It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Define Christianity as Hate - The New Homosexual Agenda

page: 19
55
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by sensible1
 


What part of Castrated do you not understand,, it means to REMOVE TESTICLES,, not the PENIS

asexual? what?

again, read the Wiki quote for the Information you need to understand the difference.
or go read what Jesus said ,,,, because that is where your point lay,,

He NEVER EVER SAID ONE THING ABOUT HOMOSEXUALS,,, EVER...

find a Red letter edition and show me a Jesus quote while he walked the Earth,, on Homosexuality,, you will not be able to do so,,
I am sure Jesus knew at least One gay person,,,, and could have said plenty,,, but did not.

Your hang up with Gay people is not the same as the attitude Jesus presented.

Sorry,, But you still are WRONG.

we can refer to the Greek language if you wish on this,, Latin? Castrate still will mean the same,,, to remove testicles,,, NOT THE PENIS.

Eunuch has multiple meanings regarding such measures.


I think you misunderstand the bible. In case you don't know, Jesus, whom you speak of, is the God of the old testament too. He said so Himself. Look it up.




posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


So,, we gays,, respect that religion,,, referring to the Islamic faith.

NOT ALL OF US!!

They can kiss my gay ars,, just like the Christians and Judaic bible thumpers who would rather that THEY COULD CHOP OFF OUR HEADS,,, have you seen lately these preachers preaching just that,,, come on now,,,

weak argument there.

Just because I am Gay does not make me Politically Correct,, Got that,, good. now we can move forward



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   


Seriously, if you cant see the difference the between love of one person and another person, and an object or animal, you need help.
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


But Barbara Streisand sings so many songs about unrequited loved! Can't I get married in a church to an inanimate object based on how I feel about it and not how it feels about me? If not, why not?
Bo**ocks to the civil partnership nonsense that the government has put it place. I wanna walk up the aisle of a church with my blow up doll/donkey/child/partner/hostage (regardless of gender) and be blessed by the authority in that church, because I want my relationship to be recognised and approved of by GOD because
I APPROVE OF IT.
How's that thought for ya?
Disgusting, I hope.
Do I still have the right to demand nothing I came onto this planet with and nothing I will take from it?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


Well CD i have to wonder. Why do we post in these threads.? Personally I have given up trying to sway anyone here because they are old and set in their ways. Its a pointless exercise in futility. Some of the members just post in these kinds of threads just because they get their jollies bashing anything they themselves do not like.

I have no trouble with people marrying the same sex. Thats between them and God. Each person is judged individually. It does no good to try to preach or reach out to them. They know where to go if they feel like they need a change. Free will is a gift and a curse at times is it not? So i propose we stop posting in these kinds of threads,turn the other cheek and let them do as they will.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucius Driftwood
 



Can't I get married in a church to an inanimate object based on how I feel about it and not how it feels about me? If not, why not?




Will it never end....

How is this even remotely analogous to two consenting human beings wanting to marry??

Do I support gay marriage? Yes. Do I support humans marrying pandas? No. Is this in conflict? No.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   
maybe i missed it in the bible where again does jesus talk against homesexuality?
and please no old testament. where does jesus himself talk against it?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mr3dboot
 


I think you misunderstand the bible. In case you don't know, Jesus, whom you speak of, is the God of the old testament too. He said so Himself. Look it up.

The prohibition re same sex union in the Old Testament was directed to a specific people within a specific historical context.

The issue was the genetic survival of Israel within a very hostile context...
...the social instructions including homosexuality were to this end...
...and these instructions were not intended for or directed to other than Israel.

Any comments by Paul in his letters to the churches must also be seen in this context...
...because Paul's primary concern was to not have any issue overshadow the Gospel story.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 

Maybe I should have been more clear when I said most. I mean the people that seem to hate homosexuals the most, the ones that just have this absolute unclear hatred for it, it seems to me the only reason for this behavior is because they themselves are scared because that is what they are. A good example come from the Bill Maher documentary Religulous, where the counselor who's job is to change gay youths into straight ones is clearly a homosexual himself. He has had multiple affairs with other men despite being "saved" by god and being married. He is just afraid to admit to himself what he truly is. People like this actually make me sad, because they are obviously confused as to why they have so much hatred towards people that never did anything towards them.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr3dboot

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by sensible1
 


snip snip to this.....
I think you misunderstand the bible. In case you don't know, Jesus, whom you speak of, is the God of the old testament too. He said so Himself. Look it up.


No,, I fully understand what the Bible says,, and I DO KNOW,, and thus am No Longer a 'christian'.

Proud to be Pagan here,, sir but still since I was brought up christian,, and studied to be a minister myself,, I find it very amusing that Christians look over what Jesus is really about (supposedly according to him)

Which is Love of your Fellow Man, and he stated very clearly that the LAW that was given to Moses was Only given because the Jews were so hard headed and ignorant of the ONE LAW that entails them all.

Do unto Others as you would have them do unto youself.

Now given that,,

How are any of you supposed Christians fulfilling that request by Jesus and Your God, when you continue to harass, beat, kill and do what you do to the Gay community.

Follow your Leader,,
Love us,,

and Let the Great Mystery called God sort it out,,,

Put yourself in our position,,, how would you wish to be treated,,, at least here in America??

It ain't really ANY OF YOUR BUSINESS what I do sexually,, but as an American,, when you start trampling on my RIGHTS as an American,, then we have a problem,,

you can not legislate my Morality, nor do you have any right to Judge me,,, given what your MASTER Jesus says,, Judge Not..

so get over it,, I don't want your religious rules,, nor anyone else's so.. Let us keep America Free of Religious bigotry masking itself as a moral absolute.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen23
 


I think you know how I personally feel about the subject. But in the interest of discussion, why not also allow Polygamists to have multiple partners? Isn't their rights the same? How about Pedophiles? Do they have rights to do whatever they choose?
This is a slippery slope. Marriage has been defined for centuries as between a man and a woman.

You want to be gay, you want to engage in sexual activity with someone of the same sex, that's your personal preference and I'll agree that it's between you and your creator. However, naming this as a "right" is completely silly and is nothing more than another attempt by leftist liberals in this country trying to force the beliefs of a tiny segment of America upon all 350 million of it's citizens, the majority of whom, overwhelmingly I might add, agree that marriage is between one man and one woman.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen23
 


Okay, I have to hang back and dredge you guys through a vast ammount of history asap. Let me put it this way...
The people who wrote the bible did it for a people group and nation that we are completeley alien to.
The authors of the bible had no idea that 2+000 years later, white westernised greco minded observors would read it. They ASSUMED that the people they were writing for (ie early centuary Jewish believers,) would understand it and interpret it through that mindset.
Your argument that 'Jesus said nothing about......' is a fallacy based on the ignorant notion that the bible/New Testament was written for us modern day 21st centuary post modern relative hipsters.
Talk about a totally wrong pair of glasses to read a book with!
If you choose to read an ancient Jewish text with post modern western morally relative eyes and mindset, you will read into EVERYTHING that you want to believe, and NONE of what is actually written.
Jesus was a 1st centuary observant Jew. He knew the law, He spoke and preached the law. He taught the law.
He was immersed in and spoke according to the law.
Example, woman caught in adultery (a sin punishable by stoning, just as homosexuality was). The difference is that Jesus chose to show GRACE..."Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". And when everyone left, what did He say to her? "Go, and SIN NO MORE".
Such is the grace of GOD. You can have grace, or you can have law ('An eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth' or 'Do unto others as you would have them do to you' are expressions of the same truth. One exhibits righteous requirements of the law, one offers grace. But SIN is still SIN.' What do you choose to do with your get out clause? Sin no more and be forgiven, or sin and continue to sin?
Free will is a bia*ch sometimes......



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by pacifier2012
The proves the homosexual agenda is one of bigtory and intolerance higher than that they claim others display toward them.

It's shows a sick state of the homosexual radical movement. They cannot handle anyone having a differing point of view so try to shut down any point of view that they don't like.

It isn't just bigotry and intolerance, it actually displays some deep seated mental instability or insecurity as well.

No if I didn't mention this we'd have a homosexual come on here and say "but Christianity this.... and these people that ..."

NO - we are not talking about others, we are looking at the homosexual agenda in 'light' of what they claim is displayed by others.

I will not take this nonsense as representative of my opposition's views. My side also has its paranoid posters that only post gibberish.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by erictcartman
reply to post by Believer101
 


ive tried to answer your points as best i can but you dont seem to want to admit that legislation to make gay marriage a human right would effectivly force churches to marry lgbt or face discrimination lawsuits for following their concience.
once again ill ask what about the christians right to follow church cannon


No you haven't. You haven't answered my questions at all, you just keep going off into something completely different. Marriage isn't defined by the church, nor is it legal until the GOVERNMENT acknowledges it. So, essentially, you can still get married without having the church's involvement period. Therefore, if marriage were legal, like it should be for everyone, church's still have the right to deny marrying someone based off their sexual orientation. They could STILL get married without the church's involvement at all.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   


How is this even remotely analogous to two consenting human beings wanting to marry?? Do I support gay marriage? Yes. Do I support humans marrying pandas? No. Is this in conflict? No.
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


.....Because it's my fricking choice in the land of the free to desire and pursue happiness as I see fit, and need the county, state and federal law to recognise that right and let me demand whatver my demands choose to demand.
How are you not getting this? Are you deeming some of my choices unhealthy or deviant?!?
How DARE YOU......



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood



Seriously, if you cant see the difference the between love of one person and another person, and an object or animal, you need help.
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


But Barbara Streisand sings so many songs about unrequited loved! Can't I get married in a church to an inanimate object based on how I feel about it and not how it feels about me? If not, why not?
Bo**ocks to the civil partnership nonsense that the government has put it place. I wanna walk up the aisle of a church with my blow up doll/donkey/child/partner/hostage (regardless of gender) and be blessed by the authority in that church, because I want my relationship to be recognised and approved of by GOD because
I APPROVE OF IT.
How's that thought for ya?
Disgusting, I hope.
Do I still have the right to demand nothing I came onto this planet with and nothing I will take from it?


You can do as you like. To try to make a rational comparison between the love of two people and the "love" of an inanimate object is fallacious at best, scary naive most likely, and nothing but propaganda at worst.

On top of that, to get married (for the most part), it takes two people WILLINGLY ENTERING INTO THE MARRIAGE. If you can prove your dildo willingly wants to marry you, feel free.
edit on 8-8-2012 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mr3dboot
 


I personally don't agree with Marriage PERIOD.. but for those who want it, and I understand procreation, nuclear family and all that,, what you miss is this.

Civil RIGHTS are not the same as Religious,, I would NEVER want to Be in,, much less be married by a religion that at its core,, hates me,,
but the STATE,, i.e. AMERICA is supposed to not force religious beliefs upon me,,
so,, I believe that given that GAY People should have the Right to Marry at the Justice of the Peace, like anyone else.
now force the Catholic church or any other church to marry ,, NO I DON"T AGREE WITH THAT.

but there is a difference,, and it is called Marriage at the Court house,, so what gives,, is it religious or civil???



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucius Driftwood
 



The authors of the bible had no idea that 2+000 years later, white westernised greco minded observors would read it. They ASSUMED that the people they were writing for (ie early centuary Jewish believers,) would understand it and interpret it through that mindset.


Exactly!

Because it was not God's omniscience guiding the words but men authoring it who didn't know the contextual relevance it might or might not have in the future.

Men wrote it. Exactly.

Now with that understanding drop the parts that are morally reprehensible.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Lucius Driftwood
Learn a little logic and critical thinking skills and you will not appear so silly. You committed en.wikipedia.org... . You are making the fallacy that if one is for gay marriage one is against all morals.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Benevolent Adversary
maybe i missed it in the bible where again does jesus talk against homesexuality?
and please no old testament. where does jesus himself talk against it?

Jesus criticisms were directed toward the religious elite.

Jesus came to save sinners...
...so if your homosexual practice is a sin then you qualify as one He came to save.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr3dboot
reply to post by EarthCitizen23
 


I think you know how I personally feel about the subject. But in the interest of discussion, why not also allow Polygamists to have multiple partners? Isn't their rights the same? How about Pedophiles? Do they have rights to do whatever they choose?
This is a slippery slope. Marriage has been defined for centuries as between a man and a woman.

You want to be gay, you want to engage in sexual activity with someone of the same sex, that's your personal preference and I'll agree that it's between you and your creator. However, naming this as a "right" is completely silly and is nothing more than another attempt by leftist liberals in this country trying to force the beliefs of a tiny segment of America upon all 350 million of it's citizens, the majority of whom, overwhelmingly I might add, agree that marriage is between one man and one woman.



We really are going through the propaganda playbook here. Homosexuality is in no way on par with pedophelia, or bestiality, or marrying an inanimate object. THERE IS NO CORRELATION between them.

And again, I have to wonder, why is it that we think marriage is only about sex? Why are we ignoring the LOVE factor?

Its as much of a "RIGHT" as it is for heteros to get married. Let's think about this. One group wishes simply to be able to marry. The other wishes to stop this, at all costs, based solely on their own beliefs.

Who is "Forcing" their belief on whom?



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join