Gays versus Christians

[BigBadWlf]

How did I ignore anything? My massive response was wiped out. All I asked in that response lost to the abyss was for your to read their side of the story and explain why you don't believe them.

And you have yet to prove they can't change their sexual orientation.

Talk about intellectual dishonesty

Ex-gay ministries have for 40 years claimed to have and to be able to change sexual orientation. Yet in 40 years they have been unable to present actual evidence that anyone has changed form homosexual to heterosexual
They have also been unable to provide evidence to back up their theories and have been unable to provide evidence that what they do is not actually harmful.

This is an intellectually dishonest statement on your part as clearly seen in the previous posts. You refused to address my refutations and simply reasserted what you already said. Now you are reasserting what you already said again. You are being intellectually dishonest.

You didn’t refute anything…you whined and complained…but that isn’t refutation.

Once again…please present an argument to justify prejudice and discrimination against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters that is not used to justify racism

The arguments I have used have not been used by racists. You claimed they had and I refuted you. Instead of proving your points or rebutting me you simply repeated what I refuted as if that were an argument.

​

You didn’t refute anything…you whined and complained…but that isn’t refutation.

Once again…please present an argument to justify prejudice and discrimination against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters that is not used to justify racism


So you cannot present a legitimate link from an actual news source

You have tried to justify your personal prejudices by citing biblical verse
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=49532890&postcount=503
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=49553438&postcount=530
…just like racists do

you tired to use disease as a justification for you prejudice
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=49517003&postcount=493
…just like racists do

you made an appeal to tradition
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=49515159&postcount=489
…just like racists do

you presented yourself as the victim of those horrible, horrible gays…and that is why its OK to discriminate
http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=49443555
…just like racists do

you (or anyone else for that matter) have yet too provide some justification for anti-gay prejudice and discrimination that is not used to justify racism

​

​

​

You can see the old lady:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRpM5jlWWlo

As for the Christians (who by the way had been coming for years and were just praying in a circle when this all began) getting chased out of the Castro in San Francisco under police protection:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng

This is what the Christian group says about the incident: http://www.jhopsf.org/

So you cannot present a legitimate link from an actual news source

 

[Polycarp_fan]

So why did you need to quote from a deliberate mistranslation of 1 Samuel 18:21?

Yes, Saul did at one time offer Merab's hand in marriage to David, but nothing came of that offer, and she married someone else.

You are painting a picture. Your art not reality.

When he was negotiating Michal's marriage, the Hebrew scripture tells us that he saw this as having David as his son-in-law twice.

Nonsense, here is the entire text from The Tanakh, the Hebrew scriptures:

I Samuel

Chapter 18

1 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.
2 And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father's house.
3 Then Jonathan made a covenant with David, because he loved him as his own soul.
4 And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his apparel, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.
5 And David went out; whithersoever Saul sent him, he had good success; and Saul set him over the men of war; and it was good in the sight of all the people, and also in the sight of Saul's servants.
6 And it came to pass as they came, when David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, that the women came out of all the cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet king Saul, with timbrels, with joy, and with three-stringed instruments.
7 And the women sang one to another in their play, and said: Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.
8 And Saul was very wroth, and this saying displeased him; and he said: 'They have ascribed unto David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands; and all he lacketh is the kingdom!'
9 And Saul eyed David from that day and forward.
10 And it came to pass on the morrow, that an evil spirit from G-d came mightily upon Saul, and he raved in the midst of the house; and David played with his hand, as he did day by day; and Saul had his spear in his hand.
11 And Saul cast the spear; for he said: 'I will smite David even to the wall.' And David stepped aside out of his presence twice.
12 And Saul was afraid of David, because HaShem was with him, and was departed from Saul.
13 Therefore Saul removed him from him, and made him his captain over a thousand; and he went out and came in before the people.
14 And David had great success in all his ways; and HaShem was with him.
15 And when Saul saw that he had great success, he stood in awe of him.
16 But all Israel and Judah loved David; for he went out and came in before them.
17 And Saul said to David: 'Behold my elder daughter Merab, her will I give thee to wife; only be thou valiant for me, and fight HaShem'S battles.' For Saul said: 'Let not my hand be upon him, but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him.'
18 And David said unto Saul: 'Who am I, and what is my life, or my father's family in Israel, that I should be son-in-law to the king?'
19 But it came to pass at the time when Merab Saul's daughter should have been given to David, that she was given unto Adriel the Meholathite to wife.
20 And Michal Saul's daughter loved David; and they told Saul, and the thing pleased him.
21 And Saul said: 'I will give him her, that she may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him.' Wherefore Saul said to David: 'Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law through the one of the twain.'
22 And Saul commanded his servants: 'Speak with David secretly, and say: Behold, the king hath delight in thee, and all his servants love thee; now therefore be the king's son-in-law.'
23 And Saul's servants spoke those words in the ears of David. And David said: 'Seemeth it to you a light thing to be the king's son-in-law, seeing that I am a poor man, and lightly esteemed?'
24 And the servants of Saul told him, saying: 'On this manner spoke David.'
25 And Saul said: 'Thus shall ye say to David: The king desireth not any dowry, but a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies.' For Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.
26 And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king's son-in-law. And the days were not expired;
27 and David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full number to the king, that he might be the king's son-in-law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife.
28 And Saul saw and knew that HaShem was with David; and Michal Saul's daughter loved him.
29 And Saul was yet the more afraid of David; and Saul was David's enemy continually.
30 Then the princes of the Philistines went forth; and it came to pass, as often as they went forth, that David prospered more than all the servants of Saul; so that his name was much set by.

The Hebrew does not say "a second chance" as your translation says. It does not say "Thou shalt this day be my son in law in [the one of]* the twain," as the AV has it. These are two separate attempts to hint that the "first chance" or the "other of the twain" was Merab, but other than that, they do not say the same thing at all., and indicate different mindsets about what it would have meant to Saul when the negotiation for Merab broke down.

Good luck with that strange interpretation.

 

[SiderealExalt]

Neat Youtube video from Casto. Never seen it before. The first one is gone, watched the second. Glad to see them get run out honestly though I hope everything going on in my home state does not escalate more.

 

[OllieFranz]

Nonsense, here is the entire text from The Tanakh, the Hebrew scriptures:

That is not Hebrew, it is English. In fact it is the same AV translation that I quoted, except it leaves out the brackets around the phrases inserted by the translators "for clarity."

Again, the Hebrew does not say "Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law through the one of the twain." It says "'Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law through the twain." In other words "you will be my son-in-law through two [relationships].

Care to try again?

 

[Morcova]

Yes - a question that assumes we believe that one is disgraceful and one isnt - so who gave you the idea ever that we do not believe the act of David murdering a man for his wife wasnt disgraceful?

Doesnt your signature ask how it feels to run from ones words? I hope that isnt what is happening here.

Don't worry it's not, and you are just reading too much into it.

 

[cantata]

Adultery refers to a specific kind of sexual sin; Sexual intercourse with another man's wife or a woman betrothed to another man.
That's it. Nothing else.
'And a man who commits adultery with the wife of another man, who commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor: the adulterer and the adulteress shall certainly be put to death.' Leviticus 20:10,

"When a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman. Thus you shall purge the evil from Yisra'el. When a girl who is a maiden is engaged to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and shall stone them to death with stones, the girl because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he has humbled his neighbor's wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from your midst." Deuteronomy 22:22-24

These two passages comprehensively define what adultery is. A married or unmarried man commits adultery if he has sexual intercourse with another man's wife. This is the only definition of adultery in the bible.

In worldly marriages, husband and wife are joined to each other, but this is not Biblically correct. According to the Scriptures, a wife is joined by contract to her husband, not the other way around. This is why na'aph (adultery) means "a woman who breaks wedlock" and never a man. This is confirmed in the allegorical marriage of believers to Jesus, where we (the branches) are joined to God. Those who reject him (commit spiritual adultery) are cut off and burned.

Adultery is solely and specifically predicated on the marital status of the female participant. A married man does not commit adultery if he has sex with an unmarried woman

BigBadWlf, you should know better than to plagiarise.

http://www.righteouswarriors.com/controversial/article4.html

What is it with people copy-pasting things without citing their sources these days? It's really dishonest to pretend that these are one's own words. Grrr!

 

[Andreusz]

The question of the relationship between David and Jonathan is all well and good; but has anyone considered the implications of the relationship between Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet? In the stories, they are constantly together, and frequently hold hands; and at the end of the second book, Piglet moves into Pooh's house, which (we know from the chapter Tigger Comes to the Forest) has only one bed. I will not go into the slang meanings of 'bear' and 'piglet' in what Polycarp_fan calls the gay culture.
These books are usually read to pre-school children. Should we be indoctrinating them with this filth at such an impressionable age?

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb42/NotJustCricket/NJCMT%20images/60420LTPoohHuggingPiglet.jpg

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Oh not the massresistance lie again

You tried to present that lie as “proof” of the so called gay agenda, it was shown to be a fabrication by Mass resistance. It was a lie every other time you presented it
It’s a lie now

Massresistence is a burr in your side huh.

"I" posted reality of the Folsom street orgy and I was threatened with being banned.

Massresistance posts photos and real materials from Gay activists.

Deal with your culture as you see fit and keep it private and out of sight.

 

[Pliny the Elder]

Massresistence is a burr in your side huh.

No, they perpetuate lies.

"I" posted reality of the Folsom street orgy and I was threatened with being banned.

You know nothing of the Folsom street fair, it is a well known event that is for everyone and yes there are families that attend.

Massresistance posts photos and real materials from Gay activists.

They twist things to fit their agenda.

Deal with your culture as you see fit and keep it private and out of sight.

Just because you do not like something does not give you the right to tell others how to live. I have both a gay man and a lesbian couple that babysit my kids on occasion and they are some of the most loving and caring people I have ever had the privilege of knowing.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

That is not Hebrew, it is English. In fact it is the same AV translation that I quoted, except it leaves out the brackets around the phrases inserted by the translators "for clarity."

I used the Jewish Publication Society, The Tanakh. It is what my Rabbi friend reads as his Bible.

There is no way you'll ever pro-homosexualize the scriptures. You would be better off starting a new religion and going from there.

Again, the Hebrew does not say "Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law through the one of the twain." It says "'Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law through the twain." In other words "you will be my son-in-law through two [relationships].

You are only going to get dizzy with spin.

Care to try again?

In Hebrew, if these guys were to boff, they would have been stoned. SOOOOOOO, if Saul wanted David killed ANDDDD his worthless son Jonathan, ALL he would have had to do would have been to have these guys stoned PER THE LAW.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

The question of the relationship between David and Jonathan is all well and good; but has anyone considered the implications of the relationship between Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet?

Two "animlas?" Don't you gay people say that it's OK for same-gender animals to hook up? Isn't that what's always used to justify homosexuality?

But we are just talking to make-believe cartoon characters though right? I think my efforts towards contending against The Gay Agenda have paid off.

In the stories, they are constantly together, and frequently hold hands;

Pigs don't have hands.

You guys sure don't understand how anatomy makes your positions look so bad do you?

. . . and at the end of the second book, Piglet moves into Pooh's house, which (we know from the chapter Tigger Comes to the Forest) has only one bed.

Pigs don't sleep in beds.

Hey wait a minute . . . "PIGLET!"

A piglet is a child pig.

HEY NOW! what is it your supporting here!!!!!!

I will not go into the slang meanings of 'bear' and 'piglet' in what Polycarp_fan calls the gay culture.

I believe you already have. But please don't stop on my account. Seeing Gay Culture for what it is, is what this is all about.

These books are usually read to pre-school children. Should we be indoctrinating them with this filth at such an impressionable age?

Obviously NOT. We know all about meaning of the Pink Triangle and Rainbow taught in our schools now don't we.

 

[David Brider]

The question of the relationship between David and Jonathan is all well and good; but has anyone considered the implications of the relationship between Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet? In the stories, they are constantly together, and frequently hold hands; and at the end of the second book, Piglet moves into Pooh's house, which (we know from the chapter Tigger Comes to the Forest) has only one bed. I will not go into the slang meanings of 'bear' and 'piglet' in what Polycarp_fan calls the gay culture.
These books are usually read to pre-school children. Should we be indoctrinating them with this filth at such an impressionable age?

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb42/NotJustCricket/NJCMT images/60420LTPoohHuggingPiglet.jpg

Your theory is gross and offensive (! ). Any fule kno that the real twu wuv relationship in Milne's books is between Pooh and Christopher Robin. It's impossible to read the closing chapter without realising that they're quite obviously in a gay relationship. It's so sweet.

David. (Half serious, but tongue at least partly in cheek.)

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Your theory is gross and offensive (! ). Any fule kno that the real twu wuv relationship in Milne's books is between Pooh and Christopher Robin. It's impossible to read the closing chapter without realising that they're quite obviously in a gay relationship. It's so sweet.

David. (Half serious, but tongue at least partly in cheek.)

Thankfully, only half serious.

////////////

pervert
Verb
1. to use wrongly or badly
2. to interpret wrongly or badly; distort
3. to lead (someone) into abnormal behaviour, esp. sexually; corrupt
4. to debase
Noun
a person who practises sexual perversion [Latin pervertere to turn the wrong way]
perverted adj
Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006

//////////////

per·vert (p

r-vûrt

)
tr.v. per·vert·ed, per·vert·ing, per·verts 1. To cause to turn away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt.
2. To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase.
3. To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. See Synonyms at corrupt.
4. To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort: an analysis that perverts the meaning of the poem.

n. (pûr

vûrt

) One who practices sexual perversion.

[Middle English perverten, from Old French pervertir, from Latin pervertere : per-, per- + vertere, to turn; see wer-2 in Indo-European roots.]

////////////////

per·ver·sion (p

r-vûr

zh

n, -sh

n) n. 1. a. The act of perverting.
b. The state of being perverted.

2. A sexual practice or act considered abnormal or deviant.

per·ver sive (-s

v, -z

v) adj.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

//////////

perversion
Noun
1. any abnormal means of obtaining sexual satisfaction
2. the act of perverting
Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006


////////////////

de·bauch·er·y (d

-bô

ch

-r

) n. pl. de·bauch·er·ies 1. a. Extreme indulgence in sensual pleasures; dissipation.
b. debaucheries Orgies.

2. Archaic Seduction from morality, allegiance, or duty.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

 

[SughaNSpice]

Massresistence is a burr in your side huh.

"I" posted reality of the Folsom street orgy and I was threatened with being banned.

Massresistance posts photos and real materials from Gay activists.

Deal with your culture as you see fit and keep it private and out of sight.

I think any site that blatantly lies like mass resistance does should be called out for what it is

 

[uberd00b]

I think any site that blatantly lies like mass resistance does should be called out for what it is

And avoided by all honest people.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

I think any site that blatantly lies like mass resistance does should be called out for what it is

Well I went to the main page (again), and see nothing that hasn't actually occurred in reality. No lies there.

This page has some links that show exactly what the goal is of "educating" youth is all about: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

It's dire without doubt.

Here's a glimpse of the hostility:

I say quite deliberately that the Christian religion, as organised in it's Churches, has been and still is the principle enemy of moral progress in the world.
- Bertrand Russell

Moral pogress? Is that what "anything goes," is called.

 

[revanneosl]

What is it with people copy-pasting things without citing their sources these days? It's really dishonest to pretend that these are one's own words. Grrr!

What's even more grrrr! is that you can get in trouble for calling plagiarism by its name!

 

[Polycarp_fan]

What's even more grrrr! is that you can get in trouble for calling plagiarism by its name!

Do I need to source the Bible?

 

[Morcova]

Do I need to source the Bible?

So the bible says that lying and stealing of others ideas is moral?

 

[Bananna]

Mod HaT On:
This thread is being closed for staff review
Mod Hat off:​