What in my signature, suggests to you that I would ever consider it my place to try to influence anyone else's sexuality???Huh?
The contrived nature of your prose. Your use of oxymoron is dazzling.
Not even the apostles condemn homosexual ORIENTATION, so I'm at a loss to understand your point.
No way are you going to paint the Apostolic testimony the color of neologism and gay activism.
It's not tough to see how Satan has brought society to the point where the erotic can now be a qualifier of persons. King Bera and Abraham (Abram) come to mind.
Homosexuality, as an orientation, is an inherent facet of an individual. It is not a sin to BE a homosexual, not even the Catholic Church teaches that. Now, whether or not homosexual ACTS are sinful is a whole different kettle of fish, but there is nothing wrong with being a homosexual, the point in discussion here.
Jesus made it clear that thoughts are as powerful as actions. I'm reminded of that everytime I have my eyes open. Your gay lenses are oh-so typical. Gays versus Christians. It's as ubiquitous as most of the threads in E & M.
Children are sexual beings.
Sapphic eroticism would say that. This validates my assertion that GLBT activism is erotic based exclusivley.
Christians see children as children. Sexual beings can wait until the proper time and place. Should wait and be allowed to wait. Doing research and going to GLBT websites and we see a different perspective of youth, and exactly as
you see them. And, this is of course why I see you in the place I do. You have literally proved my point. Christians see children as Jesus does.
No, I'm not saying children should HAVE sex, of course not. But it is a FACTR that children think about sex and engage in fantasy and simulated sexually specific role play, as well as having sexually specific dreams and so on.
That's just plain goosebump creating. The anti-Gay Christians reading along can feel comforted knowiung that their efforts against the Gay Agenda are a noble endeavor. I knew you could not hide your inner being for long.
Now, you minght find it distasteful to dwell on this, but thems the facts.
Trust me. My consistency about gay culture, gay sex and gay activism is not surpised by your view. That is why the "Q" couldn't be denied as a part of the Gay Agenda's quest for long. The history of homosexuality shows us erotica as you describe it. And it has been opposed every single day as well.
I'm sure if you honestly think back to your own childhood, you will remember incidents and feelings that, in hindsight, were inherently sexual. And as children are intrinsically sexual beings, it is only reasonable to consider them as having the foundations of an adult sexual orientation.
The Gay Agenda described as good as anything I present.
Not because an agenda wants to deal with children in this way, but because objective reality states that such orientation exists from an early age.
Even you couldn't escape what's up.
So why deny it?Indeed. Seduction IS a reality... but, since the end result of a succesful seduction is a person CHOOSING to be allowed to be seduced. A heterosexual would never choose to be allowed to be seduced by a heterosexual. Anyone who succumbs to homosexual seduction was a homosexual ANYWAY. It is not the seduction that makes the person homosexual. The person was already homosexual (or possibly biosexual) long before the seducer ever arrived on the scene. Now, of course there are instances of people being FORCED to have sex with someone inappropriate to their orientation, but that is RAPE, and I am most certainly against that, be it hetero or homosexual.What opinion would that be?
Wow. I never thought you would expose the true nature of the mind of gay culture so openly. This is the truw nature of the gay agenda in stark and descriptive reality. I usually do not get this directness often from a homosexual. It's usually hidden behind rather sophisticated neologism and PC jargon.
Hopefully some pro-family activist is printing out our debate and showing it around to co-workers.
Nowhere do the Apostles or the Gospels say it is desireable or acceptible to attempt to change anyone's sexual orientation.
1 Corinthians 6:
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
You and I live in two different worlds.
How many people wake up and realize what MISTAKE the engaged in last night. Sometimes that happens sooner. Your ideology is alarming and threatening.
I say again... if someone willingly engages in homosexual activity, then that person was already homo or bisexual.
Or seduced by someone that likes homosexual sex. That's just a fact that bears up under testing.
Again, it appears your problem appears to be with the permissiveness of society, not homosexuality per se.
Hand in glove.
Says you. A great many competent theologians and Biblk scholars disagree.
Not one from the Bible. You're offering a liberalism more akin to the satanic than to the Apostolic. There is not one place anywhere in the Bible that encourages gay sex and gay culture and many, many, many that oppose it. The neologism "gay" does not alter Biblical truth. You start a thread of gay supporting scripture and I'll dismantle your liberalism and show what its made of.
I would oppose any group trying to FORCE any church to change their doctrine or teaching against the considered desires and beliefs of the individual members. That does not mean that it is wrong to engage people and try to change their point of view through reasoned discussion.
It is unreasonable to teach and present that gay sex and gay culture is acceptable anywhere in the Bible. And as we can see from the activism and gay theology peddled by Mel White and Soulforce, FORCING gay culture on and in every Church is a malevolent "force" driving its gay agenda. It's simply not hidden by them anymore. When you oppose the Apostolic teachings, you oppose Christians and Christianity.
How is the teaching of "A2+B2=C2" effected by the sexuality of the teacher?
That is no longer deniable. Gay teachers spread the gay agenda and its incessant social reengineering goals. Too many organizations are documenting that fact.
In my educational career, I have had, approximately, 70 odd teachers and lecturers, plus a few other instructors in vocational training. Odds are that at least a couple of them were homosexual. And you know what? I could not for the life of me tell you which one, because I have been fortunate in that all of my educators have been extremely competent and professional. They teach the material. They don';t let their personal lives effect their teachings of the material in the sylabus.
Give me a break! Again you are relying on me being some country bumpkin that hasn't researched the issues. Just how have we arrived at this altering of society to celebrate gay culture and gay sex? BY the education process driven by teachers and professors that have delivered the gay agenda through humanism and atheist-secularism. Sheesh. This gay thing didn;t happen overnight. Why do you think Christians use the phrase Gay Agenda.
I would hope this is the majority experience.Give me ANY example of anyone trying to teach sexual behaviour in a contrary fashion, and I will denounce it as wrong. I see bluster, I don't see examples. Cite me a case, a SPECIFIC case, of homosexuals "ruling" anyone's sexual orientation?
The education system has driven the reengineering of society morality to now be championing gay sex and those that promote it. It's brought to us by Humanism. This isn't a tough research assignment.
False comparison. Eating hotdogs through your eyesockets would have 0 functionality. Same sex relationships are demonstrably functional, and further, appear to have an evolutionary basis.
Your statement, your in the face ignoring of reality, is proof yet again, of where the Gay Agenda got its fuel. Female to female sexual intercourse is an impossibility. Just as is male to male sexual intercourse. That is just an observabel fact of science. [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] do not alter the immutable functionality of sexual intercourse. Pseudo sex is the bast you can accomplish. A form of as it were.
Of course love is not the issue, but logic and reality is. You cannot ever prove that the tongue was naturally designed to be connected to sexual organs (or other places on someone elses body). Physiology shows us the reality of logic and proves that bigotry and hate is not part of the anti-gay perspective.
I should have used the nostrils and hot dog analogy. You could get some of the hot dog down the throat in that technique. Eh-hem.
Thats a whole other thread there, but seriously, there is more than o function for the various tracts involved, and just as the mouth can be used for digestion AND sexual activity, the same is true of anal sex.
The ubiquity of turning of every thread gay. It's positively malevolence on the march.
Not to mention thaty I, as a female homosexual, 100% guarantee that I don't do anything with my partner that heterosexual couples don't do.
That statement defies logic and reason and natural facts. You haven't the parts for it. You must seek other, um, er, things, to mimick reality.
Baloney. Hetero AND homosexuality us largely in place by the age of 8.
Sappho would be proud of you. But not one apostle. And I urge you to take Jesus and his warning about children very seriously. You are a Christian you assert, Jesus is very dire about being the one bringing offfenses.
Nothing to do with activism of any kind, merely observation of empirical evidence.
[How about we cut to the chase and fats-forward to my time in Hollywood? The anything goes crowd wanted me to do anything goes. Boys, girls and whatever that is over there smiling and staring at me.
You accuse me of dissembling and "freaking out" when asked questions, yet I notice you are reluctant to give a straight answer. I ask again, when was the first time you had feelings of a sexual nature? I don't want details, just an age. Huh?
I can't. I would have to use the "P" word and that got me in serious trouble last time I used it. GLBT's do not tolerate what they really peddle being defined in accurate ways. Suffice it to say, that ancient greek society is a very important part of gay culture of today. You have proven that fact beyond the shadow of a doubt. I'm trying not to put my head in the noose you have woven. I am not worthy of martyrdom, even in cyber space.
Did I touch a nerve here? I'm trying to do no such thing. I'm TRYING to have an open and straightforward exchange of ideas with you.
Child erotica is striking many nerves of many Christians and other parents worldwide. THIS is THE issue between GLBT's and Christians and others. The "Q" was the final straw. The nature of gay erotica cannot be hidden. Not even in the cunning world of neologism-driven political and social reengineering efforts.
Yet it seems whenever I say something that starts your cognitive disonance gears grinding against each other, you resort to strange, tangential ad homs.
Save me your bragging. You have validated every word I have written about the gay agenda and gay culture. To really expose your adversary is quite an accomplishment. My mind is soaring with the glowing feelings of achievment.
I don't doubt it. But it won't change a heterosexual into a homosexual.
The Gospel and the Apostles say differently. What has light to do with darkness? Take a different path.
