Leftist totalitarian mindset

[Oompa Loompa]

Do you imply that anyone who thinks that interpreting that passage means that gay people should perish is reasonable?

If anyone perishes, it is because they have rejected God, not because of their sexual preference. Yes, even homosexuals can be saved if they are truly repentant and seek God for absolution. In simpler terms, people do not go to hell because they are gay, but because they rejected Jesus as their savior. That is the point of Romans 1. According to Romans 1, in my opinion, those who continue these practices after knowing the truth deliberately have rejected the truth for their own self gratification. Therefore, God will give them over to their lusts and will perish. Again, this is in accordance with Christian sacred scripture as I have interpreted it. Take it or leave it, considering you are on a Christian Forum. If this is too much for you to accept, may I suggest going to a less religiously specific venue.

 

[RileyG]

Do you imply that anyone who thinks that interpreting that passage means that gay people should perish is reasonable?

Perish in hell? If they remain unrepentant in their sins, then that’s a choice they made.

And yes, who someone chooses to sleep with or be in a relationship with, is very much a choice.

For the record, yes, I'm aware you are an atheist, I respect that, and that's fine.

Take care.

 

[RileyG]

If anyone perishes, it is because they have rejected God, not because of their sexual preference. Yes, even homosexuals can be saved if they are truly repentant and seek God for absolution. In simpler terms, people do not go to hell because they are gay, but because they rejected Jesus as their savior. That is the point of Romans 1.

Homosexual behavior is just like any other sin. Just like lying, stealing, getting drunk, having premarital sex. They aren’t special.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Homosexual behavior is just like any other sin. Just like lying, stealing, getting drunk, having premarital sex. They aren’t special.

Yes! Because all sin is weighed equally in the eyes of God with the same penalty. Therefore, if I were to say that someone was going to hell because they are a homosexual, what then does that say about me? I am also a sinner who is guilty of alcohol addiction, adultery, lying, and numerous other things that I still struggle with, but I am still trying my best to carry my cross. Which is all that Jesus asked us to do. However, those who mock the cross for self gratification, that is another topic.

 

[RileyG]

Yes! Because all sin is weighed equally in the eyes of God with the same penalty. Therefore, if I were to say that someone was going to hell because they are a homosexual, what then does that say about me? I am also a sinner who is guilty of alcohol addiction, adultery, lying, and numerous other things that I still struggle with, but I am still trying my best to carry my cross. Which is all that Jesus asked us to do. However, those who mock the cross for self gratification, that is another topic.

Well said.

 

[A2SG]

So the private institution invited a speaker and an employee advocates censorship of invited speaker.

It's pretty much the same situation as described in the OP, but coming from the other side. Just to show this isn't a "leftist" thing at all. Basically, private institutions like colleges are fully able to invite speakers, not invite speakers, or even change their mind...and some people will complain about it no matter what.

Regardless of political ideology.

-- A2SG, people are people, and they all have their moods.....

 

[RileyG]

It's pretty much the same situation as described in the OP, but coming from the other side. Just to show this isn't a "leftist" thing at all. Basically, private institutions like colleges are fully able to invite speakers, not invite speakers, or even change their mind...and some people will complain about it no matter what.

Regardless of political ideology.

-- A2SG, people are people, and they all have their moods.....

No one is arguing about that.

 

[A2SG]

No one is arguing about that.

Oh? Then what was the point of the OP?

-- A2SG, my example seemed spot on to me....

 

[RileyG]

Oh? Then what was the point of the OP?

-- A2SG, my example seemed spot on to me....

...about how the leftist media is trying to control EVERYTHING? eh?

 

[A2SG]

...about how the leftist media is trying to control EVERYTHING? eh?

The OP didn't show that happening at all. It was about some people complaining about a speaker. Nothing was said about any media outlet at all, let alone any accusations about any media outlet attempting to "control EVERYTHING"....however one thinks that might be accomplished.

Thing is, colleges invite speakers, and people complain about it. From all sides.

-- A2SG, it's a tale as old as time.....

 

[RileyG]

The OP didn't show that happening at all. It was about some people complaining about a speaker. Nothing was said about any media outlet at all, let alone any accusations about any media outlet attempting to "control EVERYTHING"....however one thinks that might be accomplished.

Thing is, colleges invite speakers, and people complain about it. From all sides.

-- A2SG, it's a tale as old as time.....

Eh? Fair enough

Apparently, per the last election, America wants conservative values, and voted the leftist out.

Thanks be to God.

 

[A2SG]

Eh? Fair enough

Apparently, per the last election, America wants conservative values, and voted the leftist out.

Thanks be to God.

Well, to be fair, a slight majority voted for Trump, who does not espouse traditionally conservative values (respect for law and order and fiscal responsibility, for example). If Americans truly wanted conservative values, there were other candidates to choose from, ones who represent those conservative values far more than Trump ever has. Pence comes to mind.

Just sayin'.

-- A2SG, but you are, of course, entirely free to interpret the election results however you choose to.....

 

[RileyG]

Well, to be fair, a slight majority voted for Trump, who does not espouse traditionally conservative values (respect for law and order and fiscal responsibility, for example). If Americans truly wanted conservative values, there were other candidates to choose from, ones who represent those conservative values far more than Trump ever has. Pence comes to mind.

Just sayin'.

-- A2SG, but you are, of course, entirely free to interpret the election results however you choose to.....

Well….they chose the less radical candidate, who was Trump. People apparently didn’t want Harris.

She lost.

That’s a fact.

 

[A2SG]

Well….they chose the less radical candidate, who was Trump.

Well, that's arguable. But I simply wanted to point out that Trump was not the candidate who actually represented "conservative values," so couching the election in those terms doesn't seem accurate to me.

People apparently didn’t want Harris.

Well, to be fair, 48% of the people did.

She lost.

That’s a fact.

Granted. No argument there.

-- A2SG, though, it's interesting to note a significant difference between Trump supporters and Harris supporters when it comes to acknowledging their particular candidates' election loss.....

 

[KCfromNC]

Off topic.

Referencing the contents of the article in the OP is kinda the definition of on-topic around here.
Random posts two weeks later objecting to those posts, on the other hand...

 

[KCfromNC]

Quite possibly. I was hoping for something better than 'We hate woke!'

To be fair, the candidate also had a lot to say about the pressing dangers of sharks and electric boats. Perhaps that resonated with them as vitally important?

 

[Lukaris]

Going back to the start and quoting from the leftist history professor:

From the article:

“Universities are places for debating ideas. These are not ideas that are in need of a platform or in need of further debate,” Dartmouth history professor Bethany Moreton said.


Inviting Pence to campus “is about a redundant affinity for power that is unrelated to the quality of ideas and their fitness for intellectual engagement”








I objected to her philosophy which says the ideas Pence represents have no right to a platform for debate. She can think this, call her mobs to support her, and earn her paycheck as dhe goes and I had no objection to her job ( some said I did). I believe she is a totalitarian at heart. I provided examples of leftists mobs attacking right wing speakers so my view of her protesting minions is cynical. Never did I say anything about who private or public institutions choose to speak at their institutions but about discourse in general.

So from where I stand, I am not objecting to her right to express or earn her paycheck on whatever she chooses to rant or rave about. She can call her minions to scream about Pence as long as Pence can speak securely as an invited speaker. The leftist professor does not think Mike Pence has the right to speak where he was invited to speak.


Some say my point is ridiculous but at least not tyrannical, ok fine.

On eve of vote, Pence talks politics at Dartmouth

HANOVER — Former Vice President Mike Pence outlined his concerns for the Republican Party and the future of American democracy inside the Hanover Inn Thursday evening as about two dozen people gathered on the sidewalk outside to protest his record on...

www.vnews.com

 

[essentialsaltes]

Well….they chose the less radical candidate, who was Trump.

That is certainly not true.

Harris was the Bidenomics-as-usual (since it's working) candidate.

Trump has promised many radical changes to government.

 

[RileyG]

That is certainly not true.

Harris was the Bidenomics-as-usual (since it's working) candidate.

Trump has promised many radical changes to government.

My opinion only.