Quantcast

Same-Sex Marriage Amendment In Ohio Gets Green Light. Rave If you support gay marriage

★~DoctorWhoGuru~★ 2012/04/04 00:01:24

Marriage equality advocates in Ohio took one step closer Tuesday to overturning the state's 2004 constitutional amendment that restricts marriages in the state to only those between one man and one woman.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine (R) approved the petition language for an amendment that would redefine marriage in Ohio as “a union of two consenting adults, regardless of gender," according to the Columbus Dispatch.

The Freedom to Marry Coalition is now tasked with gathering 385,253 valid signatures of registered Ohio voters in order to put its marriage equality amendment on the Ohio ballot -- a goal that Ian James, the group's co-founder, told The Huffington Post he hopes to achieve by November 2013.

Read More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/same-sex-...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Grizzle 2012/04/04 12:27:58
    Grizzle
    +24
    This battle is about changing the definition of a word. Marriage is between one man and one woman, civil unions are between one whatever and one whatever. Why not fight for the right to call a cat, a dog?

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Mr. Furious 2012/04/10 01:08:14
    Mr. Furious
    !!Barf!!!
  • antiregressivism 2012/04/10 00:07:15
    antiregressivism
    +6
    Can't we just get the government out of marriage and leave it alone as a social and religious institution? Contracts can be drafted up and enforced in courts if necessary; there's no need for top-down, rigid structuring of society by the federal government.
  • Adakin ... antireg... 2012/04/10 02:04:42
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    FINALLY, an intelligent rational comment! Thank you.

    Get gov't out of marriage altogether! My husband & I would file taxes together only to discover that we would pay less if we filed separately. Why is there ANY mention of a private agreement between two consenting adults? Anti Regressive (and I assume Uncle Regressive) both agree with me that the government should BUTT OUT! Leave people alone to choose what to do with whom ever they want to do it with. If the gov't feels compelled to interfere, then do so under the guise of "Civil Unions" because one of the prime functions of government is to uphold and enforce legal contracts.

    Remember, any government powerful enough to GRANT you rights, has the power to take them away. Besides, If the Government ever gives you something, they first had to TAKE IT from someone else.

    Government gives and government takes away
  • A Founding Father 2012/04/09 23:30:49 (edited)
    A Founding Father
    +1
    Those farm boys in Ohio are also big on trying to marry their goats and sheep. In fact, I think the 4-H clubs there have a special ceremony for "unions" such as that. They claim a
    "right" to marry anything larger than a rabbit. Let's all cheer for these rights to do what no one wants to witness or let their children view.
  • evangelism_vision 2012/04/09 22:45:41
  • Sayer S... evangel... 2012/04/10 03:09:49
    Sayer Stewart
    +1
    And what is the point of your post?
  • Goroth 2012/04/09 21:03:37 (edited)
    Goroth
    +4
    Same sex marriage is NOT a gate-way to incest, pederasty, bestiality, or man on muffler co-mingling! It is a gateway toward true recognition in practice of Equality, and Verifiable Civility and Humanity in action not just lip service.

    Claiming something is wrong because, "God" Hates it, or The Bible Tells me so, is a cop-out, Period. It is not a sign of morality, purity, piety, or Ethical Superiority to cloak yourself in Steeped Religiosity when convenient and scream free speech when called out on bigotry. It is a sad and heartless sham.

    If you don't like being called a bigot, racist, misogynist, or any other form of disagreeable personality afflicted person, then stop acting like one, or trying so hard to prove the point, and talking like one, and using the claim of Deep Abiding faith to excuse the inexcusable.

    The time of exclusive affluence and control for wealthy white Anglo-saxon protestant male landowners and slave holders is a thing of the past, it might not seem like it to see the representative faces of those who claim to be authorities on the subject, or those who overwhelmingly appear represented in elected office or positions of power and influence to the masses. But those same masses for which those few are representative are far more diverse and re...











    Same sex marriage is NOT a gate-way to incest, pederasty, bestiality, or man on muffler co-mingling! It is a gateway toward true recognition in practice of Equality, and Verifiable Civility and Humanity in action not just lip service.

    Claiming something is wrong because, "God" Hates it, or The Bible Tells me so, is a cop-out, Period. It is not a sign of morality, purity, piety, or Ethical Superiority to cloak yourself in Steeped Religiosity when convenient and scream free speech when called out on bigotry. It is a sad and heartless sham.

    If you don't like being called a bigot, racist, misogynist, or any other form of disagreeable personality afflicted person, then stop acting like one, or trying so hard to prove the point, and talking like one, and using the claim of Deep Abiding faith to excuse the inexcusable.

    The time of exclusive affluence and control for wealthy white Anglo-saxon protestant male landowners and slave holders is a thing of the past, it might not seem like it to see the representative faces of those who claim to be authorities on the subject, or those who overwhelmingly appear represented in elected office or positions of power and influence to the masses. But those same masses for which those few are representative are far more diverse and realistically descriptive of the beauty and eclectic mixture that is humanity at large.

    The world is bigger and far removed in practice on a personal human level internally felt, beyond the archaic ignorance of the much lauded good old days before man realized the Earth was round and we weren't the center of all creation.

    The innumerably re-authored versions and transliterations of the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts contained in haphazardly collected scrolls and tomes of the collected works that are the "Bible", are not the Authority of the World, they are a tool struggling to still be relevant to those who have long since lost the masses enthralled by Church governed power over the state.

    We are lucky in this country to have that be the defining quality. The separation of Church and state isn't to protect the Church from the State, rather those of the State from Theocratic Barbaric rule by the church.

    Those passages are not law, the edicts set forth from the bill of rights, and constitution are law. Period.

    Those often misquoted, rabidly favored passages used to exploit and excuse hate bigotry, racism gender bias, and fear mongering, from the myriad versions of the Good Ole' Book are used today unfortunately, to keep things the way they were in direct opposition to an ever growing and emerging enlightened society and paradigm shift toward realizing the goals of the supposed Holy Men and Women and those who were martyred for their beliefs.

    There is nothing Holy, or Christ Like in being reflexively and chronically hateful and championing injustice and fear. Deal with it, progress will either come with your willing and abiding faith and joyful participation in tow or it will bury you in your own kicked up mires and endless demagoguery, with heels firmly and fearfully planted ineffectually digging into hypocrisy and self-righteousness until you are a forgotten shameful footnote on the back page of History.
    (more)
  • Zippcodey Goroth 2012/04/09 21:57:30
    Zippcodey
    Has nothing to do with hate, it has to do with normallity and truth to the homosexual lie. The Pope of all people with all the homosexual priests and pedephiles, told the homosexuals to come out of the closet when he came to the U.S. Just shows you who is pushing the immorality of this country.
  • Goroth Zippcodey 2012/04/09 22:16:11
    Goroth
    We live in America, not Papal Dogma, Totem and Taboo New Vatica...
  • Zippcodey Goroth 2012/04/09 22:31:36
    Zippcodey
    Yeah the one it is becoming, it will soon meet it's Waterloo.
  • Goroth Zippcodey 2012/04/09 22:36:27 (edited)
    Goroth
    Napoleon was a sad little man, as were most historical dictators and war criminals, the movement toward equality is not a movement of one man or woman who seeks to force power and dominance over all others, that is the ideal of the self-righteous. The difference is that those who live by the sword eventually die by it, but progress cannot be halted forever by loud dissenting voices of the fearful few clinging to favored status.
  • Zippcodey Goroth 2012/04/09 22:44:24
    Zippcodey
    Now you know why this world will be burned up with all the wickedness it in
  • Goroth Zippcodey 2012/04/09 22:59:16
    Goroth
    The world will burn when the sun expands to envelop it as it reaches red giant staus in about five billion more years. I am quite certain humanity will have died out as a species long before that.
  • Zippcodey Goroth 2012/04/09 23:06:39
    Zippcodey
    Only have about 1018 years at the most for the destruction of this earth.
  • herenot... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 02:18:13
    herenotthere1
    Sounds pretty legitimate. My crystal ball isn't working today so I can't check my answer with yours.
  • Zippcodey herenot... 2012/04/10 05:56:58
    Zippcodey
    Yeah they wear out.
  • The dea... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 02:42:55
    The dead and the silent
    You've actually got about 4.46 billion years left, though natural plant life ceases at around 4.40 billion years.
  • Zippcodey The dea... 2012/04/10 05:57:22
    Zippcodey
    Whatever you say.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/09 22:56:21
    TheHushedScreamer
    +2
    What is "normal", exactly? Because NO one is normal, really. Think it through.
    "Truth to the homosexual lie.". What the HELL is that? There is no lie in homosexuality, you're just too blind to see the truth in it all. "We all do not see that which we are not prepared to see."
    If anyone's pushing the immorality of this country, it's you in this exact moment. Why? Because you're JUDGING. And doesn't the Bible CLEARLY state that only God has the right to judge? That us humans are in NO POSITION to judge, to tell others wether they're right or wrong. And, by judging, you're not being moral. So this could be considered an act of hypocrisy in your part.
    And if the world is going to burn because of all its wickedness, only religious bigots that express all the hatred and resentment they have toward others different than them, such as yourself, are to blame. If it'll burn, it'll burn because of all the RESENTMENT and DISCRIMINATION that is being presented NOT ONLY for homosexuals, but to anyone who is different.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/09 23:09:31
    Zippcodey
    Hate to tell you this, but the scriptures has already done the judging I don't have to, just stand on the word.

    It will burn but not for the reason you give.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/09 23:21:26
    TheHushedScreamer
    Yeah, but there are partsin the Bible where poligamy, the rape of women and alcoholism were ALL accepted. And it's not accepted NOW, is it?
    Oh no, it sure won't. It'll burn because it has homosexuals running free, out and proud, marrying those who they love. Yep. It'll totally burn.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 01:21:33
    Zippcodey
    Yep that's right they will.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 02:50:59
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 06:01:43
    Zippcodey
    Good get as mad as you want, it's good for your blood pressure.

    See the problem with you is that there is no truth in you. You are ignorant to what scriptures teach. Hell and Hades are pagan deities of the dead. You are speaking of the Lake of Fire. God is a pagan deity too.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 11:23:12
    TheHushedScreamer
    +1
    Oh, don't worry. My rage for you religious bigots fades away after I submit my reply. There may "not be truth in me", which there is, but you're too blind to see.
    I'm not ignorant to what the Scriptures teach. Though, I DO question some things from it, like the verses I've showed you. Of course, all religion freaks are going to highlight the part where it says that "A man sleeping with a man is a sin", but you don't read the rest of the pathetic things the Bible spews. It is a very contradicting book.

    Nope, there are parts in the Bible that mention Hell. I'll give you a few examples:
    1. Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of Hell?
    2. Mar 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into Hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
    3. Rev 20:14 And death and Hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
    4. Psa 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into Hell, and all the nations that forget God.
    5. Pro 15:24 The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from Hell beneath.

    I'm not pagan, nor am I Christian. I have really no religion, but yet I've studied the Bible pretty good just to be able to sustain my arguments when discussing with narrow minded Christians who only know half of everything the Bible says.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 13:16:10 (edited)
    Zippcodey
    I'm not a Christian, Christianity is pagan to the core, why don't you look up Hades and Hell, you will find them to be pagan deities of the underworld. Rome took Yahweh's name out of scriptures and put all pagan deity names and words back in to deceive people. The word Bible is also a pagan deity.

    Homosexuality


    Genesis 1:27-28

    27: So Yahweh created man in his own image, in the image of Yahweh created he him; male and female created he them.


    Remember, Yahweh created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve or Mary and Sherry.


    28: And Yahweh blessed them, and Yahweh said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, Be fruitful, and multiply, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    Nature itself tells us that two things of the same sex cannot reproduce. So homosexuals cannot be fruitful and multiply, or replenish the earth.

    Genesis 2:24

    24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

    As we know a: Mother is a female parent.

    Father is a male parent.



    What is a male? Sex that fertilizes and begets offspring.



    What is a female? Sex that bears offspring (woman or girl: feminine).



    What is a man? An a...






















































































































































































































































































    &













    I'm not a Christian, Christianity is pagan to the core, why don't you look up Hades and Hell, you will find them to be pagan deities of the underworld. Rome took Yahweh's name out of scriptures and put all pagan deity names and words back in to deceive people. The word Bible is also a pagan deity.

    Homosexuality


    Genesis 1:27-28

    27: So Yahweh created man in his own image, in the image of Yahweh created he him; male and female created he them.


    Remember, Yahweh created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve or Mary and Sherry.


    28: And Yahweh blessed them, and Yahweh said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, Be fruitful, and multiply, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    Nature itself tells us that two things of the same sex cannot reproduce. So homosexuals cannot be fruitful and multiply, or replenish the earth.

    Genesis 2:24

    24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

    As we know a: Mother is a female parent.

    Father is a male parent.



    What is a male? Sex that fertilizes and begets offspring.



    What is a female? Sex that bears offspring (woman or girl: feminine).



    What is a man? An adult male person.



    What is a woman? An adult female human being.

    What is married? Being a husband or wife.

    What is a husband? A married man.



    What is a wife? A married woman.



    What is a widower? A man whose wife has died and who has not remarried.



    What is a widow? A woman whose husband has died and who has not remarried.


    As you can see, Yahweh's plan has nothing to do with same sex relationships, gays and lesbians, homosexuals. When you speak of homosexuals you speak of same sex relationships, so for a homosexual to be able to reproduce they must leave the same sex relationship and come over to how it was meant to be. This is where the term BISEXUAL comes from, which is usually how homosexual diseases are transmitted to the heterosexuals.


    Homosexual: One who is sexually attracted to the SAME sex.



    Bisexual: One who is sexually attracted to BOTH sexes.



    Heterosexual: One who is sexually attracted to the OPPOSITE sex. (The way Yahweh created man to be.)


    1 Kings 14:24

    24. And there were also sodomites in the land, and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which Yahweh cast out before the children of Israel. …


    Leviticus 20:13

    13. If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

    Israel was told by Yahweh to kill homosexuals so none would be found among them. Today, society is teaching the acceptance of them, but it will not change our Creator's mind. His death penalty for them is the Lake of Fire. Why were they to kill homosexuals? Homosexuality is a cancer to society.

    Leviticus 18:22-30

    22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

    23: Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.

    24: Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you.

    25: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.

    26: Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you:

    27: For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;


    As you can see, nations were destroyed for this perversion. No wonder gentiles were considered dogs.

    28: That the land spew not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spewed out the nations that were before you.

    29: For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.

    30: Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am Yahweh your Almighty.

    Genesis 19:4-8, 12-13, 24-25

    4: But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

    5: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came into thee this night: bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

    6: And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

    7: And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

    8: Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.


    Lot was going to give these men his own two daughters, to do with as they pleased, so these men would not force their perverted homosexual acts upon his visitors.

    12: And the man said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? Son-in-law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou has in the city, bring them out of this place:

    13: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of Yahweh and Yahweh hath sent us to destroy it.

    24: Then Yahweh rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of heaven.

    25: And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.

    Romans 18:24-32

    24: Wherefore Yahweh also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

    25: Who changed the truth of Yahweh unto a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.

    26: For this cause Yahweh gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.

    27: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which as meet.

    28: And even as they did not like to retain Yahweh in their knowledge, Yahweh gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

    29: Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers,

    30: Backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

    31: Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

    32: Who knowing the judgment of Yahweh, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    1 Cor. 6:9-10

    9: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of Yahweh? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate (homosexuals), nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

    10: Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of Yahweh.

    11: And such WERE some of you; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of Yahweh, and by the Spirit of Yahweh.

    Yes, there is hope for those who want to find the truth of it all and change their lives the way Yahweh meant it to be.


    America and this world becomes more acceptable to perversion daily and our own government now forces people to accept this perversion by calling it civil rights.


    Whatever some people believe the Scriptures seem to say about homosexuality, they must not use that belief to deny homosexuals their basic civil rights. To discriminate against sexual or gender minorities is unjust and un-American.


    Homosexuals have already penetrated our Boy and Girl Scout Organizations and our schools as teachers. Your children are being taught in schools about Sam and Dan, Mary and Sherry, homosexual couples as same sex parents, brainwashing the children of today. They are now actually teaching kids how to be homosexual in our schools. Homosexuality is now running rampant in our schools among teenagers. Homosexuals (lesbians) are now having artificial insemination so they can have children. The United State allows homosexuals to adopt children and allows homosexual marriages. This way they can stay true to their homosexuality.


    Homosexuality is rampant in the Catholic Denominations.


    "Vicars of priests and seminary administrators who have been around awhile speak among themselves of the disproportionate number of gay men that populate our seminaries and presbytereates. They know that a proportionate number of gay priests and seminarians would fall between 5 and 10 percent. An NBC report on celibacy and the clergy found that 'anywhere from 20 percent to 58 percent of Catholic clergy have a homosexual orientation. Other studies find that approximately half of American priests and seminarians are homosexually oriented. Sociologist James G. Wolf in his book Gay Priests concluded that 48.5 percent of priests and 55.1 percent of seminarians were gay. The percentage appears to be highest among priests under forty years of age. Moreover, the percentage of gay men among religious congregations of priests is believed to be even higher. [The Changing Face of the Priesthood, Fr. Donald B. Cozzens; Copyright 2000 by the Order of St. Benedict]

    Look at the other denominations in Christianity, it now has homosexual denominations, you have other denominations now wanting to ordain homosexuals as ministers. This proves more of what Christianity really is and what it is doing and accepting to become the one-world religion. Man kind is digging their pit deeper and deeper.


    You as a people, you as nations must turn back to Yahweh and stand up for the truth so your children can come out of the pit that you have and are putting them in. As the saying goes: If you don’t stand for something, then you will fall for anything.



    Homosexuals must turn away from their perverted lifestyle and turn to Yahweh who shall set them free, or have the same end as Sodom and Gomorrah.


    Yahweh's Warning:Jude verse 77: Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.I think the United States had better heed the warning of JUDE 7, before she, like Napoleon, meets her Waterloo.

    When Clinton was President, he legalized homosexuals to be in the military. What will be the long-term effect? How about the AIDS epidemic in our military? What about the morale of our heterosexual soldiers? Will someday our V.A. hospitals be filled with AIDS patients instead of the hurt and wounded? These are just some of the questions without answers yet.

    Leviticus 18:24-2524: Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you.

    25: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.

    The United States is condoning what Yahweh condemns, things like:

    HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES (man with man, women with women).



    You can see now what direction the United States is headed, calling bad good. What does Yahweh say about this?

    ISAIAH 5:20-21; 21. Woe to them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! 21. Woe to them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!


    The United States is following the world‘s lead and politicians today will lay hold of liberal agendas to gain votes in their greed for power. The United States is slowly self destructing and doesn’t realize it. It is already another Sodom and Gomorrah.

    Yahweh would have to apologize for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, (Which was set forth as an example, Jude verse 7) if destruction is not brought upon the United States.

    The ONLY THING I believe that is keeping the United States from her destruction is she hasn’t turned her back on Israel YET, but the day is coming when she will.

    Romans 1:24-32

    24. Wherefore Yahweh also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

    25. Who changed the truth of Yahweh into a lie and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.

    26. For this cause Yahweh gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

    27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

    28. And even as they did not like to retain Yahweh in their knowledge, Yahweh gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

    29. Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

    30. Backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

    31. Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

    32. Who knowing the JUDGMENT OF YAHWEH, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    I found a very good website which I took the following in part from. http://www.overlordsofchaos.c...

    This drive for World Empire cannot be achieved if the majority, the masses, is aware and aroused to the danger of their impending servitude. That is why the Liberal and Humanist assault on Western Civilization has been a slow process that required great organization, tact and tenacity. Some clever liberals have called the slow, gradual assault on Natural Moral Order by the Dark Forces of Evil the Long March through the Institutions. Slowly, one after another, the great institutions of Western civilisation, the universities, the Churches, the schools, the media, have succumbed to the Humanist incursion and have become incorporated into the Evil Agenda.

    To demoralize Western Christian Civilization, to attack ancient morality, Liberals use numerous strategies and weapons but a most pernicious one is the Thought Tyranny called Political Correctness, which has its own language and inner logic. Feminism, Multiculturalism and the "Race Relations Industry" are other powerful weapons to browbeat Western Culture. Another potent weapon used by the Humanists and Liberals is Homosexuality. This is why they –the Corrupt Liberal Establishment- heavily promote and protect the cult of Sodomy manifest as the Homosexual Lobby; why they have unleashed a wave of filth and degradation upon the people of the west via the mass media, TV and "pop culture" that paints a rosy picture of sodomy.

    In the 1950s, Psychiatry still regarded homosexuality as a psychological and not biological problem. Moreover, it was classified as a sexual perversion, a treatable disease, which could be cured through appropriate treatment. However, powerful dark forces desired this otherwise. They worked to promote the Homosexual Agenda by encouraging activists to publicly protest their conviction that homosexuality was not only natural and somehow noble, but also a preferable way of life, one of many on a menu of "life-choices." The agenda was heavily pushed through the decade of the "Swinging Sixties" but the rot really set in during the 1970s. At the start of the decade, most agreed that homosexuality was a "social corruption" and all authoritative psychiatric associations officially defined it as a mental disorder. In short, it was certainly not "OK to be gay" openly in society. The activists and proselytisers of homosexuality understood a massive change in public perception was needed. Therefore a main objective was the removal of the stigma of pathological obsession attached to the practice of sodomy.

    This was achieved in 1973 when, after years of disruptive homosexual protests, some openly backed by the Gay Liberation Front, and aggressive internal homosexual activism, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) caved in and removed its censure of homosexuality. That is, the homosexual activists got the APA to say that same sex was 'not a disorder' but merely "a condition" –as neutral as left-handedness. It was of course a political rather than a medical decision. The much larger American Psychological Association followed suit two years later. As homosexual activists predicted, other professional guilds from counselling to education to paediatrics soon followed the lead of both APAs and re-diagnosed homosexuality as a 'condition' related to genes rather than a sexual disorder born from personal choice.

    -----------------------------...

    HOMOSEXUALITY IS A FORM A BIRTH CONTROL

    Not only is our government trying to get rid of the morality in this country, but they are using different things to help stop future population growth, besides the pill, another one is abortion, and then there is homosexuality. Why do I say this? During the Greek Empire homosexuality was big, especially with the Olympians, then the Roman Empire took over and they seen a big problem with it. The problem was homosexuals could not make babies to supply the Roman army with soldiers, so they put a stop to it.

    WAKE UP AMERICA, WAKE UP WORLD, DON'T BE BRAINWASHED!




    Fred Hutchison

    April 28, 2004


    The dark, intolerant, and abusive nature of the gay agenda




    By Fred Hutchison

    Over twenty years ago, I had an intermittent conversation about homosexuality with an gay man at work. Although he persistently brought up the subject, he would periodically fly into a rage and call me a bigot when I disagreed with him. That man went on to become a key homosexual organizer in my city.

    Five years ago I wrote a letter to the editor of my newspaper concerning how the paper was becoming an organ of gay advocacy. I forwarded the letter to a group who received regular mailings from me. One man responded and disclosed himself as a gay. He accused me of wanting to submit gays to the equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition. He used several abusive terms which reminded me of other encounters I have had with gays including the individual mentioned in the first paragraph. I replied that I refused to be bullied and intimidated into silence.

    Are gays inherently hysterical, hateful, and intolerant of disagreement, I wondered, or are they reading off the same script? Are they systematically organized to strike out at opponents, and to silence them through intimidation? The answer is that no, homosexuals are not necessarily hysterical, hateful, or intolerant by nature — but yes, this is something they have learned. It is a technique called "jamming" which is part of an elaborate program to further the gay agenda.

    Propaganda and Thought Control

    I learned about jamming by reading the articles How America Went Gay, and Thought Reform and the Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of psychiatry at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. He is the Author of the book, Homosexuality: A Freedom too Far (1995). Socarides drew a lot of his information about the program which involves "jamming" from the book After the Ball: How America will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990's (1990) by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. This book is a blueprint for gay activists for applying brainwashing techniques developed by the totalitarian regime of Communist China. These techniques were catalogued in Robert Jay Lifton's seminal work, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China (1989).

    The program borrowed from the Chinese and put forward for gay activism by Kirk and Madsen involves three steps: 1) desensitization, 2) jamming, and 3) conversion.

    1) Desensitization — Through constant exposure to homosexuals on television, in the movies, on radio, and in the newspapers, the public would become accustomed to gays being a normal part of their life. The image conveyed would be that gays are ordinary people like everyone else. As the gays came out of the closet to show a public face, the startling aspects of gay perversion and pathology would be left in the closet — concealed from the public eye. The goal of desensitization is public indifference.

    2) Jamming — The object of jamming is to shame gay opponents into silence. The shame comes from the accusation of bigotry and social stigmatization.

    "All normal people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack...The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicted twinge of shame....when his homohatred surfaces. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths...It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. (Kirk and Madsen)

    Notice the two elements — the shaming of the alleged "bigot" by making him feel like a social pariah and the depiction of the suffering gay to win sympathy. In my personal experience, I have met with two versions of the shaming tactics from gays. The first is the personal attack (ad hominem, meaning "against the man"). The ad hominem attack ignores the logic and facts put forward by the opponent and accuses him of being a bigot, i.e., a shameful being. The insult is pure assertion and unsupported by facts. It is essentially a threat to socially stigmatize the person if he does not desist from his opposition to the gay agenda.

    This tactic is very effective in a politically correct group-think environment — such as college campuses and news rooms. Politicians as a class, are extremely sensitive to the threat of being publicly stigmatized. Remember Kirk and Marsden's idea that "...people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack." These may be primitive wolf-pack group-think tactics but they are powerful none the less.

    Almost all of us has been through this kind of thing. A perfect example is the high school clique. Retribution for violating the code of the clique involves public shaming and expulsion and demonization. One becomes an "untouchable" — a pariah to every clique and caste in the school.

    A study of the life cycle of a business found that the terminal stage of decline was when group-think prevailed. At this point the in-group became an end in itself and the customer became an inconvenient nuisance. James F. Welles, Phd., wrote The Story of Stupidity, which examined historical eras in which many people were seized by a self-destructive collective stupidity. In each case, group-think prevailed and rationality ans independent thought was driven out. "Political correctness" is a form of contemporary group-think which drives out common sense. This poisoned environment created the opportunity for the abusive nonsense of gay "jamming" to flourish. However toxic and destructive wolf-pack group-think is, it is a powerful temptation which man, a social animal, is prone to, and which dictators make use of.

    When I testified before the Ohio Senate Committee on the Defense of Marriage (DOM) Act, the Republican committee chairman who favors the act, allowed those against DOM to repeatedly make charges of bigotry and hatred against those who favored DOM. He allowed them to run on with no time limit as they painted the gay lifestyle in glowing terms and wallowed in their personal pain from bigotry. However, he did not allow those in favor DOM to answer the charges of bigotry or refute any of the assertions the anti-DOM folks made. He refused to allow experts to speak about the tragic realities of the homosexual lifestyle. Why? He probably did not want to be called a "bigot" in front of the TV cameras. He was scared to death of public jamming and shaming. Even though he voted for DOMA he was terrified at being publicly branded as not being "one of the pack." This accords perfectly with Chinese brainwashing techniques. Consider Kirk and Marsden again:

    "...our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. Just as the bigot became such, without any say in the matter, through repeated infralogical emotional conditioning, his bigotry can be alloyed in exactly the same way, whether he is conscious of the attack or not. In short, jamming succeeds insofar as it inserts even a slight frisson of doubt and shame into the previously unalloyed, self-righteous pleasure. This approach can be quite useful and effective — if our message can get the massive exposure upon which all else depends."

    The gays have indeed been given massive public exposure by liberals on TV, the movies, and the print media. This aggressive use of the media has been a priority of the agenda of gay leaders at least since 1971.

    The "frisson of doubt" inserted through emotional conditioning is especially effective on men in the clergy. They view themselves as men of conscience and compassion — and like to be seen by others as such. Thus, when the pastor speaks in accord with the scriptures and calls gay sexual practices a sin, he may feel an almost unconscious shiver of doubt and shame. It is not the shame of violating a universal moral law or upholding the truth of the Bible. It is the shame of violating a social taboo and the fear of being seen by men that he is lacking in compassion and sensitivity. It plays to the ultimate fear of many pastors, the fear of public disgrace.

    Denominations like the Episcopalians, the Lutherans, the Presbyterians, and the Methodists are in a pitched battle over whether to ordain gays, or to bless gay unions. Many of the theological moderates and many of the Bishops have taken to saying that they are "open" to hearing both sides. By taking no public position they hide from the threat of being defamed by one side as being a "bigot" and a "hater" or being charged by the other side with being unscriptural.

    The resistance against the gay agenda in the churches is left to the most conservative, the most principled, and those most willing to stand alone. Those who love God and truth more than they hate being publicly slimed by the gay activists and their liberal allies must often bear a heavy cost. When the liberal clergy seize control of a denomination and back a gay agenda, they ostracize the conservatives who oppose the gay agenda and exclude them from the seminaries, from denominational committees, and from speaking engagements. So much for liberal "tolerance" and "inclusion."

    One aspect of the shaming technique is to portray how much pain the gay suffers as a result of the intolerance of the bigot. The movie Philadelphia, starring Tom Hanks, is a media tour de force in getting wide audiences to sympathize with the sufferings of a gay man and to be disgusted with the persecutions of his bigoted tormentors. Everyone who places a high value on compassion is bound to be swayed by the movie. It is one of the greatest masterpieces of propaganda ever put on screen. The not so subtle message is — "Shame on you bigots for not giving your approval to the cute and sensitive Tom Hanks — who just happens to be gay." With one stroke, the bigots are jammed and shamed and the gay wins sympathy. Brilliant propaganda — that. The Chinese would be proud.

    3) Conversion

    The third step is conversion of the public to be receptive to the gay agenda. Conversion requires a change of heart. The change of heart will occur "...if we can actually make them like us," says Kirk and Madsen. "Conversion aims at just this...conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the media." When the audience begins to sympathize with Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, the process of conversion has begun.

    On television, gay comedienne Ellen de Generous once used abrasiveness in comedy. Since her public disclosure that she is a lesbian, she has emphasized personal likability. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy emphasizes a goofy cuteness and sweetness. Public likability has eluded the hard-boiled Ellen but the "fab five" of Queer Eye have been fantastically successful in winning the sentimental favor of the public. No line is too sappy and no situation too mushy for the fab five. Don't you just want to hug them? Folks, this is conversion. Serious conversion. Never underestimate the gushy sentimentality of the American public. The cuteness of Topsy in Uncle Tom's Cabin did more to turn public sentiment away from slavery than all the abolitionists combined.

    The Big Lie

    The big lie technique has been used by almost all totalitarians. As explained by Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda chief, "Tell a lie, make it a big one, repeat it often enough, and a lot of people will believe it." The Chinese propaganda techniques used for the gay agenda are more sophisticated than the bombastic Nazi methods. But as true totalitarians seeking mind control, the people behind the gay agenda is promoting three big lies: 1. Homosexuality is genetically determined, 2. Change is not possible, and 3. Gay rights are part of the civil rights agenda. Homosexuality is placed on a par with race and gender. According to the gay agenda, these truths are obvious. No debate is needed. Opposition to these points signifies bigotry.

    1. Genetic determinism — Genes determine human choices and the trajectory of human development, we are told. This means that the gay is a programmed automaton and has no choice but to perform those sexual acts which the genes dictate. A full menu of sexual perversions are written into the genes and require only the right opportunity and stimulation to express themselves. This is nonsense, of course. Gays have free will and choice as do every human being. Sexual perversions must be learned through some combination of experimentation and instruction.

    At present, there seems to be no scientific evidence linking particular genes to particular sexual practices. But there is scientific evidence to the contrary. A sample of 90,000 identical twins (who have the same genes) shows no meaningful correlation of the sexual preference for twins raised apart. Fraternal twins had a higher correlation. If genetic determinism was true, there should be 100% correlation. (Source: Bearman & Bruckner, American Journal of Sociology, Vol 107, No 5, 2002)

    The Journal of Homosexuality, a gay publication, reports that certain gay-gene studies and gay-brain studies do not stand up to critical analysis. Many gays want the truth instead of the big lie. Others prefer the big lie. The author of one of the criticized gay-gene studies is under investigation for science fraud by the National Institutes of Health for Science Fraud.

    2. Gays can't change

    Dr. Socarides says that one third of his former gay patients are now married and most have children. This corresponds with the success rate of the Betty Ford clinic. Another third of Socarides patients remain homosexual but are not part of the gay scene. They report more control over their impulses and a more responsible approach to sex. The point is that two thirds of his patients made positive changes to some extent. This excludes the blanket assertion that gays can't change.

    3. Discrimination against gays is a civil rights issue

    Gay sexual activities is a behavior. Race and gender are permanent innate characteristics which are fixed at birth. No moral judgement can be made of race and gender because no one chooses their race or gender.

    In contrast, a homosexual orientation seems to emerge in developmental stages. Individual choices and social environment profoundly influences the trajectory of development. Sexual perversions must be learned through experimentation and instruction. Such practices are subject to moral judgements.

    Fred Hutchison
    (more)
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 14:54:11
    TheHushedScreamer
    You know, I'm going to cite what a very important religious researcher stated in defense of Gay Marriage; I'm sure it'll answer to your whole argument:
    "The classic statement on the marriage relationship in the Bible does not use the term marriage, but is historically understood as referring to the foundation of that institution: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24 NASB). In context the text is a comment on the creation of the first woman as a complementary partner for the first man: God forms the woman from part of the man’s body, and the woman is then in effect reunited to the man, making them “one flesh” (Gen.2:18-25). The manand the woman are thus two different but complementary halves that form a whole when united in marriage. There is no room in this articulation of the significance of marriage for a union of two males or of two females, or for marriages involving three or more persons. The location of this statement in the creation narrative (agreeing with and supplementing the earlier statement that God created humans “male and female,” 1:27) makes it function as a paradigm for marriage. Miller’s objection to this classic understanding is that the Jews from whom this text c...







    You know, I'm going to cite what a very important religious researcher stated in defense of Gay Marriage; I'm sure it'll answer to your whole argument:
    "The classic statement on the marriage relationship in the Bible does not use the term marriage, but is historically understood as referring to the foundation of that institution: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24 NASB). In context the text is a comment on the creation of the first woman as a complementary partner for the first man: God forms the woman from part of the man’s body, and the woman is then in effect reunited to the man, making them “one flesh” (Gen.2:18-25). The manand the woman are thus two different but complementary halves that form a whole when united in marriage. There is no room in this articulation of the significance of marriage for a union of two males or of two females, or for marriages involving three or more persons. The location of this statement in the creation narrative (agreeing with and supplementing the earlier statement that God created humans “male and female,” 1:27) makes it function as a paradigm for marriage. Miller’s objection to this classic understanding is that the Jews from whom this text came practiced polygamy: “But as Segal says, if you believe that the Bible was written by men and not handed down in its leather bindings by God, then that verse was written by people for whom polygamy was the way of the world.” What this statement (with its hyperbolic caricature of the notion of biblical inspiration) really means is that the Bible is not allowed to offer a moral vision higher than that of the culture in which it originated. The argument presupposes not only that the Bible was not inspired by God, but that there were no visionaries, no prophets, no sages, who might express a higher view of marriage than the typical polygamous, patriarchal practice of the era.
    hermeneutically valid relevance to the question of what Genesis 1-2 teaches about marriage.The Old Testament explicitly teaches the worship of only one God, without idols, despite the fact that until the Babylonian Exile the Israelites often practiced the worship of many gods, with idols. It does not follow from the Israelite practice that the biblical texts condemning polytheism and idolatry do not mean what they say. The Old Testament condemns adultery, yet a lot of Israelites (including as honored a man as David) engaged in this activity as well. Should we then reinterpret the Old Testament to avoid the conclusion that adultery is universally wrong? I can see it now: in a few years, Newsweek will publish an article arguing that the Bible does not explicitly condemn all “extramarital affairs”—a term, it might well note, that does not even appear in the Bible. The biblical term adultery will be reinterpreted to refer to some narrower or more specific activity that postmoderns still find distasteful (assuming they can come up with something). Recent science will be adduced showing that sexual activity outside marriage has certain evolutionary benefits. We will be reminded that biblical literalism is intellectually and culturally moribund. Why not?
    Predictably, Miller appeals to the lack of any reference to same-sex relations in the Gospels as part of her case against the traditional view of marriage: “Jesus never mentions homosexuality, but he roundly condemns divorce (leaving a loophole in some cases for the husbands of unfaithful women).” Is it possible for anyone writing in defense of homosexual relationships not to resort to this argument from silence? The argument from silence is one of the classic informal fallacies, a flawed form of reasoning that incautiously draws inferences from someone’s silence on a particular issue as to their view on it. Jesus said nothing (recorded in the Gospels) about incest, pedophilia, or bestiality; what can be plausibly inferred from this “silence”? Nothing. If we had to guess, we should presume that Jesus probably held the same view of these behaviors as that of his Jewish contemporaries, which was that all such behaviors—including homosexual activities—were detestable. Nor do we need to resort to a fallacious argument from silence in reverse, arguing that if Jesus said nothing about these behaviors he must have disapproved of them. We have at least two lines of positive evidence from the Gospels for Jesus’ views of such matters (in addition to the relevant background information about the prevailing sexual mores of his culture). First, Jesus explicitly quoted Genesis 2:24 in addressing the question of divorce, demonstrating that he grounded his views on marriage and sexuality on the creational teaching of the Bible (Matt. 19:5, 6; Mark 10:8).
    Second, Jesus treated the entire Old Testament (what was at the time the entirety of Scripture) as the authoritative, infallible word of God. We can see this in his explicit statements about the nature of Scripture (e.g., Matt. 5:17-18; Luke 16:17; John 10:35) and in the way he quoted Scripture, often attributing the words of the text to God (e.g., Matt. 4:4;15:4; 22:29-32, 41-45; Mark 7:9-13). The Gospels’ reports about Jesus’ view and use of Scripture are consistent with his historical and cultural context, since in this regard Jesus would have had essentially the same view of Scripture as the Jewish rabbis of his day. We may therefore presume, given the above two lines of evidence, and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that Jesus would have agreed with the prevailing view in his native Jewish culture of such sexual behaviors as incest and homosexual relations. We know from Matthew 5:17-18 that he would have agreed that any moral teaching of the Old Testament remained in force. At the very least, it is clearly fallacious to infer that Jesus was, or even might have been, accepting of same-sex unions from the lack of any comment about homosexuality in the Gospels.
    t is customary for religious and theological argumentation that appeals to the Bible as the primary source to draw attention to secondary sources—commentaries, scholarly studies, reference works, and the like—to demonstrate that one’s handling of the Bible is in keeping with the findings of trained scholars. Miller does this in her article, which is perfectly appropriate. Unfortunately, though, she does so in ways that are highly misleading. For one thing, all but one of Miller’s secondary sources are cited in support—or at least apparent support—of her point of view. The only secondary source cited in support of the traditional man-woman view of marriage is a minister (Richard Hunter). Miller cites Hunter briefly toward the beginning of her article and spends the rest of the article refuting his traditional position. No scholars defending the traditional view appear in the article. The sources cited against this view are both scholarly and pastoral: Alan Segal, the Anchor Bible Dictionary (more on this one below), Neil Elliott, Walter Brueggemann, Rabbi Arthur Waskow, Rev. James Martin, Pastor Terry Davis, and Rev. Chloe Breyer. Are there scholars whom Miller might have consulted and quoted that support the traditional view? Of course, but one would never know this from her article. The classic fallacy of the appeal to authority is at work here, and in a “stacked deck” mode to boot. The clear intent is to give the impression (without saying so and thus being accountable for it) that current scholarship is uniformly on the side of legitimizing same-sex unions.
    Making matters worse, in some instances Miller cites these secondary sources in a highly misleading way. The most glaring example is her citation of the Anchor Bible Dictionary: In its entry on “Homosexual Practices,” the Anchor Bible Dictionary notes that nowhere in the Bible do its authors refer to sex between women, “possibly because it did not result in true physical ‘union’ (by male entry).” A discerning reader, noticing right away that the words “nowhere in the Bible” are not enclosed in quotation marks, and knowing that Romans 1:26 is in the Bible, may well suspect that the ABD does not make this sweeping statement. Such a reader will be correct. The context of the statement is an article on sexuality in the Old Testament; not one New Testament citation appears anywhere in the lengthy three-page dictionary article (Tikva Frymer-Kensy, “Sex and Sexuality,” ABD 5:1144-46). It is in this context of discussing the Old Testament that the article states, “Lesbian interaction, however, is not mentioned, possibly because it did not result in true physical ‘union’ (by male entry)” (1145-46)
    When Miller does give attention to the context in which biblical statements appear, her use of context is similarly selective and tendentious. In fairness, her argument here is not only unoriginal, it is ubiquitous (like the argument from Jesus’ silence) in polemics defending same-sexunions. It is the stock “Leviticus? You can’t be serious” argument: Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as “an abomination” (King James version), but these are throwaway lines in a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world, a text that devotes verse after verse to treatments for leprosy, cleanliness rituals for menstruating women and the correct way to sacrifice a goat—or a lamb or a turtle dove. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave? Well, then, while we’re tossing out Leviticus because it gives so much attention to matters of ritual, let’s be sure to toss out all of it. In the very chapters condemning homosexual acts (in 18:22 and 20:13), Leviticus also condemns incest (18:6-18; 20:11-12, 14, 17, 19-21), adultery (18:20; 20:10), child-sacrifice (18:21; 20:2-5), and bestiality (18:23; 20:15-16). The texts condemning homosexual acts are sandwiched immediately between texts condemning child-sacrifice and bestiality in chapter 18 (18:21-23) and between texts condemning different types of incest in chapter 20 (20: 12-14)
    In the intervening chapter, Leviticus contains what used to be its most famous injunction: “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (19:18), quoted by Jesus as the second of the two greatest commandments (Matt. 22:39; Mark 12:31, 33; cf. Luke 10:27). Leviticus 19 also commands the Israelites to respect their parents (19:3) and leave something in their fields for the poor to eat (19:9-10). They are not to steal, deceive, or lie to one another (19:11), oppress their neighbors (19:13), mistreat those with physical impairments (19:14), show partiality in judgment to the rich (19:15), spread slander or put other people’s lives in jeopardy (19:16), hate their brothers, or take revenge or bear grudges against others (19:17-18). The Israelites are not to degrade their daughters by making them prostitutes (19:29). They are to show honor to the elderly (19:32) and love foreigners like kin (19:33-34). They are to use honest weights and measures to avoid defrauding others (19:35-36). Granted that most contemporary readers will find a few of the injunctions in Leviticus 18-20 strange or inapplicable today, it hardly follows that we are justified in throwing out the lot. It would be fair to say that most people today would admit that at least most of those injunctions express moral values of relevance in our own society.
    The problem with this stock objection to the statements in Leviticus about homosexual conduct is not that it pays attention to their context but that it does not pay sufficient, close attention to their context. The argument is about as bad as reasoning that since the Gospel of Luke contains several parables, which are obviously fictitious stories (quite true), it follows that we should not regard anything in Luke as historical (quite nonsensical). The objection depends on a vague assessment of Leviticus as “peculiar” and “ancient” and therefore of no relevance to our enlightened and technologically advanced age, buttressed with selective references to elements in the book that may or may not have any direct connection to the statements about homosexuality. Much more could be said, but this is already a rather lengthy post (nearly as long as Miller’s article). I have discussed the biblical texts pertaining to homosexuality in more detail in a chapter on homosexuality in a book published over ten years ago. It’s interesting to see that the arguments and issues have not changed much in that time. The same fallacies continue to be repeated, necessitating that they continue to be answered."
    (more)
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 15:06:39 (edited)
    Zippcodey
    Nope it sure doesn't, just shows you how far some people will go to make something right in their minds.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 15:28:15
    TheHushedScreamer
    Actually, no. It shows just how far someone's willing to go to prove and demonstrate a point.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 15:30:32
    Zippcodey
    But they didn't prove anything except their lack of concept of what scriptures really teach.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 15:57:45
    TheHushedScreamer
    No, all the opposite. They demonstrated and proved that the Bible is viewed depending on the interpetation, since the Bible is SYMBOLIC and not LITERAL.
    Also, you're not proving anything either except the abundance of ignorance.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 20:19:15
    Zippcodey
    Ignorance is where you are coming from, which is lack of knowledge. Anyone can interpretate scriptures to there own end, but scriptures is totally against homosexuality, so no one can prove that it is ok, only in their own ignorant minds with lack of knowledge.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 20:41:32
    TheHushedScreamer
    That is where you're wrong.
    In the Bible, where it states that homosexuality is a sin, it also states that any person who divorce their partner and marry someone else is also commiting a sin, people who eat lobsters are also sinners, using birth control is detestable in God's eyes, eating porkrinds is a sin, tattoing yourself is a sin, and that no man shall be left alone (single), among other things.
    If all of this were also true, we'd all be going to Hell, or the "Lake of Fire" as you state.
    As you can see, most of the scriptures were written according to how the Jews of those times judged and based their beliefs. And, right now, they still follow all of these things, though WE don't.
    Ignorance is the lack of knowledge, true, but it's also the lack of realization. So, according to each of our P.o.Vs, we're both ignorant.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/10 20:51:14
    Zippcodey
    Great at least now I see you are stating the scriptures state that homosexuality is a transgression. Where before you were saying it didn't.

    Yes those are all transgressions, and yes, the Lake of FIre is the end of those who do not serve Yahweh. I can see that you dont know what is transgressions for the Lake of Fire and those that aren't.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/11 11:13:48
    TheHushedScreamer
    Have I ever refused it? No. I only tried to explain what the Bible meant by most of the references you gave me that supposedly states. That marriage is between one man and one woman only. Though, the Bible is misinterpreted and it may not actually mean that God, or Yahvveh or whatever, says homosexuality is supposedly a sin. Didn't you read the rest of my reply?
    You know, there's something I don't think you quite get: we're all sinners. We all sin every day. I gave you various examples of what the Bible considered a sn, and most of those things we do every day. So, I honestly don't get why you're going all anal because homosexuals "sin", when you do also.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/11 13:24:42 (edited)
    Zippcodey
    Who knows where you are coming from on it, one minute you are trying to stick up for it. Homosexuality is a trangression unto death, just like rape, murder, etc. Scriptures give the ones that are unto death.

    Leviticus 20:13
    13. If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

    Leviticus 18:22-30
    22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

    So when you try to make homosexuality look good by saying that everyone transgresses will never make it right. Transgressions that are unto death are unto death, so it does not matter which ones are done, they are still unto death. Just like when you go to court you have crimes that will get you the death sentence, so does it matter which one that you do? No, it still brings you a death sentence, so the end is the same. So your argument can't stand.

    I will tell you a secret that they have hidden from the world, Yahweh is the true Messiah's name, the only one that brings salvation. So a little rat poison mixed in with the good stuff still kills the rat.
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/13 22:55:32
    TheHushedScreamer
    If you followed the REST of what Leviticus said, you'd find out you sin, also. Leviticus is a book in the Bible that should not be trusted much, for it is written and based on the laws the Jews followed in those days and depended on what THEY thought was wrong.
    In Leviticus, it states that divorcing and remarrying is a sin and considered adultery. We all know adultery is in one of the Ten Commandments, so it means it'll also get you "a death sentence". Though, is that REALLY true? Will all remarried people go to "The Lake of Fire"? We both know that the answer's no, therefore, when you find me parts in the Bible where it states directly that homosexuality is a sin besides Leviticus and the Soddomah and Gomorrah story, then will you have an actual defense on your stance againts homosexuality.
    Heh, that what you think, because that's what your religion states. You talk to a Christian, they'll say it's Jesus. So it's not for sure that's his name,.
  • Zippcodey TheHush... 2012/04/13 23:10:02
    Zippcodey
    I must have a case.

    Romans 18:24-32

    24: Wherefore Yahweh also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

    25: Who changed the truth of Yahweh unto a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.

    26: For this cause Yahweh gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.

    27: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which as meet.

    28: And even as they did not like to retain Yahweh in their knowledge, Yahweh gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

    29: Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers,

    30: Backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

    31: Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

    32: Who knowing the judgment of Yahweh, that they which commit such things are worthy ...









    I must have a case.

    Romans 18:24-32

    24: Wherefore Yahweh also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

    25: Who changed the truth of Yahweh unto a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.

    26: For this cause Yahweh gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.

    27: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which as meet.

    28: And even as they did not like to retain Yahweh in their knowledge, Yahweh gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

    29: Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers,

    30: Backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

    31: Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

    32: Who knowing the judgment of Yahweh, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    1 Cor. 6:9-10

    9: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of Yahweh? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate (homosexuals), nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

    10: Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of Yahweh.

    11: And such WERE some of you; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of Yahweh, and by the Spirit of Yahweh.

    ISAIAH 5:20-21; 21. Woe to them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! 21. Woe to them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
    (more)
  • TheHush... Zippcodey 2012/04/14 17:00:49
    TheHushedScreamer
    Ok, first of all, there is no Chapterm 18 in Romans. Romans has up to 16 chapters. You meant chapter 1: 24-32.
    Ah. I know that verse all too well.
    Pay attention to this verse, in specific: "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers, backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful."
    As you can see, in this mentioning of sins, the homosexuality is not mentioned. Fornication, yes, and, in other words, adultery, also. Yet, their sexuality is not mentioned. Onle, "without natural affection", which is possible that it's not referred to as a bad thing, for homosexuality in those times was not natural nor normal.

    The other verse: "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.". It doesn't have to necessarily imply that homosexuality is bad. It may be referring to the fornication they have commited, because by fornicaqting they experience pleasure, no?

    On to 1Corinthians 6:9.
    When the verse mentions the effeminate, it may mean ...




    Ok, first of all, there is no Chapterm 18 in Romans. Romans has up to 16 chapters. You meant chapter 1: 24-32.
    Ah. I know that verse all too well.
    Pay attention to this verse, in specific: "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers, backbiters, haters of Yahweh, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful."
    As you can see, in this mentioning of sins, the homosexuality is not mentioned. Fornication, yes, and, in other words, adultery, also. Yet, their sexuality is not mentioned. Onle, "without natural affection", which is possible that it's not referred to as a bad thing, for homosexuality in those times was not natural nor normal.

    The other verse: "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.". It doesn't have to necessarily imply that homosexuality is bad. It may be referring to the fornication they have commited, because by fornicaqting they experience pleasure, no?

    On to 1Corinthians 6:9.
    When the verse mentions the effeminate, it may mean homosexuality, but there are PLENTY of effeminate men all ove rthe world that are not homsexuals,. Therefore, they're going to go to Hell for being effeminate?
    Remember: effeminate= (of a man or boy) having traits, tastes, habits, etc., traditionally considered feminine, as softness or delicacy; characterized by excessive softness, delicacy, self-indulgence, etc.

    Now, to Isaiah:
    That was directed to me, not the homosexuals. You say I'm disguising what's wrong with what's right, though, how can you be so sure it isn't YOU who is taking right for wrong and wrong for right?
    NOBODY can EVER be sure.
    (more)
  • The dea... Zippcodey 2012/04/10 02:43:40
    The dead and the silent
    +2
    Because there were no homosexual priests and pedophiles back in the medieval ages when the church ruled everything? Yeah, no.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/31 05:33:27

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals