Gays versus Christians

selfinflikted · Oct 31, 2008

PastorJim said:
I disagree. Unless they're one of a very, very small group of people who has taken a lifelong vow of celebacy, they do act on their orientation.

But that's not the point. Originally, you said they "ALL" act on their orientation. "All" leaves no room for even one exception. So, you were wrong.

MarcusHill · Oct 31, 2008

selfinflikted said:
But that's not the point. Originally, you said they "ALL" act on their orientation. "All" leaves no room for even one exception. So, you were wrong.

You see your mistake here, don't you? You're expecting him to:

a) See the logical reason why his statement is, in fact, wrong

b) Actually acknowledge the mistake and say "oh, OK, I meant almost all", thus weakening his claim.

Based on past form, neither is likely, is it?

David Brider · Oct 31, 2008

MarcusHill said:
You see your mistake here, don't you? You're expecting him to:

a) See the logical reason why his statement is, in fact, wrong

b) Actually acknowledge the mistake and say "oh, OK, I meant almost all", thus weakening his claim.

Based on past form, neither is likely, is it?

We can dream, though.

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

PastorJim said:
They already have that. In fact, they have preferential treatment.

For instance, if a homosexual is fired from a job, they can claim it's because they were homosexual and sue the employer. If they're assaulted, then the assault is considered even more serious because it's a "hate crime", where as, if a straight person is assaulted, it's just regular old assault.

I don't have full and equal protection under the law. My partner and I are 5 weeks away from being forcibkly split up by our employer, because they don't officially recognise our relationship. If we were heterosexual this wouldn't happen.

Where is the equal protection there?

LittleNipper · Oct 31, 2008

PastorJim said:
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. 6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. 7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. 1 John 3:4-10

This must be viewed in light of the likes of I Corinthians 10:23 and Romans 8:2.

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

And sexual orientation is pop psychology at best.

and you are basing this on...?

So, if "homosexual" isn't my "sexual orientation"... then why am I only attrcted to women and not men?

Are you going to address my earlier points? We are STILL waiting for you to provide a working definition of what the "homosexual agenda" is, and supporting evidence for it.

fated · Oct 31, 2008

EnemyPartyII said:
Certain posters insist that homosexuality is a "Christian vs. Gay" issue. I do not personally subscribe to this viewpoint, as I am both a Christian AND homosexual. However, at the request of one such poster that I start a thread to discuss this matter, I am starting this thread.

Since I strongly suspect that the terms "Gay agenda" and "Gay lifestyle", are likely to be used before we get too far, I would like to request in the strongest possible terms, for any of the anti-homosexual posters who are considering contributing to provide a specific, clear and unambiguous definition of what they mean by the term "gay agenda" or "gay lifestyle".

So far these phrases get bandied about an awful lot, but I have yet to see anyone actually explain preceisely what they are supposed to mean.

So... homosexuality and Christianity are not mutually exclusive. The "gay agenda" and "gay lifestyle" are myths made up by sloppy thinkers who would rather deal in stereotypes and strawman fallacies than actually addressing a more complex reality.

Discuss...

Sure, the "gay community" is a very diverse one.

But, that's beside the point.

In California, for instance, we see a double assault on the education system. From one direction, homeschooling is being attacked, and from another, text books using the terms "husband and wife" are being banned because they are seen under the judicial decree as being anti-gay. So is reference to reproduction in the confines of marriage, which is also seen as discriminatory.

Therefore, while we cannot conclude that all gays take part in this portion of the radical gay agenda, it is clear that many people do. Also, "many people in the gay community" seek to obfuscate the truth of what is occurring in order to garner additional support.

selfinflikted · Oct 31, 2008

MarcusHill said:
You see your mistake here, don't you? You're expecting him to:

a) See the logical reason why his statement is, in fact, wrong

b) Actually acknowledge the mistake and say "oh, OK, I meant almost all", thus weakening his claim.

Based on past form, neither is likely, is it?

No, neither is likely. However, someone has to call shenanigans where needed.

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

In California, for instance, we see a double assault on the education system. From one direction, homeschooling is being attacked, and from another, text books using the terms "husband and wife" are being banned because they are seen under the judicial decree as being anti-gay. So is reference to reproduction in the confines of marriage, which is also seen as discriminatory.

Really? Can you please cite me a specific example where a textbook that mentions "husbands and wives" has been banned?

Therefore, while we cannot conclude that all gays take part in this portion of the radical gay agenda, it is clear that many people do. Also, "many people in the gay community" seek to obfuscate the truth of what is occurring in order to garner additional support.

and what do you contend is "the truth" that so many homosexual people are desperate to obfuscate?

I say again, I'm homosexual, and I want the same protections and opportunities as everyone else. Give me fair and equal treatment, and you'll never hear from me again. What's wrong with that?

wanderingone · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
Sure, the "gay community" is a very diverse one.

But, that's beside the point.

In California, for instance, we see a double assault on the education system. From one direction, homeschooling is being attacked, and from another, text books using the terms "husband and wife" are being banned because they are seen under the judicial decree as being anti-gay. So is reference to reproduction in the confines of marriage, which is also seen as discriminatory.

Therefore, while we cannot conclude that all gays take part in this portion of the radical gay agenda, it is clear that many people do. Also, "many people in the gay community" seek to obfuscate the truth of what is occurring in order to garner additional support.

So why does the "radical straight" agenda get to keep the textbooks the way they want them? Why do you and your agenda win out? I know all "straight" people don't support a radical agenda, but it's clear from things like prop 8, the ridiculous court case here in NY against Paterson's choice not to fight a decision in favor of a gay couple, and obviously posts on CF that many do.

And there's no tongue in cheek here. For all the claims of a radical gay agenda the only clear agenda I see is that of allegedly straight, conservative Christians a la Dobson and cronies.

fated · Oct 31, 2008

EnemyPartyII said:
Really? Can you please cite me a specific example where a textbook that mentions "husbands and wives" has been banned?and what do you contend is "the truth" that so many homosexual people are desperate to obfuscate?

I say again, I'm homosexual, and I want the same protections and opportunities as everyone else. Give me fair and equal treatment, and you'll never hear from me again. What's wrong with that?

Ocean View School District trustee John Briscoe, a supporter of Prop. 8, said the Education Code and state curriculum may not change right away if Prop. 8 fails, but having gay marriage become legal would eventually prompt challenges to reflect the law of the land, limiting the decision-making power of local school boards.
“Local schools boards can approve their own curriculum, but they must meet under the umbrella of state standards,” Briscoe said. “To say that the state department of education’s hands will be free of this gay marriage issue is false.”

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-gay-prop-2201297-school-education

There's more, of course, but it is clear that the school boards hands become tied as to what they need to teach. If they can't discriminate between the natural institution of marriage and the gay version, then it complicates all the teaching, and assuredly might include teaching gay marriage in school.

One person interviewed said that schools were unlikely to make consequential choices willingly, which shows that they expect that there is room within the California Courts decision to force them into changing their textbooks in the manner I've described.

wanderingone · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-gay-prop-2201297-school-education

There's more, of course, but it is clear that the school boards hands become tied as to what they need to teach. If they can't discriminate between the natural institution of marriage and the gay version, then it complicates all the teaching, and assuredly might include teaching gay marriage in school.

One person interviewed said that schools were unlikely to make consequential choices willingly, which shows that they expect that there is room within the California Courts decision to force them into changing their textbooks in the manner I've described.

Your article does nothing to validate your claims.

fated · Oct 31, 2008

wanderingone said:
So why does the "radical straight" agenda get to keep the textbooks the way they want them? Why do you and your agenda win out? I know all "straight" people don't support a radical agenda, but it's clear from things like prop 8, the ridiculous court case here in NY against Paterson's choice not to fight a decision in favor of a gay couple, and obviously posts on CF that many do.

And there's no tongue in cheek here. For all the claims of a radical gay agenda the only clear agenda I see is that of allegedly straight, conservative Christians a la Dobson and cronies.

More and more lawsuits force the state farther and farther toward the radical gay agenda. Why then, even if we were to accept gay marriage, would we expect that it stop there?

In Canada one cannot even present the Bible's passages concerning homosexuality in public without being sued. (there's many of these article of what occurs in Canada) That's apparently where this whole situation is headed, and it appears that the belief in freedom of religion and speech does not triumph over "gay solidarity" at least within the court system.

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8600

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-gay-prop-2201297-school-education

There's more, of course, but it is clear that the school boards hands become tied as to what they need to teach. If they can't discriminate between the natural institution of marriage and the gay version, then it complicates all the teaching, and assuredly might include teaching gay marriage in school.

One person interviewed said that schools were unlikely to make consequential choices willingly, which shows that they expect that there is room within the California Courts decision to force them into changing their textbooks in the manner I've described.

Sooo... where are the examples of "husband and wife" being removed from textbooks?

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

More and more lawsuits force the state farther and farther toward the radical gay agenda. Why then, even if we were to accept gay marriage, would we expect that it stop there?

ANOTHER person using the term "gay agenda"... if you want to use this term, please state, SPECIFICALLY, what you understand the "gay agenda" to be, and what your problem with it is?

fated · Oct 31, 2008

wanderingone said:
Your article does nothing to validate your claims.

You don't see were Californians might, in many cases, be forced by legal action, to send their children to a school, against their will, and have them taught about gay marriage?

fated · Oct 31, 2008

EnemyPartyII said:
ANOTHER person using the term "gay agenda"... if you want to use this term, please state, SPECIFICALLY, what you understand the "gay agenda" to be, and what your problem with it is?

The radical gay agenda is one that includes the ability to sue people for not recognizing gay unions as should be their freedom of religion. Thus, they would support this lesbian couple:

Christian Photographer Accused of 'Discriminating' Against Same-Sex Couple

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11573436/

wanderingone · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
More and more lawsuits force the state farther and farther toward the radical gay agenda. Why then, even if we were to accept gay marriage, would we expect that it stop there?

In Canada one cannot even present the Bible's passages concerning homosexuality in public without being sued. (there's many of these article of what occurs in Canada) That's apparently where this whole situation is headed, and it appears that the belief in freedom of religion and speech does not triumph over "gay solidarity" at least within the court system.

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8600

No answer on the radical straight agenda?
Like I said. you fail to prove anything about an actual gay agenda in your schools. Are you in Canada? I'm not so I can't speculate without a lot of research on what goes on with their schools.

wanderingone · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
The radical gay agenda is one that includes the ability to sue people for not recognizing gay unions as should be their freedom of religion. Thus, they would support this lesbian couple:

Christian Photographer Accused of 'Discriminating' Against Same-Sex Couple

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11573436/

People in business should be familiar with the anti discrimination laws where they do business.

EnemyPartyII · Oct 31, 2008

fated said:
The radical gay agenda is one that includes the ability to sue people for not recognizing gay unions as should be their freedom of religion. Thus, they would support this lesbian couple:

Christian Photographer Accused of 'Discriminating' Against Same-Sex Couple

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11573436/

I'd support anyone suing anyone for discriminatory business practices. Wouldn't you?

People are perfectly free to consider homosexuals unions non Biblical, or contrary to their religion. Thats fine. No one is trying to change that. But no matter what your personal religious convictions, you aren't allowed to discriminate against people for things like this. And I think thats only good and proper.

If I was the only plumber in town, and I refused to fix the leaking pipe that was damaging your foundation, because I disagree with your "Christian lifestlye", would that be cool with you? I'll fix the pipes of the houses either side of you, but refuse to take your money and provide the same service I provide to others because I think there is something wrong with you. Would you get upset and feel you were being unfairly discrimnated against?

Gays versus Christians

Under Deck

Educator and learner

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

The White Hart

Under Deck

Well-Known Member

I'm not lost I'm just wandering

The White Hart

I'm not lost I'm just wandering

The White Hart

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The White Hart

The White Hart

I'm not lost I'm just wandering

I'm not lost I'm just wandering

Well-Known Member

Similar threads