Gay preaching on proper sexuality: Born Gay

[AlAyeti]

What is the law that little Joey knows? AlAyeti says his parents are sheltering him from "sexualization," so he does not know about sex. What does he think that Joey's mommies are doing that's wrong?

As we have seen from following the history of gay rights advocacy (or civil rights activism or whatever), that there is recruitment and invitation to gay behavior. And homosexuality as behavior is now common. It is very common for liberal teachers to use any tactics as a means of indoctrinating the unwary into a liberal view of life. All of us that are older than 25 have been through experience after expereince with progressive secularists as our typical teachers through high school and beyond. Now these kinds of people are after our children. Just as follows, God being excused from school and homosexuality being welcomed in: Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News

And you still haven't answered the question of how Joey's parents can accuse Joey's mommies of sexual sin when they have no way of knowing what sex, if any is going on between them?

Lesbian does not mean a tennis grip. It means female homosexuality.

Let's be real. The whole canard that homosexuality isn't about direct physical behavior is no longer, at this level of debate, worth trying.

 

[AlAyeti]

Num 25:1 While Israel was staying at [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tim, the people began to have sexual relations with the women of Moab.
Num 25:2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods.
Num 25:3 Thus Israel yoked itself to the Baal of Peor, and the LORD's anger was kindled against Israel.
Num 25:4 The LORD said to Moses, "Take all the chiefs of the people, and impale them in the sun before the LORD, in order that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel."
Num 25:5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, "Each of you shall kill any of your people who have yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor."
Num

25:6 Just then one of the Israelites came and brought a Midianite woman into his family, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the whole congregation of the Israelites, while they were weeping at the entrance of the tent of meeting.

Num 25:7 When Phinehas son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he got up and left the congregation. Taking a spear in his hand,
Num 25:8 he went after the Israelite man into the tent, and pierced the two of them, the Israelite and the woman, through the belly. So the plague was stopped among the people of Israel.
Num 25:9 Nevertheless those that died by the plague were twenty-four thousand.
Num 25:10 The LORD spoke to Moses, saying:
Num 25:11 "Phinehas son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the Israelites by manifesting such zeal among them on my behalf that in my jealousy I did not consume the Israelites.
Num 25:12 Therefore say, 'I hereby grant him my covenant of peace.
Num 25:13 It shall be for him and for his descendants after him a covenant of perpetual priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for the Israelites.'"

Num 25:14 The name of the slain Israelite man, who was killed with the Midianite woman, was Zimri son of Salu, head of an ancestral house belonging to the Simeonites.

Num 25:15 The name of the Midianite woman who was killed was Cozbi daughter of Zur, who was the head of a clan, an ancestral house in Midian.
Num 25:16 The LORD said to Moses,
Num 25:17 "Harass the Midianites, and defeat them;
Num 25:18 for they have harassed you by the trickery with which they deceived you in the affair of Peor, and in the affair of Cozbi, the daughter of a leader of Midian, their sister; she was killed on the day of the plague that resulted from Peor."

Mind pointing out where that is?

Zimri and Cozbi.

Their love was sin.

 

[Archivist]

As we have seen from following the history of gay rights advocacy (or civil rights activism or whatever), that there is recruitment and invitation to gay behavior. And homosexuality as behavior is now common. It is very common for liberal teachers to use any tactics as a means of indoctrinating the unwary into a liberal view of life. All of us that are older than 25 have been through experience after expereince with progressive secularists as our typical teachers through high school and beyond. Now these kinds of people are after our children. Just as follows, God being excused from school and homosexuality being welcomed in: Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News

So it is the fault of the lesbian that her prom was cancelled because she wanted to bring her girlfriend?

How is that "recruitment?" How is that "an invitation to gay behavior?" All she is after is the same rights currently enjoyed by her heterosexual classmates.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To Archivist,
My wife could bring a girlfriend and so could I, so what you mean by lesbian is the other girl wasnt a friend but a sexual attraction.

 

[Zebra1552]

Zimri and Cozbi.

Their love was sin.

Really? Mind pointing out where that is?

 

[OllieFranz]

As we have seen from following the history of gay rights advocacy (or civil rights activism or whatever), that there is recruitment and invitation to gay behavior. And homosexuality as behavior is now common. It is very common for liberal teachers to use any tactics as a means of indoctrinating the unwary into a liberal view of life. All of us that are older than 25 have been through experience after expereince with progressive secularists as our typical teachers through high school and beyond. Now these kinds of people are after our children. Just as follows, God being excused from school and homosexuality being welcomed in: Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request - Yahoo! News

Can you give me just one bit of evidence that at little Johnny, Joey, and Pete's ages the schools are teaching about the mechanics of sex, much less recruiting them into gay sex?

Lesbian does not mean a tennis grip. It means female homosexuality.

Let's be real. The whole canard that homosexuality isn't about direct physical behavior is no longer, at this level of debate, worth trying.

All you KNOW about Pete's family is that there are two women there who are jointly raising him. You are assuming that they are lesbians. You are further assuming that they are having same-sex physical relations. You have no more evidence for these assumptions than I have to assume that you regularly visit brothels and bondage clubs.

Let's you be real. The whole canard that tolerance is about orgies in the classroom is no longer, at this level of debate, worth trying.

 

[OllieFranz]

I did NOT EDIT THE POST AGAIN period!

I thought YOU brought up the Bible as the answer the teacher would give. See posts #919 and #920.

Copy of your answer here:

Originally Posted by one11

Little Johnny: I have a mommy and a daddy, and so does Susie. How come Pete has two mommies and no daddy?"

Teacher: Your mommy fell in love a boy, your daddy. Pete's mommy fell in love with a girl, Pete's other mommy.

Little Johnny: But, my Mommy and Daddy say that is a sin.


What if that happens, and I'm sure it will. How will teachers handle another's belief without infringing on that belief?

_______________________________________________

YOUR ANSWER HERE:


​

Love is a sin? Where in the Bible does it say that?

I did not say you just re-edited the post, I said I just noticed the re-edit. At the time of post #924, my first post after your first edit which you did properly acknowledge, your post did not have the teacher bringing up the question about the Bible and love. And in that post, I made it clear that the question was aimed from me to you, not from the teacher to Joey.

 

[Archivist]

To Archivist,
My wife could bring a girlfriend and so could I, so what you mean by lesbian is the other girl wasnt a friend but a sexual attraction.

You and you wife could bring girlfriends to a high school dance? Given your age, I highly doubt that you would be admitted.

So, if a man brings a female date I assume that she would be a sexual attraction to him? If so, why can't a woman bring a a woman to whom she is sexually attracted?

 

[brightmorningstar]

To Archivist,

You and you wife could bring girlfriends to a high school dance? Given your age, I highly doubt that you would be admitted.

but that doesn’t address my point which was that my wife could take a girlfriend so what you mean by lesbian is the other girl wasn’t a friendship but a sexual attraction.
That’s the point.

So, if a man brings a female date I assume that she would be a sexual attraction to him? If so, why can't a woman bring a a woman to whom she is sexually attracted?

Yes if a man brings a girlfriend you might assume it would be a sexual attraction, but you aren’t sure. I can see you assumed it by using the word ‘date’ but the girlfriend might not be a sexual attraction but a friend. However a lesbian means a sexual attraction so that would be a sexual attraction rather than a friend.

 

[AlAyeti]

Really? Mind pointing out where that is?

The entire episode points that out. Phineas was expunging the evil from Israel. And we can see how his actions and the outcomes bears that out in the context of the scripture.

But, I'm glad that this portion of exchange is coming close to a sermon. I just wish you would attempt one about gay morality "in The Church." That would be most fascinating to watch.

 

[AlAyeti]

Can you give me just one bit of evidence that at little Johnny, Joey, and Pete's ages the schools are teaching about the mechanics of sex, much less recruiting them into gay sex?

"Gay," means sex. To say otherwise is simply impossible. The tactics of putting out the concept of the LGBT community itself was crafted to for that. The whole concept of gay not being about behavior is rather silly to watch employed. Of course, the only people falling for that tactic are the young and inexperienced.

All you KNOW about Pete's family is that there are two women there who are jointly raising him. You are assuming that they are lesbians.

No matter how wide you push out your goal posts, you meant lesbians. And lesbian means sexual behavior between women. Especially women living together saying they are someone's "mom's."

You are further assuming that they are having same-sex physical relations.

Yes that is true. An assumption based squarely on reality. I assume my trash cans were tipped over last night by raccoons. But I never saw their behavior. I'm asserting that I am not being ignorant, bigoted hateful towards raccoons to "assume" the behavior is traced to an individual.

You have no more evidence for these assumptions than I have to assume that you regularly visit brothels and bondage clubs.

I have admitted my involvement with inappropriate content. One can "assume" that my experiences in that world are not just missionary position couples tapes.

Let's you be real. The whole canard that tolerance is about orgies in the classroom is no longer, at this level of debate, worth trying.

There can ONLY be tolerance UP TO A POINT. We in the "live and let live" department, have had enough of liberals indoctrinating our children with sophisticated agendas and implementation methods of that agenda. Now it's our turn to push our rights.

I applaud the School in Mississippi for not holding Prom connected to their school, rather than to allow an leftist activist organization like the ACLU to rule to day with their power of litigation threats to force acceptance of gay political power. Proms have always been boys with girls and there is no reason to alter that for some pop culture movement hidden under the guise of a civil rights issue. I have already called some Churches in the area to connect them with other people in other palces that have handled Prom on private property. The kids never missed a beat. Having good role models encouraging youth on the night of the Prom is a very good endeavor.

Between the positions of gay advocates and Evangelical Christians is a schism so wide and well defined in scripture and history that the chasm cannot be crossed this side of eternity. All we can do is agree to tolerance that fits the Gospel meaning of the word.

 

[brightmorningstar]

I agree with you AlAyeti, what they are saying to us seems to be the opposite of what they are claiming.

 

[David Brider]

"Gay," means sex.

No. To be gay means to tend to be physically and romantically attracted to people of the same gender as oneself.

As I explained to you a week ago, if someone realises that they're gay, they're not suddenly discovering that they're sexually active. They're just discovering who it is that they're attracted to.

If someone tells you that they're gay, that's telling you absolutely nothing about their sexual activity, they're just telling you who it is that they're attracted to.

Some gay people are sexually active, sure. Some of them are in monogamous relationships. Some of them are more inclined to play the field. Some, of course, are in monogamous relationships which haven't yet reached the stage of sexual activity. Some are still single, and sexually inactive because of that. But the ones who aren't sexually active - and, for that matter, the ones who have never been sexually active - are gay nonetheless, because it's not sexual activity which defines one's sexual orientation; rather, it's who one is romantically and physically attracted to that defines one's sexual orientation.

I'm not sure why you have such difficulty either accepting or understanding that, as it's always seemed pretty straightforward to me.

David.

 

[brightmorningstar]

To David Brider,

No. To be gay means to tend to be physically and romantically attracted to people of the same gender as oneself.

No not yet it doesn’t. Gay means sex. The definitions of gay in the dictionaries do not include ‘romantic’. Gay=homosexual which is a sexual orientation to the same sex.

As I explained to you a week ago, if someone realises that they're gay, they're not suddenly discovering that they're sexually active. They're just discovering who it is that they're attracted to.

No they are discovering which sex they are sexually attracted to. What you are claiming is simply not the case, I am attracted to people of my own sex when I see they have the same Holy Spirit and faith, the faith rises up in me and I am attracted to them. I say my own sex for your benefit as it is the same attraction to either sex, its just to show that the only attraction limited by the sex of the people is a sexual one.

If someone tells you that they're gay, that's telling you absolutely nothing about their sexual activity, they're just telling you who it is that they're attracted to.

true but it tells me they either have a joyful disposition or they are sexually attracted to someone of the same sex.

I'm not sure why you have such difficulty either accepting or understanding that, as it's always seemed pretty straightforward to me.

Yet as I have demonstrated what you are claiming doesn’t work.

 

[OllieFranz]

"Gay," means sex. To say otherwise is simply impossible.

I know gays that are life-long celibates. I know gays who are holding their virginity to offer it to their proper spouse when the time comes. I know gays (well, mostly bi's) who have only had sex with someone of the opposite sex, often only a legal spouse. They are all gay. They are no less gay than any other gay person. Gay≠sex

The tactics of putting out the concept of the LGBT community itself was crafted to for that.

The "concept" of the LGBT community is exactly the same as the "concept" of the Black community, or the Hispanic-American community, or the Irish-American community, or the Italian-American community. It is also the same concept that make a church more than just a building used for prayer an hour a week. A concept of a place where one can find emotional support (and yes, when necessary, financial and even political support) from people of similar background facing similar struggles.

The whole concept of gay not being about behavior is rather silly to watch employed. Of course, the only people falling for that tactic are the young and inexperienced.

That is like saying that the whole concept of being Christian being about behavior is rather silly. The letter of James puts paid to that idea. Christianity is not about behavior in the sense that whatever we do or do not do, we cannot be saved by our works. But when we are saved by Grace, we are transformed, and our behavior should reflect that.

Likewise homosexuality is not primarily about behavior. Behavior, though, is what others can see. Just because because some people engage in behavior that you deem a "homosexual lifestyle," does not mean that they are the only gays that exist.

No matter how wide you push out your goal posts, you meant lesbians. And lesbian means sexual behavior between women. Especially women living together saying they are someone's "mom's."

Yes, Marian and Rose probably are lesbians. But I don't know that for a fact. They have not told me that they are. But even if I planted a spy camera in their house, and it caught them having sex together, I still would not know that they are lesbians. Straights can engage in same-sex physical relations just as easily as gays can.

Yes that is true. An assumption based squarely on reality. I assume my trash cans were tipped over last night by raccoons. But I never saw their behavior. I'm asserting that I am not being ignorant, bigoted hateful towards raccoons to "assume" the behavior is traced to an individual.

Just because you and your wife "tip over trash cans" every night does not mean that every couple does. There are plenty of couples who have not "tipped over trash cans" in years, but they are still together, still a couple, still in love, and if the law recognizes their commitment, still married. There are even married couples (rare, but it happens) that have never had sex with one another.

While the assumption that Marian and Rose "tip over trash cans," at least occasionally, is probably correct, there is no basis for asserting it. You do not know, and cannot know if it is true in this particular case.

I have admitted my involvement with inappropriate content. One can "assume" that my experiences in that world are not just missionary position couples tapes.

TMI!!

But just because I now know that you enjoy inappropriate content, I still don't know that you visit brothels and bondage clubs every night. And to insist that I do know that you make those visits would be a lie. Not just a lie but bearing false witness against you.

There can ONLY be tolerance UP TO A POINT. We in the "live and let live" department, have had enough of liberals indoctrinating our children with sophisticated agendas and implementation methods of that agenda. Now it's our turn to push our rights.

Kindly give me any example of this indoctrination at the level of little Johnny, Joey and Pete. (Let's say 3rd grade or earlier). It simply does not exist.

I applaud the School in Mississippi for not holding Prom connected to their school, rather than to allow an leftist activist organization like the ACLU to rule to day with their power of litigation threats to force acceptance of gay political power. Proms have always been boys with girls and there is no reason to alter that for some pop culture movement hidden under the guise of a civil rights issue. I have already called some Churches in the area to connect them with other people in other palces that have handled Prom on private property. The kids never missed a beat. Having good role models encouraging youth on the night of the Prom is a very good endeavor.

Between the positions of gay advocates and Evangelical Christians is a schism so wide and well defined in scripture and history that the chasm cannot be crossed this side of eternity. All we can do is agree to tolerance that fits the Gospel meaning of the word.

 

[AlAyeti]

No. To be gay means to tend to be physically and romantically attracted to people of the same gender as oneself.

There is no way that you can define Christian reality by worldly perspective. If you do not sin, you are not a sinner.

As I explained to you a week ago, if someone realises that they're gay, they're not suddenly discovering that they're sexually active. They're just discovering who it is that they're attracted to.

That has no validity as a Christian concept. Pop psychology is a woldly ideology that is at odds with The Church.

If someone tells you that they're gay, that's telling you absolutely nothing about their sexual activity, they're just telling you who it is that they're attracted to.

Convoluted logic.

Some gay people are sexually active, sure. Some of them are in monogamous relationships. Some of them are more inclined to play the field. Some, of course, are in monogamous relationships which haven't yet reached the stage of sexual activity.

The gay way is antithetical to the Christian way. No matter how you try to present it.

Some are still single, and sexually inactive because of that. But the ones who aren't sexually active - and, for that matter, the ones who have never been sexually active - are gay nonetheless, because it's not sexual activity which defines one's sexual orientation; rather, it's who one is romantically and physically attracted to that defines one's sexual orientation.

"Sexual orientation." Pop culture labeling has no place in The Faith.

I'm not sure why you have such difficulty either accepting or understanding that, as it's always seemed pretty straightforward to me.

David.

Because it is convoluting Christian reality. If you don't "do" a sin, you are not that sinner.

 

[David Brider]

There is no way that you can define Christian reality by worldly perspective.

That's alright, I'm not defining Christian reality. Just pointing out that your understanding of the meaning of the word "gay" is incorrect.

David.

 

[OllieFranz]

If you do not sin, you are not a sinner.

Precisely! That is why gays are not a sinners simply for being homosexual.

Of course, we are all sinners. No one claims gays have a special immunity from sin.

But homosexuality is not a sin. Certain acts, that you (falsely) claim are defined as "homosexuality," are described in the Bible and given as examples of sin. But homosexuality is not those acts. And your interpretation of why those acts are sinful and how to expand them into a type of behavior (or as some of you call it a "lifestle") that is just as sinful does not agree with the Bible.

 

[OllieFranz]

The gay way is antithetical to the Christian way. No matter how you try to present it.

This makes no more sense than saying "The left-handed way is antithetical to the Christian way. No matter how you try to present it."

How is the persecution of gays any different from the persection of southpaws?

 

[AlAyeti]

That's alright, I'm not defining Christian reality. Just pointing out that your understanding of the meaning of the word "gay" is incorrect.

David.

Well, that is my challenge of your views and perspective. Now, in no way am I challenging your walk with Christ, but it seems quite clear that your perspective is tainted with humanist and leftist social political baggage. I am indeed correct that gay is behavior in relation to Christian reality. It is the goal of preaching the Gospel that people turn away from sin. In your position, one does not have to do so. They get to justify and excuse it away because they have a congenital condition oriented to sin. Jesus says that doesn't cut it even with lusting.

In Christian reality no one is judged by the things they do not do, unless of course it is not doing good works as part of a faithful walk. One is not a bank robber because they have feelings about robbing banks but don't. If they are a Christian, they are doing what a Christian should do. In other words, the term "sexual orientation" is meaningless to Christian reality. And of course we see why with the world using it as justification for all sorts of sin to be excused away. Typical of worldly people but not of Christians. THAT is Christian reality. That pop culture has infleunced the way in which YOU see the world has no bearing on those of us that haven't been so influenced by secularism, or that have been able to shake off its influence. This is an age old situation with Christians living in the world.

Jesus uses the analogy of thinking about sex with a woman as adultery to show the folly of judging others that have the choice of repenting and changing but don't whether in thought or deed. That doesn't serve your perspective well.

The hypocrisy involved of tagging someone an adulterer if they just look at a woman without lust in the heart BUT none the less are looking at the shapley form of a beautiful woman as she walks by, is such a case. Therefor, it is completely appropriate to think a homosexual (in your definition) can shake off "being" a homosexual. No different than any other "sexual orientation" which of course, lusting is.

This "sexual orientation" tagline is a complete fabrication of pop pyschology and nothing else. It is used to further the goals of an altogether antithetical belief system incompatible with that of Christianity. But "sexual orientation" does fit in well with the culture of escaping culpability that literally defines the liberal perspective since the rise of the baby boom generation: AKA the Hippy Sixties.