C.A.R.M. 's homosexuality webpage

[Texas Lynn]

You might want to ask Christ about that. These are His words not yours. We all fall short including you.

The metaphor does not mean one must be politically correct to reach hebbin.

 

[Hentenza]

The metaphor does not mean one must be politically correct to reach hebbin.

Jesus was not politically correct. The narrow gate is not a human invention but a statement of fact given to us by Jesus our Lord and Savior.

 

[catlover]

Lynn,

Is it too much to assume that someone purporting to be a Christian would actually USE Christian sources?

That is the disconnect.

That is why I wrote Therefore you offer your OPINION instead of using any Christian sources. and erroneously categorize the Bible as a muddle without offering a scintilla of evidence. That is an extremely poor hypothesis, and without merit.

I called you on your bigoted statement previously
And now you make another Looks as if I discern a persistent pattern. You go off onto ad hominems, and when others respond in kind, your side goes ballistic

Here is another of your ad hominems Honestly, I do not know why such bigoted rhetoric is coming from on your part. Despite your protestation that you can "keep objectivity" in professional situations, and making this a personal situation where you are free to inject venom tells much about you as a person. You are free to disagree with me, but it is behavior of the lowest sort that condemns outright people based upon their religious beliefs.

If anyone would submit those BIGOTED quotes to NASW, and if you were a member, they would be very unhappy. Therefore be aware that I am NOT responding in kind to your taunts, but I am giving notice that continuation of such blatant prejudice, based upon religious stand is unacceptable.

"Love" the last paragraph, it's a veiled threat against Texas Lynn.

Very babyish behavior John T.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Jesus was not politically correct. The narrow gate is not a human invention but a statement of fact given to us by Jesus our Lord and Savior.

Agreed. It does not in any sense refer to sex.

 

[Hentenza]

Agreed. It does not in any sense refer to sex.

It is actually a package deal which includes everything in one's life (including sex).

 

[JohnT]

"Love" the last paragraph, it's a veiled threat against Texas Lynn.
Very babyish behavior John T .

If it was any sort of a threat, I'd mention the New York State Office of Professions. I did not do that. Therefore your conclusion is in error.

Are you perhaps supporting her bigot statements?

You see by her not backing down from her comments that I pointed out SEVERAL TIMES, she affirms them, defacto. Since she affirms her own bigoted statements, she EARNS the name that goes with those writing and supporting bigotry.

Would you also earn that name?

 

[Texas Lynn]

It is actually a package deal which includes everything in one's life (including sex).

No, sir. Political correctness is not in the cards. Salvation is not dependent upon it. The idea it is is contrary to the message of Christ.

 

[Texas Lynn]

If it was any sort of a threat, I'd mention the New York State Office of Professions. I did not do that. Therefore your conclusion is in error.

Are you perhaps supporting her bigot statements?

You see by her not backing down from her comments that I pointed out SEVERAL TIMES, she affirms them, defacto. Since she affirms her own bigoted statements, she EARNS the name that goes with those writing and supporting bigotry.

Would you also earn that name?

I've said nothing improper. The idea of heterosexists claiming those who oppose heterosexism are "bigoted" is the height of absurdity. They are persons of dignity and worth (unlike their hatred they express toward LGBTs) but in this action they are wrong and do much harm. I merely call it as it is.

By this fellow's specious reasoning as a NAACP member I am "bigoted" against the Ku Klux Klan as well.

 

[JohnT]

Please place the N-word in the place of the red bolded type, (or any other ethnic or group epithet, and see if these are NOT bigoted statements, that Lynn has not recanted one bit


I called you on your bigoted statement previously

I know those who condemn LGBTs tend to hold themselves in low esteem and fear "hell" to a bizarre extent. http://christianforums.com/showpost....8&postcount=73
​

And now you make another

But the handful of bad pro-human rights folks versus legions of meanspirited heterosexists is like an ant to an elephant http://christianforums.com/showpost....5&postcount=97
​

Looks as if I discern a persistent pattern. You go off onto ad hominems, and when others respond in kind, your side goes ballistic

Here is another of your ad hominems

If you look at where this group is coming from they see LGBTs as the lowest of the low and want to keep them there. http://christianforums.com/showpost....8&postcount=82
​

 

[catlover]

If it was any sort of a threat, I'd mention the New York State Office of Professions. I did not do that. Therefore your conclusion is in error.

Are you perhaps supporting her bigot statements?

You see by her not backing down from her comments that I pointed out SEVERAL TIMES, she affirms them, defacto. Since she affirms her own bigoted statements, she EARNS the name that goes with those writing and supporting bigotry.

Would you also earn that name?

It's clear you cannot handle a disagreement without resorting to threatening etc.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Please place the N-word in the place of the red bolded type, (or any other ethnic or group epithet, and see if these are NOT bigoted statements, that Lynn has not recanted one bit


I called you on your bigoted statement previously

I know those who condemn LGBTs tend to hold themselves in low esteem and fear "hell" to a bizarre extent. http://christianforums.com/showpost....8&postcount=73

​

And now you make another

But the handful of bad pro-human rights folks versus legions of meanspirited heterosexists is like an ant to an elephant http://christianforums.com/showpost....5&postcount=97

​

Looks as if I discern a persistent pattern. You go off onto ad hominems, and when others respond in kind, your side goes ballistic

Here is another of your ad hominems

If you look at where this group is coming from they see LGBTs as the lowest of the low and want to keep them there. http://christianforums.com/showpost....8&postcount=82

​

Well, J I don't know what to say. I stand by the statements and and don't see anything wrong with them.

I'm sorry that you are offended, but OTOH you haven't been beaten to within an inch of your life for wearing a Human Rights Campaign t-shirt so count your blessings.

We can always parse and overgeneralize about others' posts, but if you want me to deny fundamentalist-religious right folks do not purposefully seek to harm LGBTs I'm not going to lie and say that.

You know there is a group called "Fundamentalists Anonymous" that operates on the same 12 step model as AA, NA, GA etc., right?

 

[Texas Lynn]

It's clear you cannot handle a disagreement without resorting to threatening etc.

Cat, I didn't feel threatened, just a little weird.

When I point out what I see as bad behavior of some of the folks on the far right they generally deny it and I move on. So it goes.

 

[JohnT]

There is never any excuse for someone to instigate physical violence against another, nor is it wrong to defend yourself due to political view differences. It is understandable that you harbor negativity such as you do. In a misguided effort to project a positive message, they sinned against you. That is not the message of Jesus. He did not tolerate, nor demonstrate against a sinful position. The only violence He used was justifiable because the money changers and others profaned the Temple of God

We do not share the same positions, and we each have a right to stand in the public square. But that right does not give your side permission to create an ad hoc "pink police patrol" and get people arrested for praying silently, as was done in Philadelphia last year (or so). They were silenced for being silent, and the Court threw out the arrests, saying tha`t they were without merit.

Fascism exists on both sides, and neither extreme justifies the other, opposite extreme.

As to your statement,

Well, J I don't know what to say. I stand by the statements and and don't see anything wrong with them.

I suppose that due to the experiences mentioned above they "ring true". However, if you were to say wild things like that any group ( I kid my Puerto Rican wife about all Puerto Ricans having switchblades) you know that that is a wildly inaccurate statement, as is my generalization about Puerto Ricans. One bad experience does not taint a whole group. That is why I called you on your bigoted statement.

I wish you would reconsider, because now I believe that you may be digging your heels into the ground.

 

[Texas Lynn]

We do not share the same positions, and we each have a right to stand in the public square.

Agreed.

But that right does not give your side permission to create an ad hoc "pink police patrol" and get people arrested for praying silently, as was done in Philadelphia last year (or so). They were silenced for being silent, and the Court threw out the arrests, saying tha`t they were without merit.

We had a spirited discussion about that at the time. My position is that Michael Marcavage and his cult were creating a danger to public safety with their agitation which was documented. He is a domestic terrorist like Randall Terry and Fred Phelps and needs to be watched carefully. His "work" does not honor Christ.

However, if you were to say wild things like that any group ( I kid my Puerto Rican wife about all Puerto Ricans having switchblades) you know that that is a wildly inaccurate statement, as is my generalization about Puerto Ricans.

I don't know if you knew but the business about "burning the Puerto Rican flag" was based on a Seinfeld episode where Kramer did that accidentially and he got chased by the crowd for it. I did not know she was Puerto Rican.

That is why I called you on your bigoted statement.

I wish you would reconsider, because now I believe that you may be digging your heels into the ground.

I used to argue with a poster who does not post that often anymore and he would always respond to these sorts of things with "we're not all like that", parsing, but, I never said y'all were.

 

[JohnT]

It is impossible to argue with "logic" like this:

My position is that Michael Marcavage and his cult were creating a danger to public safety with their agitation which was documented. He is a domestic terrorist like Randall Terry and Fred Phelps

That is pure demagoguery.

Phelps is a hate monger. There is no love or compassion in what he does. He is as much a Christian as Hitler was.

Do you similarly mis characterize EVERYONE opposing your liberal stances as 'domestic terrorists" or other sorts of criminals? That is bigotry, pure and simple. Your posts in the past, and the one previous to mine exhibit a "liberal Nazi" approach, and I find that most unacceptable, and unproductive to civilized discourse.

Moderator, Please close this thread

 

[Texas Lynn]

It is impossible to argue with "logic" like this: That is pure demagoguery.

Phelps is a hate monger. There is no love or compassion in what he does. He is as much a Christian as Hitler was.

Do you similarly mis characterize EVERYONE opposing your liberal stances as 'domestic terrorists" or other sorts of criminals? That is bigotry, pure and simple. Your posts in the past, and the one previous to mine exhibit a "liberal Nazi" approach, and I find that most unacceptable, and unproductive to civilized discourse.

Moderator, Please close this thread

Marcavage and Phelps both share the modus operandi of disturbing the peace to express hatred, and therefore commit terrorism though on a rather low-level scale compare to Randall Terry.

J, if debate is painful to you perhaps you might consider other activities. Others have differing views and that's okay. There is no reason whatsoever for the thread to be closed.

 

[JohnT]

Marcavage and Phelps both share the modus operandi of disturbing the peace to express hatred, and therefore commit terrorism though on a rather low-level scale compare to Randall Terry.

J, if debate is painful to you perhaps you might consider other activities. Others have differing views and that's okay. There is no reason whatsoever for the thread to be closed.

Yes, it is FRUITLESS for anyone to be rational with a person using demagoguery. That is why it should be closed.

Every attempt om my part to engage you in rational discussion resulted in unprofessional, unChristian bigoted responses from you.

Every attempt on my part to call you on them resulted in self justification, and one loyalist agreeing with you.

Every attempt on my part to engage you in a discussion of Christian things met with passive-aggressive rhetorical tactics, or red herrings, or outright evasions.

Truth be told, had you posted the TRASH you posted about fundamentalist people on any other Christian site, your posts would have been deleted.

Case in point, I did get a mod to intervene in the inappropriate nature of a post describing genitalia. You and your cadre of sock puppets deemed it appropriate. Well, I am sorry, but if you check it, the remark was removed.

Looks as if CF does have a sense of decency, and your support of the genitalia remark is a direct contradiction of that.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I don't have any sock puppets but it's flattering you think so.