin

maybe its his other personality Eeker
quote:
Originally posted by moondancer323:
Personally, I believe gays in the military can create a dangerous environment -- both to young recruits and in battle, when everyone must trust and depend upon that person or persons who have your back.
Please explain this ridiculous statement....


That was exactly the same thing that was said about women when they wanted to go to combat....... when are you men out there going to wake up and realize that the white-male is not '''''all that''' anymore....... women.... other races...... gays are protecting our country and our right just as much....... if not more so than you opinionated men are..... Jetboi got a lot of flack from uniformed people on here....... that I do remember.....
quote:
Originally posted by moondancer323:
I truly do not understand anyone's fixation on another person's sexuality. What possible different does it make? I don't get it! Could someone please explain why there is even a forum discussing this? Who cares??????????????


Huh?....... you cant have it both ways... one comment is against...... one is for...... which is it?.....
RE: sockpuppetry: N/A for me. I have posted under no one else's name. I want to have credit given when it is earned in either direction, i.e., from the rational and those of normative socialization skills as well as umm . . . those of you who are not meeting such standards.

One good piece of hate mail makes my day twenty times more than twenty Bravo Zulus.
quote:
RE: sockpuppetry: N/A for me. I have posted under no one else's name. I want to have credit given when it is earned in either direction, i.e., from the rational and those of normative socialization skills as well as umm . . . those of you who are not meeting such standards.

One good piece of hate mail makes my day twenty times more than twenty Bravo Zulus.


Cant understand you neal...you may have something stuck up your butt...pull it out and try again...
Basically it means that anything bad you say about me I relish as I think that Jet/Ratboi/46:1 is a pile of hot steaming crap that is probably going to be working in a stockroom with a bunch of butch muscle bear gay coworkers and manager for the rest of his miserable and sadly for humanity's sake too long life. Or he may just become a Republican politician. Maybe Lindsay Graham can be your mentor or Larry Craig! That would be fun, now wouldn't it Jetso? A stretch in Cellblock Q with the Aryans who would sell you to the MS-13 and on down the line for a carton of cigarettes might be more to your tastes though. Thought of admitting to any felonies? I heard that Capshaw needs a few good new bois as the old ones are worn out after such a short while . . .
quote:
Basically it means that anything bad you say about me I relish as I think that Jet/Ratboi/46:1 is a pile of hot steaming crap that is probably going to be working in a stockroom with a bunch of butch muscle bear gay coworkers and manager for the rest of his miserable and sadly for humanity's sake too long life. Or he may just become a Republican politician. Maybe Lindsay Graham can be your mentor or Larry Craig! That would be fun, now wouldn't it Jetso? A stretch in Cellblock Q with the Aryans who would sell you to the MS-13 and on down the line for a carton of cigarettes might be more to your tastes though. Thought of admitting to any felonies? I heard that Capshaw needs a few good new bois as the old ones are worn out after such a short while . . .



Actually neal I supervise inmates. Need I tell you some of the disgusting things I have seen?
Where am I? Why trying to find something worth reading on these forums. Actually, I think I saw you supervising inmates yesterday in Athens. Were you washing sheriffs' cars wearing an orange jump suit? Are "trustees" now considered "supervision"?

(rimshot) Thanks Ladies and Germs, I got a million of 'em, and now Miss Fanny Brice will render us a little ditty called "Secondhand Rose."

Some topics are so overdone that scant reply is required. The equations of Hitler and gays and gays and pedophiles reveals the overall "debate" character of the regular thought-challenged here. We ain't straight out of Cambridge, we straight out of da trailer!
quote:
27% of men have experienced military sexual trauma
60% of women have experienced military sexual trauma



Mean,

Those numbers seem quite unbelievable. Yeah, I know you quoted your source but I simply cannot believe that that many people have experienced "trauma."

I'd like to know they define "trauma." I've had my butt slapped by other dudes during various sports things (no, I do not know why we do that). Have I been "traumatized"? No.

But, back to the subject at hand: I wonder if anyone would get upset if we debated if black folks should serve in the military. Why, I can't imagine why they would.
GoFish, it's pretty bad. That number doesn't actually surprise me.

My daughter had a young man in one of her classes that was being tormented by the instructor. The instructor had a pet name for this kid & the kid just took the abuse and humiliation. My daughter stood up in a fury one day and threatened to report the instructor, which effectively ended it. It happens but everyone is not aware of their options, that or it's just more difficult for the guys to report embarrassing crap like that. I dunno.

The military HAS cracked down on public displays of affection, but they can't always know what goes on behind closed doors. Sometimes it's an abuse of power situation & sometimes it's just a person being who they are. Some people sleep around. It could also get you boot-kicked out of the military and is a stupid risk to take. Most wear the uniform with honor but you know there are always some the rest would like to personally boot kick out of there, just as in any organization.

Oh, and as to what sexual orientation someone is...when you are in a combat situation, that is not an issue. You do what you are trained to do, period, and they are trained well.
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Oh, and as to what sexual orientation someone is...when you are in a combat situation, that is not an issue. You do what you are trained to do, period, and they are trained well.



Do you think your Christian god would think it is an issue?


MY Christian God? And lower case even. How about that? So you are not a Christian but just use the Bible to judge others? That's a bit twisted, jetboy. Smiler You want we to tell you what my Christian God thinks about that, too? Nah, I'm sure I'm just misunderstooding you. You clarify that for me & we'll talk.
Yes YOUR Christian God. Do you not claim to be a Christian? I only asked you if YOUR Christian God would think ones sexual oreintation is an issue. Don't want to answer that one do you?

And since when does one have to be a Christian to be knowledgable, or comment on the Christian bible?


And WHEN have I ever claimed to be a CHristian?
quote:
I believe I said...you clear that up for me & we'll talk. You know exactly why it's important, which is why you are afraid to tell me.Wink So, are you a Christian or not?



I have no idea why my religion or lack thereof plays any part with you answering my question.

If you are not secure enough in YOUR religion to state how it believes, then I have to wonder...just what is this strange new religion?

Every Christian I have ever met was not the least bit afraid to tell it like it is...like it or not.

One thing I admire about Bill, even though he lied about me.
Well, since you refuse to clear that up for me, which is such a simple question, I refuse to answer your's.

It is important to know if I am speaking to a Christian or not if I am discussing the Bible with someone.

Also, if you would like to discuss what the Bible has to say about homosexuality, you might want to start your own thread since that is not the subject of this one.

OR, you could simply go find one of the many threads you've already started on homosexuality & bump it to the top of the list. I believe I gave my own opinion concerning this on one or two of them, likely the first two. Smiler
quote:
Well, since you refuse to clear that up for me, which is such a simple question, I refuse to answer your's.

It is important to know if I am speaking to a Christian or not if I am discussing the Bible with someone.

Also, if you would like to discuss what the Bible has to say about homosexuality, you might want to start your own thread since that is not the subject of this one.

OR, you could simply go find one of the many threads you've already started on homosexuality & bump it to the top of the list. I believe I gave my own opinion concerning this on one or two of them, likely the first two.




I am a Christian...now bring on your answer.
Dear Holy, I was not mocking the Holy Spirit, rather that people take political points and confuse them with religious ones and claim that the "Spirit" leads them when they are not being true, just sad and confused.

Every time I say the Creed I do say and mean, "and in the Holy Spirit, the giver of life who proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified."

I do not believe that God in any Person leads a person towards hate or second class status, that is our own human doings. God needs no help from us in the pursuit of evil, we seem to have it down pat.
quote:
Originally posted by _Joy_:
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Oh, and as to what sexual orientation someone is...when you are in a combat situation, that is not an issue. You do what you are trained to do, period, and they are trained well.



Do you think your Christian god would think it is an issue?


MY Christian God? And lower case even. How about that? So you are not a Christian but just use the Bible to judge others? That's a bit twisted, jetboy. Smiler You want we to tell you what my Christian God thinks about that, too? Nah, I'm sure I'm just misunderstanding you. You clarify that for me & we'll talk.


quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
I am a Christian...now bring on your answer.


Thank you.

Based on Matt 22:15-22, I think He would ask who our military belongs to or represents, the US or God. As Jesus told the Pharisees "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

The only time we are to disobey our government's laws is when they tell us to do something contrary to the Word of God. 'IF' the law stated that members of the military must be homosexual (which it doesn't of course), that would be grounds for breaking the law of the land. That is not the case in this instance.
quote:
Based on Matt 22:15-22, I think He would ask who our military belongs to or represents, the US or God. As Jesus told the Pharisees "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

The only time we are to disobey our government's laws is when they tell us to do something contrary to the Word of God. 'IF' the law stated that members of the military must be homosexual (which it doesn't of course), that would be grounds for breaking the law of the land. That is not the case in this instance.




You have got to be kidding
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Originally posted by _Joy_:
quote:
Originally posted by _Joy_:
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Oh, and as to what sexual orientation someone is...when you are in a combat situation, that is not an issue. You do what you are trained to do, period, and they are trained well.



Do you think your Christian god would think it is an issue?


MY Christian God? And lower case even. How about that? So you are not a Christian but just use the Bible to judge others? That's a bit twisted, jetboy. Smiler You want we to tell you what my Christian God thinks about that, too? Nah, I'm sure I'm just misunderstanding you. You clarify that for me & we'll talk.


quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
I am a Christian...now bring on your answer.


Thank you.

Based on Matt 22:15-22, I think He would ask who our military belongs to or represents, the US or God. As Jesus told the Pharisees "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

The only time we are to disobey our government's laws is when they tell us to do something contrary to the Word of God. 'IF' the law stated that members of the military must be homosexual (which it doesn't of course), that would be grounds for breaking the law of the land. That is not the case in this instance.



You have got to be kidding


Confused No, not kidding. I thought the question was a little goofy, but I did answer it.
quote:
jetboy, you are the one that brings it up all the time, not me. So take a look in the mirror. There is no point in treating you like a human being and trying to discuss anything with you apparently. If you are happy being so mean-spirited, have at it. I'm fine either way



I have simply told you the truth!
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
jetboy, you are the one that brings it up all the time, not me. So take a look in the mirror. There is no point in treating you like a human being and trying to discuss anything with you apparently. If you are happy being so mean-spirited, have at it. I'm fine either way



I have simply told you the truth!


I would think you could tell by now that we already know the truth........ Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
I'll tell you what I think. I think you have a child or close family member that is homosexual and you are trying to create on opening in the Christian faith for them. You might want to research 'abomination'!
I took you up on the advice you gave Joy, and I researched "abomination" in the Bible.

Homophobic fundamentalists often quote two verses that seem to justify their hate of gay people. These two verses, both of which appear in the book of Leviticus, are:

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)

and . . .

"If a man lie with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."(Leviticus 20:13)

Let's back up a bit in Leviticus, shall we?

"For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)

Imagine what would happen today if we killed every child who was disrespectful to his parents. And you are still your mama and daddy's child even after you are grown. Fundamentalists explain this verse away, saying that it is part of the Old Levitical Holiness Code and is not meant to be taken literally. Really? Not to be taken literally? Sounds pretty literal to me. The above verse is just 3 verses before Leviticus 20:13, one of the favorite anti-gay scriptures which, of course, they do choose to apply literally.

Fundamentalists change their entire methodology of scriptural interpretation when it suits their purpose, even when dealing with verses that are a just couple of sentences away from each other.

"If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)

Imagine what would happen today if we deported every man and woman who had ever had sex together while the woman was having her period. Fundamentalists decline the opportunity to take this verse literally, which is merely 5 verses after Leviticus 20:13. If I had a nickel for every time I have heard a guy say "if you can drive through mud, you can..." well - you've all heard the saying... Anyone who has uttered that should be cut off from the people. Sinners! Abominations!

"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)

Did you ever wonder where racist, uneducated people got the idea that slaves were just property and not people? Directly from the above verse, which fundamentalists do not, of course, take literally. Or maybe they do. Jetboy, where do you buy your slaves?


"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27)

Bible-thumping fundamentalists never preach against the evils of shaving, as they do not take this verse literally for our day. Of course, they most certainly would do so if they had a personal bias against shaving, but apparently, they do not. Or, since I haven't seen our resident fundamentalists in person, maybe they do look like this:


"...do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)

Farmers in this country almost always grow more than one kind of crop in their fields. In fact, they often must do so for ecological reasons. Fundamentalists do not apply this verse literally. If they were to preach against farmers, there would be an uproar, and rightfully so.

Fundamentalists also ignore the Biblical command to not wear clothes that have two different kinds of material. The shirts that many fundamentalists are often seen wearing are a cotton/polyester blend, the most common in the United States of America. They may be "Bible believing" Christians, but this is yet another verse that they don't believe should be applied to today. Seriously, God has spoken about the poly-wool blend socks.

Fundamentalists also like to use Leviticus 18:22 to justify their anti-gay prejudice. That verse says, "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." Perhaps you have heard some people refer to gay people as an "abomination." They get the idea directly from Leviticus 18:22. But did you know that the Bible calls other things an abomination as well?

* The Bible says that eating shrimp and lobster is an abomination:

"But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you." (Leviticus 11:10)

"They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11)

"Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an abomination to you." (Leviticus 11:12)

Stay away from Captain D's, Newbern's, anywhere with shrimp, lobster, catfish, and oysters. They are an abomination to you! And you put them in your mouth. For the love of Pete, no one is asking you to put a gay person in your mouth (well, no one on this thread) so what is the deal? Can't you take your hate and your holier-than thou attitude to Red Lobster or Joe's Crab Shack and leave the gay folks alone for a while?
quote:
The list illustrates how relevant the verses are that refer to homosexual acts as an abomination. They are not relevant, any more so than the ones that call the eating of shellfish, the wearing of cotton/wool blend socks, or the shaving of your sideburns an abomination.


I reckon you will have to take up the relevancy of these abominations with God. No matter what you think of them...it doesn't make them any more or less. Joy is trying to justify homosexuality using the bible. I don't see it happening.

Jesus even had a little to say about it, easy goin' fellow that he was.

"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
I reckon you will have to take up the relevancy of these abominations with God. No matter what you think of them...it doesn't make them any more or less.

Exactly. Eating crab legs, shrimp, and pig; shaving your sideburns; wearing cotton/wool blend pants; and planting two crops in the same field are all abominations to God.

Joy is trying to justify homosexuality using the bible. I don't see it happening.

Jesus even had a little to say about it, easy goin' fellow that he was.

And there you are wrong, again. Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality. He was silent on the issue.

"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."


I've read Matthew 19. I had it shoved down my throat when I belonged to a very backwards church. It is about divorce, not about being gay or straight.

As to the abominations, do you believe that eating shellfish = abomination in the eyes of God = wearing poly/cotton pants = abomination in the eyes of God = homosexuality = abomination in the eyes of God = shaving your sideburns and your beard? You realize that by wearing clothes of blended fabrics, eating shrimp, and / or shaving your sideburns or trimming your beard that you are just as much of an abomination as the gays that you spew your hatred against, right?
quote:
As to the abominations, do you believe that eating shellfish = abomination in the eyes of God = wearing poly/cotton pants = abomination in the eyes of God = homosexuality = abomination in the eyes of God = shaving your sideburns and your beard? You realize that by wearing clothes of blended fabrics, eating shrimp, and / or shaving your sideburns or trimming your beard that you are just as much of an abomination as the gays that you spew your hatred against, right?


Have you been to Peking on a Friday or Saturday night? You can see all of the above at any given moment. Even the occasional act of aggression if someone in line gets too many of those abominable snow crab legs.
And another thing - what about those people who are boy male and female at the same time - shemales or whatever like Jamie Lee Curtis was rumored to be. Some people and some animals are born with both sets of equipment down there. Did God make those people too? Your Bible verse says he didn't. And so what if God made people MALE and FEMALE. Both men and women can be gay! Jetboy, you are not too bright.
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Are you saying that God didn't make gay people?


No, I am saying God didn't make people gay. They made that choice.
Science says you are wrong. ALL animals (humans included) exhibit homosexual behavior. God made the animals, and he made some of them gay. Even people. Too bad, so sad. Go eat a big plate of shrimp for me after you trim or shave your beard and put on your cotton/poly shirt. Hypocrite.
quote:
And another thing - what about those people who are boy male and female at the same time - shemales or whatever like Jamie Lee Curtis was rumored to be. Some people and some animals are born with both sets of equipment down there. Did God make those people too? Your Bible verse says he didn't. And so what if God made people MALE and FEMALE. Both men and women can be gay! Jetboy, you are not too bright.




Some people are born blind...their abilty of sight is not there.

Some people are born without legs...their ability to walk is not there.

Some people are born deaf...their ability to hear is not there.

Some people are born without sexual organs...their ability to have sex is not there.

Some people are born with both sexual organs...their ability to have sex IS there...but they must violate Gods words to do it.


Many people are born without the ability to do many things...why do you place such importance on sex?


"“'Teacher,' his disciples asked him, 'why was this man born blind? Was it a result of his own sins or those of his parents?' 'It was not because of his sins or his parents' sins,' Jesus answered. 'He was born blind so the power of God could be seen in him'” (John 9:2-3)."
Last edited by Jetboy
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
Why do you ignore this question tsc?


quote:
Do you understand what the coming of Jesus was all about?

Were any laws fulfilled?
I thought your question was rhetorical. Yes, I understand that the coming of Jesus fulfilled prophecy. And Christ states that he did not come to abolish the law. Further, he states that we are to obey every letter of it. If you want to speak out against gays, then you must also see the sin of the shrimp eaters, the shavers, the blended shirt wearers - no?

Matthew 5:17-48 (New International Version)

The Fulfillment of the Law
17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
And another thing - what about those people who are boy male and female at the same time - shemales or whatever like Jamie Lee Curtis was rumored to be. Some people and some animals are born with both sets of equipment down there. Did God make those people too? Your Bible verse says he didn't. And so what if God made people MALE and FEMALE. Both men and women can be gay! Jetboy, you are not too bright.




Some people are born blind...their abilty of sight is not there.

Some people are born without legs...their ability to walk is not there.

Some people are born deaf...their ability to hear is not there.

Some people are born without sexual organs...their ability to have sex is not there.

Some people are born with both sexual organs...their ability to have sex IS there...but they must violate Gods words to do it.


Many people are born without the ability to do many things...why do you place such importance on sex?


"“'Teacher,' his disciples asked him, 'why was this man born blind? Was it a result of his own sins or those of his parents?' 'It was not because of his sins or his parents' sins,' Jesus answered. 'He was born blind so the power of God could be seen in him'” (John 9:2-3)."
Seems that being born a hermaphrodite is the only thing you could come up with that violates God's law. Now why on earth can those people not have sex? Blind people don't sin by having eye transplants. People who don't have limbs don't sin by having prosthetics. How on earth could someone be a sinner just by using the sexual organs that GOD gave them?
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
ALL animals (humans included) exhibit homosexual behavior.



Whoa!!!! You may be willing to classify YOURSELF as an animal to further your agenda. I am in no way an animal.


Now that I think of it...it does make sense... Wink


You are either a plant, animal, or mineral. So take your pick. People are animals. And people are born gay every single day. To say that God creates people to be sinners is to deny the choice that God gave us with free will. You cannot will yourself to be gay any more than you can will yourself to be taller, have a different eye color, or anything else that is controlled by genetics. People who think that being gay is some horrible plague are just as unevolved as the ones who burned witches in Salem, kept slaves in the South, and practice female genital mutilation in Africa. Those beliefs are old, outdated, and ignorant.
Pay special attention to 29 - 31 of that passage:

29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.


I've seen plenty of the characteristics in bold above on these forums and no one rallies against those people like they do the ones that are gay. Why is that? Why pick and choose like you do?
quote:
Originally posted by David L.:
TSC, just ignore these homophobes - it is a waste of time. Jetboy obviously has issues and he does not know any gay people (or he thinks he hasn't). I've never seen a bigger moron on this forum.
It just makes me so mad to see someone take the word of Jesus - who promoted LOVE and acceptance and tolerance - and try to make it into something ugly and twisted. I just can't for the life of me figure out how people can't see the similarities between using the Bible to justify owning slaves and using the Bible to justify persecuting gay people. It is abhorrent, backwards, and ignorant. I will have to take your advice and leave this alone though. Otherwise I'm going to give myself high blood pressure!

Peace ~
TSC
quote:
Originally posted by T S C:
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
ALL animals (humans included) exhibit homosexual behavior.



Whoa!!!! You may be willing to classify YOURSELF as an animal to further your agenda. I am in no way an animal.


Now that I think of it...it does make sense... Wink


You are either a plant, animal, or mineral. So take your pick. People are animals. And people are born gay every single day. To say that God creates people to be sinners is to deny the choice that God gave us with free will. You cannot will yourself to be gay any more than you can will yourself to be taller, have a different eye color, or anything else that is controlled by genetics. People who think that being gay is some horrible plague are just as unevolved as the ones who burned witches in Salem, kept slaves in the South, and practice female genital mutilation in Africa. Those beliefs are old, outdated, and ignorant.
......TSC, I believe he is plant. Probably needs watering.
quote:
It just makes me so mad to see someone take the word of Jesus - who promoted LOVE and acceptance and tolerance - and try to make it into something ugly and twisted. I just can't for the life of me figure out how people can't see the similarities between using the Bible to justify owning slaves and using the Bible to justify persecuting gay people. It is abhorrent, backwards, and ignorant. I will have to take your advice and leave this alone though. Otherwise I'm going to give myself high blood pressure!




You are bringing up the (old law) and trying to apply it here. God was against homosexuality in the old testament. The coming of Jesus (new law) fulfilled some of those laws. In the new testament you will find it written quite clear that God still feels the same way about homosexuality. The verses I will post below fits to a tee most of the posters in this thread, joy included.


"Romans 1:22-27:


Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."



This statement is so very true...


"It just makes me so mad to see someone take the word of Jesus - who promoted LOVE and acceptance and tolerance - and try to make it into something ugly and twisted."
quote:
TSC, just ignore these homophobes - it is a waste of time. Jetboy obviously has issues and he does not know any gay people (or he thinks he doesn't). I've never seen a bigger moron on this forum.


davidl...isn't it about time for you to post that I must be a closet homosexual? thats about all I have saw out of you, other than name calling and insults.

Why dont you go to the red cross and give blood ? Oh thats right...they wont take blood from homosexuals will they? Their afraid it will be too contaminated.

Eeker
Last edited by Jetboy
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
TSC, just ignore these homophobes - it is a waste of time. Jetboy obviously has issues and he does not know any gay people (or he thinks he doesn't). I've never seen a bigger moron on this forum.


davidl...isn't it about time for you to post that I must be a closet homosexual? thats about all I have saw out of you, other than name calling and insults.

Why dont you go to the red cross and give blood ? Oh thats right...they wont take blood from homosexuals will they? Their afraid it will be too contaminated.

Eeker
There are many, many people who cannot give blood. People who have spent six months or more cumulatively in the United Kingdom from 1980 through 1996 (i.e., from January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1996) cannot give blood. Those horrible, deviant, contaminated Brits!

But homosexual women can give blood. A very good friend of mine is gay and she and I donate blood together every time the Blood Mobile pulls up at our workplace. Hope you don't ever need any of her "contaminated" blood.
quote:
There are many, many people who cannot give blood. People who have spent six months or more cumulatively in the United Kingdom from 1980 through 1996 (i.e., from January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1996) cannot give blood. Those horrible, deviant, contaminated Brits!



Not only the Brits, but any group with a desease epidemic, (mad cow in their case). Mad cow is not contracted through deviant lifestyles as you try to equate though...I can't even give you a 'good try' on that one. Roll Eyes


quote:
But homosexual women can give blood. A very good friend of mine is gay and she and I donate blood together every time the Blood Mobile pulls up at our workplace. Hope you don't ever need any of her "contaminated" blood.


Never said they couldn't...I was speaking to a 'male'...(I think)??? Wink

Just hope a male homosexual doesn't have a family member that needs their particular blood type. It would be a bad situation to lose someone because of a deviant sexual lyfestyle.
quote:
"Romans 1:22-27:


Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."



This statement is so very true...


"It just makes me so mad to see someone take the word of Jesus - who promoted LOVE and acceptance and tolerance - and try to make it into something ugly and twisted."




Didn't want to touch that one did you tsc?
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
"Romans 1:22-27:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."



This statement is so very true...


"It just makes me so mad to see someone take the word of Jesus - who promoted LOVE and acceptance and tolerance - and try to make it into something ugly and twisted."


Didn't want to touch that one did you tsc?
Not sure what you wanted me to "touch" on that one JB. Romans 1:22 - 27? Let's see... it starts out talking about idols and images. Then talked about people allowing themselves to be overtaken by lusts (like John Edwards, for example). They dishonored their bodies, changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped something other than God.

Then, according to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, addressing theology students in Toronto, said an oft-quoted passage in Paul's Epistle to the Romans meant to warn Christians not to be self-righteous when they see others fall into sin. "Paul is making a primary point not about homosexuality but about the delusions of the supposedly law-abiding."

Go further and read verses 28 - 32:
[28]And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
[29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
[30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
[31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
[32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Paul was talking about all kinds of sin and fornication and deceit, murder, envy, etc... he was not calling out gays, but rather he was calling out the Christians who turn on their own self-rightous halos while chastising others. It is a great deflection from your own moral short-comings (envy, covetousness, maliciousness, deceit, gossip, proudfulness, boasting, disobying your parents) to call attention to someone else's. I think that is what the majority of the homophobes are trying to do. Again Jesus Christ my Lord and Savior did not have one single thing to say about homosexuality. That speaks volumes to me.
"
Jesus also never said anything directly about rape, incest or domestic violence. Are those things okay, too?


Many teachings and deeds of Christ are not included in the Gospel accounts, as John writes in John 21:25.


Christ did say that God created people ?in the beginning? as male and female, and that marriage is the union of one man and one woman joined together as ?one flesh? (Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9). Nothing is said about any other type of union.


When He discussed sexual morality, Christ had a very high standard, clearly affirming long-standing Jewish law. He told the woman caught in adultery to ?Go and sin no more? (John 8:11). He warned people not only that the act of adultery was wrong, but even adulterous thoughts (Matthew 5:28). And he confronted the woman at the well (John 4:18) by pointing out to her that he knew she was living with a man who was not her husband. If he had intended to change this longtime understanding of God?s requirements for human sexuality, He would have said so.


Christ used the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as an example of God?s wrath (Matthew 10:15, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12 and Luke 17:29). Throughout the Old Testament, prophets clearly described these cities as being notorious for the practice of homosexuality (Genesis 18:20, Genesis 19:4-5, Isaiah 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14, Ezekiel 16:46-59). Jesus certainly knew that this was how the comparison would be understood.


Christ was God incarnate (in the flesh) here on earth. He was the long-expected Messiah, which was revealed in Matthew 16:13-20, Matthew 17:5-9, Mark 8:27-30, Luke 4:16-30, Luke 9:18-21, John 4:25-26, John 8:57-59 and elsewhere. As one with God, He was present from the beginning (John 1:1-13; Colossians 1:15-17; Ephesians 3:9 and elsewhere). So, Jesus was part of the Godhead as the laws were handed down through Moses to Israel and eventually to the whole world. This Old Testament law clearly prohibited homosexuality (Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Deuteronomy 23:17 and elsewhere). The apostles understood this also, as shown by Paul?s writing in Romans 1:24-27, Peter?s in 2 Peter 2:4-22, and John?s in Revelation 22:15.

So ? the apostles, who were taught by Christ, clearly understood that homosexuality was a sin as it has always been. When people say, ?Jesus said nothing about homosexuality,? they reveal that they really haven?t understood Scripture, or Who Christ is. Maybe some of these points can help them toward a clearer understanding. "
TNT show me where it says it is not OK to be gay. And then I'll show you were it says it is not OK to eat shrimp. It is not ok to wear cotton/wool blend socks. It is not ok to have sex while you have your period. It is not ok for you (as a woman) to speak in church. It is not ok to divorce except for adultry. It is not ok to remarry after divorce unless you are the one who was cheated on. It is not ok for men to shave. It is not ok to have braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothes.

Why all the attention to something that is going on in two consenting adult's bedroom???
quote:
TNT show me where it says it is not OK to be gay. And then I'll show you were it says it is not OK to eat shrimp. It is not ok to wear cotton/wool blend socks. It is not ok to have sex while you have your period. It is not ok for you (as a woman) to speak in church. It is not ok to divorce except for adultry. It is not ok to remarry after divorce unless you are the one who was cheated on. It is not ok for men to shave. It is not ok to have braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothes.



Again you try to confuse old law with new law. It is irrelevant however. It doesn't matter what you think of the old laws...God said it was law therefore it is. It still doesn't change homosexuality being an abomination.


quote:
Why all the attention to something that is going on in two consenting adult's bedroom???


Thats not the case though is it? I for one don't want a homosexual teaching my child in school. Nor do I want the school teaching my child homosexuality is acceptable .
quote:
Originally posted by T S C:
TNT show me where it says it is not OK to be gay. And then I'll show you were it says it is not OK to eat shrimp. It is not ok to wear cotton/wool blend socks. It is not ok to have sex while you have your period. It is not ok for you (as a woman) to speak in church. It is not ok to divorce except for adultry. It is not ok to remarry after divorce unless you are the one who was cheated on. It is not ok for men to shave. It is not ok to have braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothes.

Why all the attention to something that is going on in two consenting adult's bedroom???


Right on!....... great comment!...... so very true too!........
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
TNT show me where it says it is not OK to be gay. And then I'll show you were it says it is not OK to eat shrimp. It is not ok to wear cotton/wool blend socks. It is not ok to have sex while you have your period. It is not ok for you (as a woman) to speak in church. It is not ok to divorce except for adultry. It is not ok to remarry after divorce unless you are the one who was cheated on. It is not ok for men to shave. It is not ok to have braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothes.



Again you try to confuse old law with new law. It is irrelevant however. It doesn't matter what you think of the old laws...God said it was law therefore it is. It still doesn't change homosexuality being an abomination.


quote:
Why all the attention to something that is going on in two consenting adult's bedroom???


Thats not the case though is it? I for one don't want a homosexual teaching my child in school. Nor do I want the school teaching my child homosexuality is acceptable .


I am not confused in the least, JetBoy.

Tell me where in the New Testament Jesus the Christ, the Mesiah, says that any of the laws of the Old Testament do not apply any more. He does NOT say any such thing. As to what laws are old and which are new:

1 Timothy 2:9

Women, for their part, should display their beauty by dressing modestly and decently in appropriate clothes, not by braiding their hair or by wearing gold, pearls, or expensive clothes.

1 Corinthians 14:33-38

As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached? If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. If any one does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

Divorce is never permissible.
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Matthew 19:6

Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery. -- Mark 10:11

Whosoever putteth away his wife and marrieth another, committeth adultery. -- Luke 16:18

I don't see you all up in arms about divorced people, women having braided hair, jewelry, expensive clothes, speaking in church, or any of the other things explicitly taught against in the New Testament. Why not??

Now, please, show me where in the New Testament, in the NEW LAW as you like to call it, where did Jesus Christ say that being gay was a sin, was bad, was an abomination, or anything of the sort? The fact is - He did not. The only place you find it is in your OLD LAWS which you choose to discount and toss aside when they don't suit your pleasure. It saddens me that you fear those things about which you are ignorant so much that it consumes you.
"Matt 5:17-18 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."


Jesus did not come to ABOLISH any law. Some have been fulfilled, some have not. The law is already in place concerning homosexuals, Jesus didn't need to restate it.


Please note...Jesus also speaks about the prophets. Do you not understand what Paul said was with Jesus's approval?
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
"
Jesus also never said anything directly about rape, incest or domestic violence. Are those things okay, too?


Many teachings and deeds of Christ are not included in the Gospel accounts, as John writes in John 21:25.


Christ did say that God created people ?in the beginning? as male and female, and that marriage is the union of one man and one woman joined together as ?one flesh? (Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9). Nothing is said about any other type of union.


When He discussed sexual morality, Christ had a very high standard, clearly affirming long-standing Jewish law. He told the woman caught in adultery to ?Go and sin no more? (John 8:11). He warned people not only that the act of adultery was wrong, but even adulterous thoughts (Matthew 5:28). And he confronted the woman at the well (John 4:18) by pointing out to her that he knew she was living with a man who was not her husband. If he had intended to change this longtime understanding of God?s requirements for human sexuality, He would have said so.


Christ used the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as an example of God?s wrath (Matthew 10:15, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12 and Luke 17:29). Throughout the Old Testament, prophets clearly described these cities as being notorious for the practice of homosexuality (Genesis 18:20, Genesis 19:4-5, Isaiah 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14, Ezekiel 16:46-59). Jesus certainly knew that this was how the comparison would be understood.


Christ was God incarnate (in the flesh) here on earth. He was the long-expected Messiah, which was revealed in Matthew 16:13-20, Matthew 17:5-9, Mark 8:27-30, Luke 4:16-30, Luke 9:18-21, John 4:25-26, John 8:57-59 and elsewhere. As one with God, He was present from the beginning (John 1:1-13; Colossians 1:15-17; Ephesians 3:9 and elsewhere). So, Jesus was part of the Godhead as the laws were handed down through Moses to Israel and eventually to the whole world. This Old Testament law clearly prohibited homosexuality (Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Deuteronomy 23:17 and elsewhere). The apostles understood this also, as shown by Paul?s writing in Romans 1:24-27, Peter?s in 2 Peter 2:4-22, and John?s in Revelation 22:15.

So ? the apostles, who were taught by Christ, clearly understood that homosexuality was a sin as it has always been. When people say, ?Jesus said nothing about homosexuality,? they reveal that they really haven?t understood Scripture, or Who Christ is. Maybe some of these points can help them toward a clearer understanding. "


Jetboy googles when he doesn't know what to say.
You know, since I first visited this forum..with no thoughts of homosexuals even remotely in my mind...all I have seen is the homosexuals flaunting their "sexuality" in everyones face, pretty much saying, 'you have to accept me or your are mean'...Now, if they had never mentioned their 'lifestyle' how could anyone have criticized them? I did not come on saying, 'Hey, you guys, I am hetero, and you better like it or you are a heterophob!!!
And, btw, where does the "phob" come from? What is there to be afraid of?? I think everyone should keep their sexuality in the closet. Our sex lives should be personal, not on public display. If the homosexuals weren't in everyone's face maybe people would be less vocal about it.
quote:
You know, since I first visited this forum..with no thoughts of homosexuals even remotely in my mind...all I have seen is the homosexuals flaunting their "sexuality" in everyones face, pretty much saying, 'you have to accept me or your are mean'...Now, if they had never mentioned their 'lifestyle' how could anyone have criticized them? I did not come on saying, 'Hey, you guys, I am hetero, and you better like it or you are a heterophob!!!
And, btw, where does the "phob" come from? What is there to be afraid of?? I think everyone should keep their sexuality in the closet. Our sex lives should be personal, not on public display. If the homosexuals weren't in everyone's face maybe people would be less vocal about it.




Well put... Wink
Golly gee, Marionette and Rocket Girl, you two, along with Bill Gray have to take the cake for subliminal cries for professional mental health provision.

It is so nice and cozy in your cocoons, protected by distance from personal interaction. I wonder how brave you lot would be at an Episcopal Church coffee hour after Mass? Why, even the visiting Franciscans would be out for blood, I dare say! I shudder at what the choir would do . . . albs stained with blood be darned, full speed ahead!

I know some gals on a softball team who would just love to know your real names!
quote:
Originally posted by Monette:
You know, since I first visited this forum..with no thoughts of homosexuals even remotely in my mind...all I have seen is the homosexuals flaunting their "sexuality" in everyones face, pretty much saying, 'you have to accept me or your are mean'...Now, if they had never mentioned their 'lifestyle' how could anyone have criticized them? I did not come on saying, 'Hey, you guys, I am hetero, and you better like it or you are a heterophob!!!
And, btw, where does the "phob" come from? What is there to be afraid of?? I think everyone should keep their sexuality in the closet. Our sex lives should be personal, not on public display. If the homosexuals weren't in everyone's face maybe people would be less vocal about it.


ALL the homosexuals? I know of one longtime member who NEVER flaunts anything but occasionally rebuts inaccuracies when he sees them & one new member who had an avatar with 2 guys on it, which does not necessarily mean he or she is gay - could just like yanking someone's chain.

This discussion keeps reoccurring (trust me, many times over before you joined here) because members that like to stir the pot keep bringing it up. These would be members that profess to be straight, btw. They choose subjects that are controversial on purpose.
quote:
If the homosexuals weren't in everyone's face maybe people would be less vocal about it.


Well, if stupid people would not harp on and on about the rain coming or not coming -- oh, excuse, me -- "the gays" and just keep their pie holes shut then maybe people wouldn't make fun of them so much.

Mental masochism: I understand not its appeal, but am more than willing to supply the verbal paddle for your jollies when the fancy strikes me.
quote:
ALL the homosexuals? I know of one longtime member who NEVER flaunts anything but occasionally rebuts inaccuracies when he sees them & one new member who had an avatar with 2 guys on it, which does not necessarily mean he or she is gay - could just like yanking someone's chain.

This discussion keeps reoccurring (trust me, many times over before you joined here) because members that like to stir the pot keep bringing it up. These would be members that profess to be straight, btw. They choose subjects that are controversial on purpose.




Do ya think they do that because this is a DISCUSSION board? Roll Eyes
quote:
Is that your idea of a clever retort or are you asking a real question? If you are asking me if I think that this same subject keeps being brought up by the same member(s) simply because we are on a discussion board, my answer is no.



I think it is a RETORT by you. You try to discredit anyone that is against homosexuals.

"Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. "
Such hypocrites. None of you keep the New Testament Law, let alone the ones that you have conveniently dismissed in the Old Testament. Yet you judge and ridicule others for not keeping the few laws that you choose to highlight. Some examples of your hypocrisies:

Jesus forbids the taking of any kind of oath. Yet Christians in courtrooms throughout the United States place their right hand on the Bible swear to tell the truth. Matthew 5:34-37

It is wrong to borrow money. Romans 13:8

Jesus said "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." Matthew 15:4-7

Jesus tells his disciples not to pray in public. Those who favor school prayer, National Day of Prayer, etc. should take his advice. Matthew 6:5-6

Don't judge or condemn others. Forgive those who have offended you. Luke 6:37

Those who are unmarried should never marry. 1 Corinthians 7:27

Wives are not to braid their hair, wear gold, or put on any expensive clothing. 1 Peter 3:2-6

Jesus warns against hypocrisy. The Christian right should pay more attention to this verse. Luke 6:41
quote:
Originally posted by jetboy:
quote:
Is that your idea of a clever retort or are you asking a real question? If you are asking me if I think that this same subject keeps being brought up by the same member(s) simply because we are on a discussion board, my answer is no.



I think it is a RETORT by you. You try to discredit anyone that is against homosexuals.

"Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. "


Confused

HOW exactly did anything I said "discredit" you? I guess I've somehow missed your kind and considerate side & mistakenly assumed your were just being rude. Silly me. I did answer you just in case. You're welcome.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×