An Example of Hedonistic Lesbians...

[savedandhappy1]

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I did.

I was referring to the statement about what Christians want is gays in prisoned. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[savedandhappy1]

1. Conservative, right-leaning Christians are vehemently opposed to homosexuals to the point where many vocally seek to impose discriminatory laws.

2. Conservative, right-leaning Christians are vehemently opposed to same-sex marriages, regardless of whether or not such unions affect them personally.

3. The Wisconsin Family Council is a conservative Christian human interests group located in Madison. Their statement of purpose, as per their website:



In other words, they are a Christian organization that has tremendous sway with their State government and they seek to impose legislation that is discriminatory based upon their interpretation of the Scriptures (which they openly admit in their missions statement they believe is the correct interpretation) under the guise of "strengthening families". Along with fighting against same-sex unions, the WFC also blames crime on single motherhood, claims that the "universally accepted" purpose of marriage is to control procreation, and they used National Breast Cancer Month to promote their pro-life views, not breast cancer awareness.

Now, you can try and claim I'm bearing false witness in assuming that there are Christians who would like to see homosexual couples imprisoned for nothing more than crossing state lines to get married in California, but there is obviously proof that there are Christian organizations out there urging Christian citizens to espouse such views. And it's pointless to try and argue that it has nothing to do with condemning homosexuals, when we're talking about a law that was adopted in 1915 and has not been used in decades to prosecute anyone crossing state lines to get married. Same-sex couples in Wisconsin are not expecting Wisconsin to recognize their marriages, as they already know under State laws they won't be. This is a blatant attempt to do something these Christians have wanted to do since gays and lesbians started "coming out" - imprison them for their "sinful lifestyle". Now they have a legal loophole through which they can execute such a sinister plan.

And for anyone who wants to claim that the WFC is some sort of minority fringe group, consider this (take directly from their website):



There you have it, folks - a group pushing for the imprisonment of same-sex couples fully affiliated with Focus on the Family. Hardly a fringe group.

Information taken from:
www.wifamilycouncil.org/

Well I'm trying to figure out how if we imprison sinners we will have anyone to feed us, since that means everyone will be in jail. Because sin is sin, and so if one sin means jail then it won't belong before that would be the case for all.

Anyhow my objection is when someone trys to make it look like all conservative, right wing Christians want gays in jail, which some of this garbage I read on page 2 of this thread. Yes a culture is dying but it isn't evil, but it is just as the Bible said things would go.

I have read the end of the story though and God wins so...................................................

 

[Crazy Liz]

Yes, I did.

I was referring to the statement about what Christians want is gays in prisoned. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

That was clear to me. That's why I referred to the video, where the head of the Wisconsin Family Council advocated in favor of enforcing the law that calls for jail time and/or fines.

 

[Texas Lynn]

That was clear to me. That's why I referred to the video, where the head of the Wisconsin Family Council advocated in favor of enforcing the law that calls for jail time and/or fines.

If the assertion "[Right wing] Christians do not want to put LGBTs in jail" had validity then such "Christians" would have been openly supportive of the Supreme Court Decision in Lawrence v. Texas which repealed Texas Penal Code Sec. 21.06 which criminalized homosexuality. The Texas law was a class C Misdemeanor for which the only penalty was fines but other "sodomy laws" of other states provided for jail time.

Instead, we had right wing Christians decrying the result all but unanimously. So the assertion they do not really want to jail LGBTs is revealed to be the falsehood that it is.

 

[Caylin]

I don't think that after the people in California voted that marriage was between a man and a woman that the court should have been able to override the people.

So when the people were overruled to integrate the schools and to allow for black and female civil rights, that shouldn't have happened either? Or does not overruling the people only apply to gays?

 

[katautumn]

Anyhow my objection is when someone trys to make it look like all conservative, right wing Christians want gays in jail, which some of this garbage I read on page 2 of this thread.

I, personally, don't recall stating that Christians in general want all gays and lesbians imprisoned. What I did say is that obviously there are some who do, otherwise this wouldn't even have been opened for discussion. I'm not expecting you to answer for all Christians on their behalf, and I appreciate the fact that you clarified your stance. The fact remains that there are some Christians (whether it's a small minority or a silent majority is inconsequential) who believe gays and lesbians should be imprisoned for their behavior.

The topic actually came up in a Christian chat room not long ago. A man was praying in chat, petitioning God for a return of "the good 'ol days". One of the things he mentioned was a return to the days when gays and lesbians who were outed (either by themselves or someone else) would be arrested or thrown into a mental institution against their consent. Obviously this isn't a position Julaine Appling is alone in embracing.

 

[savedandhappy1]

That was clear to me. That's why I referred to the video, where the head of the Wisconsin Family Council advocated in favor of enforcing the law that calls for jail time and/or fines.

Because a person cis in the Wisconsin Family Council doesn't make them a Christian, anymore then many who profess to be Christians but their fruits say otherwise.

Anyhow my objection is when someone trys to make it look like all conservative, right wing Christians want gays in jail, which some of this garbage I read on page 2 of this thread.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Because a person cis in the Wisconsin Family Council doesn't make them a Christian, anymore then many who profess to be Christians but their fruits say otherwise.

Anyhow my objection is when someone trys to make it look like all conservative, right wing Christians want gays in jail, which some of this garbage I read on page 2 of this thread.

OK. I interpreted the phrase "has ever been suggested or stated" in your post to mean has ever been suggested or stated by anyone. Thank you for clarifying.

And the Wisconsin Family Council states it is affiliated with Focus on the Family, and certainly claims to represent a conservative Christian constituency.

 

[savedandhappy1]

So when the people were overruled to integrate the schools and to allow for black and female civil rights, that shouldn't have happened either? Or does not overruling the people only apply to gays?

So this isn't America anymore, and the Constitution of for the people and by the people doesn't really mean that?

Anyhow are you saying that the majority of people in the USA voted to overrule and not allow these things, since it was a National government decision, (I think) or just the people in the states involved?

We are told to obey the laws of the land and if we were still putting in Godly leaders, like it also tells us to do in the Bible maybe there wouldn't be so must confussion about worldly/secular issues.

Since I don't believe there is any comparison between African Americans and female civil rights, because I don't consider homosexuality as something that is a God created thing I'm not real sure how to answer. Or should I say it isn't a yes or no answer to me.

The simple truth of the matter to me is that I believe the Bible is clear on homosexuality being a sin, and so to me a vote in favor of allowing a marriage between two males or two females would be me approving of something I believe is not pleasing to God. So unless the Lord tells me different I will not vote to ok that type of marriage. I don't hate those with SSA nor do I wish anything bad to happen to them, but for the reasons above, I could never vote in favor of that issue.

 

[savedandhappy1]

OK. I interpreted the phrase "has ever been suggested or stated" in your post to mean has ever been suggested or stated by anyone. Thank you for clarifying.

And the Wisconsin Family Council states it is affiliated with Focus on the Family, and certainly claims to represent a conservative Christian constituency.

People can claim anything, and that doesn't mean it is of God or that it is following the will of God. People have used God to get approval and or to justify alot of things down through the ages, but that doesn't mean everything done is of God.

Can someone believe they are doing the right thing, the Godly thing and it not be? I think you would agree the answer is yes, right?

Has anyone ever claimed to be something they weren't? Again, I believe you would agree the answer is yes.

 

[savedandhappy1]

I, personally, don't recall stating that Christians in general want all gays and lesbians imprisoned. What I did say is that obviously there are some who do, otherwise this wouldn't even have been opened for discussion. I'm not expecting you to answer for all Christians on their behalf, and I appreciate the fact that you clarified your stance. The fact remains that there are some Christians (whether it's a small minority or a silent majority is inconsequential) who believe gays and lesbians should be imprisoned for their behavior.

The topic actually came up in a Christian chat room not long ago. A man was praying in chat, petitioning God for a return of "the good 'ol days". One of the things he mentioned was a return to the days when gays and lesbians who were outed (either by themselves or someone else) would be arrested or thrown into a mental institution against their consent. Obviously this isn't a position Julaine Appling is alone in embracing.

Don't remember saying you did, since I mentioned the page I was referring to. Sorry if you felt I was.

See post above about saying you are a Christian and being one isn't always the same thing. Also just because someone is on a Christian chat room doesn't mean they are Christians. We know that on this site because people have openly stated they are atheist, agnostic, seeking, etc.

I am not saying some people who really are Christians don't believe some of these things, I am just trying to point out that not all Christians, (conservative, fundamentialist, right wing, etc.) do.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Since I don't believe there is any comparison between African Americans and female civil rights, because I don't consider homosexuality as something that is a God created thing I'm not real sure how to answer. Or should I say it isn't a yes or no answer to me.

What you believe about civil rights appears to be only that certain groups deserve them.

And God keeps cranking out those little gay babies.

The simple truth of the matter to me is that I believe the Bible is clear on homosexuality being a sin, and so to me a vote in favor of allowing a marriage between two males or two females would be me approving of something I believe is not pleasing to God. So unless the Lord tells me different I will not vote to ok that type of marriage. I don't hate those with SSA nor do I wish anything bad to happen to them, but for the reasons above, I could never vote in favor of that issue.

And yet none of them are proposing your right to marry who you love. How about that!

It seems you want to force others to accomodate you but whenever the shoe might be on the other foot you would probably squeal like a pig. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe if the state decided you had to marry somebody the same gender you would just shrug and say "okay, sure." ?

 

[Texas Lynn]

I am not saying some people who really are Christians don't believe some of these things, I am just trying to point out that not all Christians, (conservative, fundamentialist, right wing, etc.) do.

Anyone who would vote on the basis of their views on LGBT civil rights and marriage in engaged in an effort to actively seek to harm LGBTs and their families.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Since I don't believe there is any comparison between African Americans and female civil rights, because I don't consider homosexuality as something that is a God created thing I'm not real sure how to answer. Or should I say it isn't a yes or no answer to me.

The simple truth of the matter to me is that I believe the Bible is clear on homosexuality being a sin, and so to me a vote in favor of allowing a marriage between two males or two females would be me approving of something I believe is not pleasing to God. So unless the Lord tells me different I will not vote to ok that type of marriage. I don't hate those with SSA nor do I wish anything bad to happen to them, but for the reasons above, I could never vote in favor of that issue.

I don't know what state you live in, but I live in California, and in November I'm not going to be faced with a vote to allow two males or two females to get married. Our state Supreme Court has already made that ruling. What I'll be asked in November is whether or not to take away a right they already have.

Do you see a distinction between voting to allow gay marriage and voting to take that right away?

 

[savedandhappy1]

What you believe about civil rights appears to be only that certain groups deserve them.

And God keeps cranking out those little gay babies.



And yet none of them are proposing your right to marry who you love. How about that!

It seems you want to force others to accomodate you but whenever the shoe might be on the other foot you would probably squeal like a pig. Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe if the state decided you had to marry somebody the same gender you would just shrug and say "okay, sure." ?

No, I would not say "okay, sure", because I answer to God over anything man wants or does. So as I have already said, I believe it isn't pleasing to God, and so no I would not marry someone of the same gender as me.

I could tell how I had SSA, and how I have been happily married to a man for almost 33 yrs., (I'm a woman) but I don't need to be told how I'm lying or all those other things that come up when I mention it. So in other words I won't, and will just continue to Praise the Lord for my husband, son, daughter-in-law and precious grandson.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Anyone who would vote on the basis of their views on LGBT civil rights and marriage in engaged in an effort to actively seek to harm LGBTs and their families.

Nope, just someone who is following the Lord, who says we are in this world but we aren't to be part of it.

So all I'm doing is to the best of my ability trying to let the Lord change me into what I am meant to be.

Oh, I don't vote on the basis of my views, but on the only views that matter, the Lords.

 

[savedandhappy1]

I don't know what state you live in, but I live in California, and in November I'm not going to be faced with a vote to allow two males or two females to get married. Our state Supreme Court has already made that ruling. What I'll be asked in November is whether or not to take away a right they already have.

Do you see a distinction between voting to allow gay marriage and voting to take that right away?

No, I don't because you all had already voted against this, and I don't believe the court had any right to be able to overturn it. So I would be voting to change what I believe is an illegal act by the Court.

Just for this conversation lets say that God believes homosexuality is a sin. If Jesus was living on earth, in California, right now how do you think He would vote, with the world or with His Father?

 

[KCKID]

No, I don't because you all had already voted against this, and I don't believe the court had any right to be able to overturn it. So I would be voting to change what I believe is an illegal act by the Court.

While I'm no scholar of the U.S. Judicial System I would seriously doubt that an illegal act would have been made by the Court. Precisely what WAS this 'illegal act'?

Just for this conversation lets say that God believes homosexuality is a sin. If Jesus was living on earth, in California, right now how do you think He would vote, with the world or with His Father?

Well, that's a hypothetical situation, isn't it? The problem we have in ACTUALITY is that Jesus would surely not say that two people who are innately 'gay' are committing a sin. Sodomy may be or may have been perceived as sinful at one time but that has nothing to do with one's sexual orientation and who one is sexually attracted to. Any taboo would surely have been due to procreational factors anyway. We really are not sure whether the Bible even makes reference to the issue that we're discussing on this subforum. Those scarce scriptures that might appear to refer to homosexuality are most ambiguous and it's doubtful that they would hold up as defense for the 'anti-gay' message in any Court of Law.

 

[Texas Lynn]

No, I would not say "okay, sure", because I answer to God over anything man wants or does. So as I have already said, I believe it isn't pleasing to God, and so no I would not marry someone of the same gender as me.

I could tell how I had SSA, and how I have been happily married to a man for almost 33 yrs., (I'm a woman) but I don't need to be told how I'm lying or all those other things that come up when I mention it. So in other words I won't, and will just continue to Praise the Lord for my husband, son, daughter-in-law and precious grandson.

Good, nobody's forcing you to. That would be wrong. So is forbidding those who want to.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Nope, just someone who is following the Lord, who says we are in this world but we aren't to be part of it.

So all I'm doing is to the best of my ability trying to let the Lord change me into what I am meant to be.

Oh, I don't vote on the basis of my views, but on the only views that matter, the Lords.

"The Lord" does not demand people deny their capacities to love.