In Other Futile Events: Young "Pro-Marriage" Conservatives Plan March on DC..

reply to post by gncnew

Hi GNC

It seems to me that Equality For All means Equality for All means Equality for All means Equality for ALL, not just for what we laughingly refer to as 'the breeder population.'

As for the religious aspects to this discussion, you have homework to do, apparently.

The Hebrew word QADOSH means 'holy'; and QADOSHIM means literally 'holy ones' or 'sacred ones' i.e. sacred male prostitutes who cross dressed as women during fertility rites in the shrines that 'Sholomon' (i.e. the clan-chief Jedediah, son of David & the Jebusite princess Bath-Shebiti 'daughter of the 7 gods') built for their priests.

I believe the King James version did not know how to translated Qedoshim ('holy ones' / 'sacred ones') so they opted for 'Sodomomites' and later translations used 'temple prostitutes' when they came to the word.

see 1 Kings 15:11

" And Asa did good in the eyes of YHWH as his father David had done before him by expelling the 'Sodomites' (i.e. sacred male prostitutes) from Eretz Yisroe'l and removed the pagan idols the kings who reigned before him had made - and he exiled his own grandmother Ma'akah from her title as Queen Mother, because she had made caused Asherot (a set of 2 sacred trees on a 'high place' growing towards & around each other to make a vulva shape space between the trunks) to be made, that idol of ritual toq'ebah ('abominable thingy') - in fact, Asa cut it down and burned it in the Kidron Valley

And though he did not remove ALL of the pagan shrines to other foreign clan gods upon the hills [i.e. near the temple of YHWH] yet Asa’s heart was fully committed to YHWH until his death - he brought into the temple of YHWH the silver and gold and the articles that he and his father had dedicated to the god."

See 2 Kings 23:7

"And King Josiah also tore down the Shrines of the Qedoshim (male sacred prostitutes) which were installed WITHIN the Temple of YHWH."

This despite the command in the Torah not to create male qedoshim within the temple precincts

Deuteronomy 23:17 'None of the daughters of Israel may become temple prostitutes neither may anyone of the sons of Israel become sacred male prostitutes.'

The fact that Hebrew retains "QADOSH' ('holy, sacred') to refer to two males engaging in ritual fertility sex to Ashera and Ba'al and other non YHWH gods on a sacred altars WITHIN THE TEMPLE PRECINCTS is important - it was one part of the religion of ancient Canaan then later borrowed by the invading Yisro'elites when they began occupying 'the land'.

As for marriage between males, you only need read about David and Jonathan in 1 Samuel 20: 30 when the clan chief ('king') Saul found out what his little boy was doing with his boy's boy-toy David...

1 Samuel 18: 1ff


And after David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan's and David's souls were knit - so that he began to love David as his own soul.

(curiously perhaps, the Heb. NEPHESH means not only 'soul' or 'breath of life' but also refers to the 'throat' lips/mouth area or 'esophagus' or 'throat' ('nophesh') as in the Nephesh-She'ol i.e. 'soul of the grave' meaning gaping mouth ready to swallow the dead).

1 Sam 20:30

'Then Saul's anger raged forth at Jonathan his son and he spoke to him shouting "You son of a perverse and unnatural female ! Do you imagine I do not know that you have (lit. 'chosen to marry') with the son of Jesse to your own confusion (lit. 'cross-dressing') and to the confusion of the nudity of your mother ? If you persist in this activity, how will your Kingdom EVER be established ? ! " (i.e. by producing warriour princely sons; Jonathan's own son was 'lame in the feet' and could not walk....)

and 2 Samuel 1:26ff
.
Ah, how I grieve for you, my own brother in law Jonathan !
How precious you were in my sight !
Yea your love for me was full of wonder
far surpassing that of any mere female !"

The term 'homosexual' was not really coined in the literature until 1869 and even now is a disputed medical term in terms of its exactness (many gay men throughout the centuries have ben / are married and / or father children ; and many lesbians likewise throughout history were or are married and or give birth to children);

The Greek orthodox church (according to John Boswell) have a midnight ceremony for the "nupital rites of Sergius & Bacchus", i.e. homosexual marriage referring to the 2 homosexual saints who were martyred according to legend.

And as for 'the Disciple whom ho Iesous loved' in the 4th canonical Greek gospel ('according to John' whoever he was) , 'who leaned upon the breast of ho Iesous' at the Meal (possibly a kind of pre-passover meal, after all they were 'reclining' together, a position of the Passover meal) - tradition holds that this 'un-named disciple whom Jesus loved (!!)' was named Yohanon, i.e. John...

So, the Son of David has a relationship with another Jonathan !

reply to post by Sigismundus


What you have sited refers to the Israelite's falling into sin/sodomy/paganism and then repenting and expelling the whores. I fail to see your point. You are giving examples of sodomy being called sin and then done away with by righteous kings. The male prostitutes were holy to the pagans/sodomites religion not the Hebrew religion, I don't see how you failed to recognize that. The ancient greeks were sick pedophiles that is a known fact. The bible says it is a sin, it does not say that no Hebrew ever sinned, you are drawing some very weak conclusions based on what you want to believe. Also the word confusion in 1 Samuel 20 would be better translated as shame. So Saul is mad at the shameful acts of his son. How does this help your case?

Originally posted by begoodbees
reply to post by grainofsand

 

The public schools are an indoctrination machine that works in tandem with pop culture. That is why your child thinks the way he does. Glee anyone? Also it has long been acknowledged that homosexuality is often the result of sexual abuse. It spreads like a disease not genetically like hair loss. It is a dirty little secret that you will not see on the news. When pressed every homosexual that I know (friends/family) has admitted this to me. Up until the last decade or so it was still recognized as a mental illness. It was removed from the list due to political pressure, not because the facts have changed. Now these sick people cannot even get help because they are being told they are not sick. To top it off I will now be called a bigot even though most of the bigotry is coming from the gay lobbies, not the mentally and spiritually healthy people like me. There is much info on the subject available online and many books have been written by credible doctors/psychiatrists. www.home60515.com...

Oh pleeease! So you think all or most gay folks have 'caught' it by being molested, or experimented with it at school? Do you think YOU'D have 'caught' it if that had happened to you? Think about that for a moment... No, you don't think it would have turned you, I bet.

I don't know any of my gay friends who had such an experience. They all just either knew they were gay, or realised it shortly after puberty.

Gay people are borne from straight parents. They are surrounded by overwhelming heterosexual family, society and influences all though their childhood and adolescence. Despite that IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. Some people are gay, almost certainly born gay - GET OVER IT!

Throughout history gay people have been persecuted, tortured and killed. Not good to be gay even now in many countries. Has it stopped it? Has it gone away? A so-called "evolutionary dead end" that just won't die out...

Yeah, all these gay people getting married and stuff will bring the sky down on us all.

(I despair at this nonsense...)

reply to post by begoodbees


"Without ethics corruption runs rampant and then comes the fall."

You honestly think this world is devoid of corruption, without getting into the homosexuality squabble?

As the OP stated.. priorities, man, priorities. This world has so many issues, rampant corruption, and alas! We're still here!

'Selective biblical literalists' drive me up a wall. The same people preaching we shouldn't let gay people marry because the Bible says it's wrong have historically usually been wealthy capitalists, as well, yet you never hear them talk about the passage in the Bible where Jesus declares you should give all your money to the poor.. Matthew 19:21, "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven."

Curious, is it not?

My best friend when I was a child turned out to be gay. Him and I would play and jump around in the dirt and had relatively normal childhoods. We both come from families that ended in divorce, yet he stayed close with his father while I did not. Both our mothers are very sweet and caring people, though mine is a bit judgmental. James Dobson, famous evangelicalist and "family expert", claimed that homosexuality was a symptom of ones upbringing lacking a strong father figure and an unhealthy overbearing mother figure. If this were true, I should be a flamboyant and flaming homosexual. However, I ended up on the other side of the spectrum. Although I can be sensitive, I turned into a manly man, who played football and enjoyed smashing people's faces in, and love getting dirty, chopping wood, and building things just to destroy them. I've also had many, many girlfriends and I absolutely think women are the most perfect and beautiful creatures, especially compared to us men and our ugly a*ses. My best friend on the other hand, whose family I've always been jealous of due to their unflinching kindness and success (his mother was in the Army and worked for the DoD, nonetheless), realized in the beginning of high school that he was different. He didn't like girls the way his male classmates did. He came out to his family and they have never criticized him, they support him unconditionally. As do I.

We lost touch for a few years and when we reconnected for a family outing, his mother articulated to mine that he was quite worried I would not accept him after not being close for a while. On the contrary, upon seeing him and upon my departure I got in close and gave him great big giant hugs. Later on, his mother once again told mine that she had a wonderfully amazing son for me to be so great and accepting. And I tell you what, it felt GOOD, real good, to BE that accepting. In my heart, I know what true love is and means, I know what acceptance means, and I know what Jesus would want.

We have to understand that the people who have co-opted these so-called religious and Christian movements, the leaders, the ones everyone takes their cue from, are not true Christians. In fact, I believe they are destroying Christian values, whether intentionally or not, in the name of their religion. I do not even personally subscribe to any one organized religion, but I respect and recognize the value of each and every one, and the common line throughout each is a message of love, tolerance, and acceptance.

Make no mistake about it, this is a civil rights issue. Gay people who have lost their partners have had to give up businesses, homes, pensions, etc because they cannot marry the ones they love like the rest of us. It's disgusting for us to have let this go on as long as it has. It is no ones business who someone loves, male or female. And you have these bigots out there who claim such a perversion would allow others to marry their daughters, or sofas, or horses, well my question is.. Where are all those people? Why isn't their a movement of those who love their furniture? It's so completely ridiculous.

Love and acceptance will win out, I believe, despite the efforts of fascist troglodytes.

reply to post by begoodbees

Hi BeeBees

You Wrote:

QUOTE

“What you have sited [sic] refers to the Israelite's falling into sin/sodomy/paganism and then repenting and expelling the whores. I fail to see your point. You are giving examples of sodomy being called sin and then done away with by righteous kings.

The male prostitutes were holy to the pagans/sodomites religion not the Hebrew religion,

I don't see how you failed to recognize that.“

UNQUOTE

I believe the word you are looking for is ‘cited’.

I’m not sure how much you know about ancient preExilic Yisro’elite cults in Canaan, but one of my points was to show that even the post Exilic Hebrew priests – long after the practice had been abolished after the period of the reorg following Babylonian Invasions (c. 587-531 BCE) still used the technical term QEDOSHIM (‘sacred ones’) to refer to Sacred Male Temple Sodomites – though admittedly later writers used the term for ‘dogs’ to refer to males who get paid for sex with their clients.

See Deut 23:17-18 – written in the same Hebrew language style of Jeremiah c. 560 BCE

("There shall be no sacred prostitutes among the daughters of Israel, nor Qedoshim (‘holy ones’) among the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the fee charged by whores, or the fee charged by dogs into the house of your clan god YHWH for any vow: for even both these are ritually Toq’ebah to YHWH your clan god.”)

In other words, for centuries in Yisro’el PRIOR to the Exile, ritual Sodomy was instituted from the time of Sholomon (Jedediah) and Reheboam

i.e. from the beginning of the Yahweh Temple cult

(just as the Pagan Bronze Snake Idol was standing in the Middle of the Temple of YHWH for 400 years prior to Hezekiah’s reforms)

–and it was only AFTER Ezra’s reforms (c. 440 BCE) that e.g. the wife of YHWH (Asherah) and the practice of male Sodomy upon the altar of YHWH become forbidden.

It was during this later period that most of the Hebrew Scriptures were written down and edited and re-edited

(e.g. ‘and Asa did good in the sight of YHWH…and Manasseh did bad in the sight of YHWH’ – later propaganda editing at its worst.

You later wrote, QUOTE

"The bible says it is a sin, it does not say that no Hebrew ever sinned, you are drawing some very weak conclusions based on what you want to believe.

Also the word confusion in 1 Samuel 20 would be better translated as shame. So Saul is mad at the shameful acts of his son. How does this help your case?”

UNQUOTE

You’ve missed the points I was trying to make, apparently; that David & Jonathan were having a full on physically consummated homosexual relationship –and Saul’s anger was only the result of Jonathan wasting his seed on David when he should be making sons for the kingdom.

And this very same David (in one of his bi-sexual moods !) had an adulterous affair with a Jebusite Princess producing a bastard that died from a fever, and had Uriah the Hittite murdered to make room for her.
So this Great ‘king’ was a Bisexual Adulterous Murderer who defected to the Philistines for 7 years ! '

‘Behold, David, a Man After My Own Heart’ indeed ! Tells us something abour YHWH’s own morals !

But back to 1 Samuel 20:30

'You son of a perverted, mounting female ! Do you imagine that I do NOT know that you have 'chosen-to-marry' that son of Jesse, to the CONFUSION (exposure?) of your MOTHER'S NUDITY and TO YOUR OWN CONFUSION? As long as this Son of Jesse is walking the earth, your position won't be solidified---nor your [future] kingdom ! “

So many homosexual words in so short a space when talking about David/Jonathan, oh my !

First there's this PERVERSION thingy (naughty naughty...) then there's this 'rebellious woman' phrase (refering to the Sexual Position of the Mounting Female aka Lilith/Lillitu, reflected in the Apocalypse of Yohanon aka Book of Revelation with the Whore of Babylon who (sexually) MOUNTS the RED Beast

(in Greek the term in the 'Book of Revelation' actually means 'where the female sexually positioned on top') i.e. in a sexually 'perverted' position.

Rebbes 'back in the day' used to teach when a female mounted a male in sex (i.e. got on top) any child born of the intercourse would be 'perverted' (if a girl she would act like a boy, if a boy, he would act like a girl),

So Saul the King is here accusing Jonathan of being 'the son of a perverted top-mounting female' in other words, a kind of 'pansy' (what the British would call a NANCY BOY) for doing the deed with David (at least he believed they were exchanging alot more than just underwear or holding hands !.)...

לחצות הלבשה = leTatzot haLebushah in Rabinnic writings has to do with cross-dressing (i.e. confusion) -

FYI: the Heb. root BASHAR can mean 'confusion', 'disgrace' 'exposure' 'humiliation' 'degradation' 'shame' etc. and often carries with it the connotation of the exposure of nakedness.

reply to post by Sigismundus


Wow, you are still missing the point. Everything you are presenting is proof that the Hebrew faith (the bible) is against homosexuality.

reply to post by PatriotGames2


wow you are missing the point and ignoring the facts and many studies done by people much smarter than you and me. put words in my mouth if you choose but what have I stated is accurate. you explained what you believe to be true but it is not based on anything other than what you were programmed by the educational system or the boob tube. the facts have not changed, the political and social climate has, that's all. Did you check the link I provided, of course not because you don't want to know the facts you want to stick to your preconceived notions. Show me a scientific study that disproves the link between sexual abuse and homosexuality from a credible non gov source and then we can talk. I was in fact molested by two older boys at different times and do you want to know where they learned that behavior? Well I am going to tell you anyways. They were molested by male adults. I never said that everyone who is molested turns gay, I said most of the time it is caused by sexual abuse. That may have changed slightly since our society is pushing it on the youth now and calling it an acceptable lifestyle and it is being glamorized in the media but no one is borne that way. Or at least there is no evidence to support that theory. Also, being sexually abused isn't something most people want to admit too or talk about. I did not tell anyone until I was in my thirties because I was ashamed. Now I am only ashamed of our society for promoting such behavior on children. The boys who molested me were victims and yes it spread to me like a disease. They weren't born with the will to molest me it was learned behavior. So lets get real here why don't we.

reply to post by begoodbees

Hi Beebee--

You wrote QUOTE

"Wow, you are still missing the point. Everything you are presenting is proof that the Hebrew faith (the bible) is against homosexuality."

UNQUOTE

Well, I would first have to ask you 'which Hebrew faith' because there were several dozen of them over the centuries as they morphed into a kind of watery monotheism over time...

Are you speaking about pre-Assyrian Hebrew cults found all over the north e.g. at Dan and Gibeon, and Shechem and Shiloah and Gilboa and Mitzpah and Bethel just to name a few? If so you would have to explain why YHWH was always worshipped in these shrines alongside other deities e.g. Bull-EL or Ba'al or the goddess Asherah? i.e. pre 721 BCE

Or are you speaking of the various Judaiesms of the preExilic (pre 531 BCE) in the south with the Temple of YHWH upon Mt Moriah?

If so, then you would have to explain the presence of more than 450 years of sacred male temple prostitution within the precincts of the Temple of YHWH from 1000 BCE onwards...i.e. the Qedoshim, lit. 'the holy ones' and the fact that a pagan Midianite Bronze Snake Idol was placed ON A POLE in the Holy of Holies for just as long, attributed to Mosheh (see Numbers 21:7)

If you are talking about post Exilic Judaeisms, then which one of the many Judaeisms are you speaking about ? The Samaratim and their sacred 'Jewish' Temple at Gerazim and their own older verison of the Torah ? The type of Mesianism practiced by the Dead Sea Qumran Covenanters and their own books which do not match modern day 'rabinnic' Judaeism today?

or are you speaking about the Tsaddukkim (aka Saduccees) who ran the 2nd Temple as a multi million dollar for-profit business? Perhaps you are referring to the type of Judaism practiced by the Armed Hashmonean Vigilante's during the socalled Macabbean Revolt of 164 BCE?

Or maybe any one of several Galilean varieties of Judaiesm practiced way up in the Circle of Gentiles (haGilgal haGoyim) up in the north (aka The Gailiee) ?

Why would anyone familiar with the history of the Levant refer to the 'Hebrew faith' in the singular, when it is patently obvious that (like the many Christianities practiced in the first 3 centuries of the common Era) there were half a dozen DIFFERENT 'Hebrew' faiths being practiced at the same time throughout antiquity in various places in the Levant ?

I'm not sure you quite understand the 'big picture' yet - but you will after this discussion is over !

reply to post by Sigismundus


There is really no debate to be had here. There is one law that they were all given and of course that is what I am talking about. Lets not split hairs. This is simple, the bible is clear. Your big picture is a distorted and dishonest one. Sometimes they fell into paganism and that is why they had asher poles and the like. No where does the bible say that it was ok. Yes it happened but only when they were turning away from God and the law. Try reading the bible instead of books about the bible and things will become a little more clear possibly.

Originally posted by begoodbees
reply to post by PatriotGames2

 

They weren't born with the will to molest me it was learned behavior. So lets get real here why don't we.

edit on 25-3-2013 by begoodbees because: (no reason given)

@begoodbees

Exactly. They learnt how to molest, not 'how' to be gay. Did they grow up to have happy, fulfilling gay relationships? Probably not. They probably didn't grow up gay at all, but it would be interesting to know for sure.

How come you think most gay people become gay because of being sexuality abused - presumably as youngsters? If this were the true, there would be mountains of irrefutable evidence. Every gay person would have a disturbing horror-story of abuse. This is simply not the case, as I'm sure many on this forum would testify.

When it comes to studies to prove a point, both you and I know anyone can select a study to 'prove' something. There is nearly always some flaw in its procedure, usually centred around misinterpretations of results which have been extrapolated out by those untrained in statistics, but keen to make their results fit what they believe!

Anyway a general point, people under about 30 who have had a broad and un-fanatical upbringing just don't give a flying **** about whether someone is gay or not; those that do, have just learnt prejudice. It's a preoccupation of a few over 50s, in the same way my parents thought mixed-race marriages 'were not right' 50 or 60 years ago.

If anything is going to bring down civilization, it's already been said here that homosexuality is WAAYYYY down the list! And as to anyone thinking it will lead to a population collapse, well with over 7 billion people in the world, I reckon some no-breeding would do no harm at all.

And by the way, I believe any unwanted or inappropriate sexual contact between people is reprehensible. When this happens to a child this is a criminal offence, and rightly so.

Mrs Chicken

reply to post by rubberchicken

It all goes hand in hand I believe is what the original comment was about. And of course any studies that disagree with your opinions are faulty. It is strange to me how on topics like this, common sense and normal protocols are thrown out the window in favor of speculation and conjecture. It is also proven that the vast majority of "happy, healthy gay relationships" are rather short lived in comparison to the conventional relationships which implies to me that they are not really so happy or healthy.
“We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't it is easier to ignore the facts than to change the preconceptions.”

Jessamyn West quotes (American Writer, 1902-1984)

Originally posted by begoodbees
reply to post by rubberchicken

 

It is also proven that the vast majority of "happy, healthy gay relationships" are rather short lived in comparison to the conventional relationships which implies to me that they are not really so happy or healthy.

"Proven" by whom? When? Anyway...

Hearing that that perception is particularly interesting to me, because last month I spoke to a registrar who officiates at civil partnerships, which were introduced across the UK in 2004.

He was under the same impression as you. i.e. That since most men are supposedly naturally promiscuous (given the opportunity) that there wouldn't really be a demand for that many male same-sex ceremonies; stereotypical gay men just go off having sex all the time - apparently - without wanting/needing a sharing, loving one-to-one relationship. (You know, the joke: Q: What do gay men do on their second date? A: What second date? Q: What do lesbians do on a second date? A: Go to Ikea to buy furniture together!)

Anyway what he and his colleagues were extremely surprised by was the fact that not only were there so many gay male couples that wanted to "tie the knot", but that so many had been together in their monogamous relationships already for many years, sometimes decades.

So I think that evidence from real life rather blows away the myth that gay men live miserable lonely lives. Yes, a few do, but that's hardly the monopoly of homosexuals now is it?

I very much doubt that you know as many gay men as I do. My brother is gay, in his 50s and has been in a monogamous relationship for 12 years. And one before that for 10 years. In fact our gay friends have been in stable relationships for as long as most of our straight friends. Actually, many of our straight friends haven't done quite as well.

Familiarize yourself with the facts. Get out there, get to know lots of real gay people leading real, ordinary lives and stop reading reports backed by Christian "Family" groups with axes to grind - as if gay people just fell out of the sky and didn't actually come from real families themselves!

We are now well into the 21st century. How about some informed opinions based on experience and just not "what everyone knows".

reply to post by begoodbees


Yeah, you stick to your facts, buckaroo.

I respect your opinion although it is completely distorted and hope you have a change of heart somewhere down the line.

It seems to me based on your stated personal experience you have one hell of a bias regarding this issue and maybe some things to work out.

Nonetheless I hope you find peace and all I can say is be careful who you judge.

Originally posted by gncnew
Now, the family unit stuff... yeah, I agree. But I think that has less to do with sexuality and more to do with selfishness and a few lazy self-entitled generations that have been fed the secret to happiness is "dolla dolla bills y'all"

It's just plain old materialism.

Isn't the first time to happen, and won't be the last.

Homosexuality becomes an easy target for correlation/causation only because a certain level of equality is required to encounter materialism.

So, history will show an equality movement, a rise in homosexuality (really just a rise in reported homosexuality due to more equality), then a collapse. That tends to make people believe that the rise in equality and homosexuality caused the collapse, when they were nothing more then parts of the equality stage of the movement.

Once materialism sets in, you run into the issue of having a persons worth determined by what they own not by what they contribute...at that point, start counting down to collapse.

Materialism was not the only outcome, it is unfortunately, the easiest outcome. It plays to many of our base needs and psychology.

So, to recap: homosexuality will often get mislabelled as part of a collapse, when it is simply a symptom of the conditions that provided the opportunity to go down the path of collapse...if that makes any sense.

So I guess no body looked at my link or even tried to find any info on their own. There is lots of info and many studies have been done. So I suppose almost every person and every civilization in world history are wrong and modern liberal propaganda is the only real truth huh? I am sorry to have wasted my time presenting facts and truth. Here is a famous quote for you. “We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't it is easier to ignore the facts than to change the preconceptions.”

Jessamyn West quotes (American Writer, 1902-1984)

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MrSpad

 

However, the tide has turned and the bigots are slowly crawling into their holes. Nobody wants to be the last person with a whites only water fountain.

The fact just about anyone who doesn't simply tolerate but enthusiastically embrace it is classified by such offensive and outright hateful terms are why the feelings are growing hard where they weren't before ..and getting harder where they never needed to be.

A fight for rights is on the edge if not already well over into getting downright spiteful and when those getting hateful represent well under 10% of this nation's population, it's not a position to be doing that from, IMO. We can all have equality but that really needs to come with some respect for each others differing points of view and levels of acceptance.

I don't believe tolerance can be optional in a civilized society. Open acceptance though? That's a whole different animal and one which cannot be forced. That's a matter of each individuals own feelings, which are each person's to hold without having to get grief over it. The attempts to force acceptance beyond tolerance from all are more self-defeating in the long run than I think some realize now.

With all due respect Wrabbit.
The me me me only comes in when basic rights
are being violated. Nobody says those opposed have to like it.

But to have individuals, who are not directly affected by gays beings married,
halt another's right to the same rights that straight people have is neither
Christian nor based in "freedom".

And putting up with the radical views of a small percentage running the show
is something that happens everyday in the House of Reps.
Where progressive votes out number the conservatives by millions,
but the representation is skewed towards the tea partys minority views.

Originally posted by begoodbees
So I guess no body looked at my link or even tried to find any info on their own. There is lots of info and many studies have been done. So I suppose almost every person and every civilization in world history are wrong and modern liberal propaganda is the only real truth huh? I am sorry to have wasted my time presenting facts and truth. Here is a famous quote for you. “We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't it is easier to ignore the facts than to change the preconceptions.”

Jessamyn West quotes (American Writer, 1902-1984)

Actually I did look at the website you posted: home60515.com...

Some quotes from Wikipedia about it:

HOME's main goal is to oppose LGBT rights and to criminalize homosexual relations [How the f*** are they gonna do that? Oh yeah, cameras in EVERY bedroom!]. The group purports that if homosexuality remains legal, then "necrophilia and pedophilia may become legal activities". [Eh?]

Hate group designation:

On November 22, 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) designated the Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment (HOME) as an anti-gay hate group "based on their propagation of known falsehoods". According to the SPLC, Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment "is entirely focused on the alleged evils of homosexuality [and] attacks gay people on a wide variety of levels".

Some quotes I found about this rather peculiar, fanatical and obsessed "HOME" website:

"As much as the entire site makes them look like typical fundie morons, the Freemason connection is the icing on the cake."

"I'm in awe of the total lack of critical thinking skills here. It's a like a poor high-school essay."

The info on website founder, Wayne Lela, reads like the the Fred Phelps of quack psychiatry - completely obsessed by homosexuality. Pretty unhealthy I should imagine!

So, begoodbees, your posting this crazy site just completely undermines your credibility and arguments.

There are real horrors going on in this world that you and those like you should be redirecting your not insignificant energies to address, rather than obsessing over what consenting adults do in private.

Originally posted by begoodbees
reply to post by grainofsand

 

The public schools are an indoctrination machine that works in tandem with pop culture. That is why your child thinks the way he does. Glee anyone? Also it has long been acknowledged that homosexuality is often the result of sexual abuse. It spreads like a disease not genetically like hair loss. It is a dirty little secret that you will not see on the news. When pressed every homosexual that I know (friends/family) has admitted this to me. Up until the last decade or so it was still recognized as a mental illness. It was removed from the list due to political pressure, not because the facts have changed. Now these sick people cannot even get help because they are being told they are not sick. To top it off I will now be called a bigot even though most of the bigotry is coming from the gay lobbies, not the mentally and spiritually healthy people like me. There is much info on the subject available online and many books have been written by credible doctors/psychiatrists. www.home60515.com...

Roman soldiers used to have sex with each other when out on campaign, as did Trojans and many other armies.

They were all abused too?

What if you took away the last 500 years of the Church's influence, and the repressed sexuality practices that have led SO many in the cloth to abuse kids along with all kinds of other fun things...

You still think it would be because people were abused? What about bisexual women, come on, "I kissed a girl and I liked it.."

Girl-on-Girl porn has been around and enjoyed by 'strait' men since pictures could be taken.... what about those girls? They all abused kids too? What about the guys who like to look at it... are they abused?

Here's what I think. Sexual desires take many forms. In modern culture we've become so wrapped up in trying to label everything and classify what's normal or not that we've made it impossible to operate freely with out some kind of boogy man looming behind you because you're breaking the social norm... and OH GOD please let us fit in!!!

Originally posted by Sigismundus
reply to post by gncnew

Hi GNC

It seems to me that Equality For All means Equality for All means Equality for All means Equality for ALL, not just for what we laughingly refer to as 'the breeder population.'

As for the religious aspects to this discussion, you have homework to do, apparently.

I dont want to do that much research, but I'm not doubting you a bit. The current flavor of Christianity seems rather obsessed with sex imo. Odd that they see this as the great downfall and not a pure lack of love and compassion as the Son taught...

Originally posted by Sigismundus
reply to post by gncnew

Hi GNC

It seems to me that Equality For All means Equality for All means Equality for All means Equality for ALL, not just for what we laughingly refer to as 'the breeder population.'

As for the religious aspects to this discussion, you have homework to do, apparently.

The Hebrew word QADOSH means 'holy'; and QADOSHIM means literally 'holy ones' or 'sacred ones' i.e. sacred male prostitutes who cross dressed as women during fertility rites in the shrines that 'Sholomon' (i.e. the clan-chief Jedediah, son of David & the Jebusite princess Bath-Shebiti 'daughter of the 7 gods') built for their priests.

I believe the King James version did not know how to translated Qedoshim ('holy ones' / 'sacred ones') so they opted for 'Sodomomites' and later translations used 'temple prostitutes' when they came to the word.

see 1 Kings 15:11

" And Asa did good in the eyes of YHWH as his father David had done before him by expelling the 'Sodomites' (i.e. sacred male prostitutes) from Eretz Yisroe'l and removed the pagan idols the kings who reigned before him had made - and he exiled his own grandmother Ma'akah from her title as Queen Mother, because she had made caused Asherot (a set of 2 sacred trees on a 'high place' growing towards & around each other to make a vulva shape space between the trunks) to be made, that idol of ritual toq'ebah ('abominable thingy') - in fact, Asa cut it down and burned it in the Kidron Valley

And though he did not remove ALL of the pagan shrines to other foreign clan gods upon the hills [i.e. near the temple of YHWH] yet Asa’s heart was fully committed to YHWH until his death - he brought into the temple of YHWH the silver and gold and the articles that he and his father had dedicated to the god."

See 2 Kings 23:7

"And King Josiah also tore down the Shrines of the Qedoshim (male sacred prostitutes) which were installed WITHIN the Temple of YHWH."

This despite the command in the Torah not to create male qedoshim within the temple precincts

Deuteronomy 23:17 'None of the daughters of Israel may become temple prostitutes neither may anyone of the sons of Israel become sacred male prostitutes.'

The fact that Hebrew retains "QADOSH' ('holy, sacred') to refer to two males engaging in ritual fertility sex to Ashera and Ba'al and other non YHWH gods on a sacred altars WITHIN THE TEMPLE PRECINCTS is important - it was one part of the religion of ancient Canaan then later borrowed by the invading Yisro'elites when they began occupying 'the land'.

As for marriage between males, you only need read about David and Jonathan in 1 Samuel 20: 30 when the clan chief ('king') Saul found out what his little boy was doing with his boy's boy-toy David...

1 Samuel 18: 1ff


And after David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan's and David's souls were knit - so that he began to love David as his own soul.

(curiously perhaps, the Heb. NEPHESH means not only 'soul' or 'breath of life' but also refers to the 'throat' lips/mouth area or 'esophagus' or 'throat' ('nophesh') as in the Nephesh-She'ol i.e. 'soul of the grave' meaning gaping mouth ready to swallow the dead).

1 Sam 20:30

'Then Saul's anger raged forth at Jonathan his son and he spoke to him shouting "You son of a perverse and unnatural female ! Do you imagine I do not know that you have (lit. 'chosen to marry') with the son of Jesse to your own confusion (lit. 'cross-dressing') and to the confusion of the nudity of your mother ? If you persist in this activity, how will your Kingdom EVER be established ? ! " (i.e. by producing warriour princely sons; Jonathan's own son was 'lame in the feet' and could not walk....)

and 2 Samuel 1:26ff
.
Ah, how I grieve for you, my own brother in law Jonathan !
How precious you were in my sight !
Yea your love for me was full of wonder
far surpassing that of any mere female !"

The term 'homosexual' was not really coined in the literature until 1869 and even now is a disputed medical term in terms of its exactness (many gay men throughout the centuries have ben / are married and / or father children ; and many lesbians likewise throughout history were or are married and or give birth to children);

The Greek orthodox church (according to John Boswell) have a midnight ceremony for the "nupital rites of Sergius & Bacchus", i.e. homosexual marriage referring to the 2 homosexual saints who were martyred according to legend.

And as for 'the Disciple whom ho Iesous loved' in the 4th canonical Greek gospel ('according to John' whoever he was) , 'who leaned upon the breast of ho Iesous' at the Meal (possibly a kind of pre-passover meal, after all they were 'reclining' together, a position of the Passover meal) - tradition holds that this 'un-named disciple whom Jesus loved (!!)' was named Yohanon, i.e. John...

So, the Son of David has a relationship with another Jonathan !

edit on 25-3-2013 by Sigismundus because: stutteringggg keyyboarddddd