Very recent epiphany, The gay rights movement has a very sinister agenda.

Yes you have it!
I MUST be a kiddy fiddler to get in heaven.
um? odd it seems priests molest little boys not girls?
no! they could never be guy, could they?

a reply to: Darth_Prime

Darth I wish you all the happiness of the world. But please keep it out of the classroom isn't that fair?

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

Everything you mentioned is being rightly addressed but the net that has been cast goes far beyond the items you mention and as a result we are seeing infringements in far more areas that should be left alone.

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: deadeyedick

I'm Harmful to society?

So, lets tell straight people to only be straight behind closed doors, oh and religious people? leave you crosses at home because lets ban them also...

I think you are not distinguishing between your self and the actions of a movement that is undermining our culture as a whole.

a reply to: deadeyedick

I think the only way that confusion could have come about there, between yourself and Darth_Prime, is if you were making the cardinal error of generalising so hard that any statement you made or theory you based upon that generalisation, became banal or ridiculous before you even uttered it.

Want to make a point? Refer to individuals, not movements, not agendas, not entire demographic groups, and I will bet this little problem never comes up again. Try it for a month. Trust me, you will never go back once you get used to it.

a reply to: TrueBrit
but I have no problems with the individual but together the fight against intolerance is taking us far beyond the place the individual wants to be. However there will rightfully be no back peddling on their part because that could result in losing ground in the fight.

I am railing on about unintended consequences and not individuals

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

What Classroom? Where?

a reply to: deadeyedick

Can you explain how it is Undermining your Culture?

a reply to: buddha

It's a travesty that any priest would do
That to any child. This is why it may be better for priests to be married.

a reply to: deadeyedick

And none the less, the very moment, the very instant you to begin to refer to people in groups, rather than as individuals, is the moment at which you fail to be able to speak accurately about them. There is, in truth, no Them. There is US, and each one of US is a human being. All other distinctions are secondary, and so we must do each other the service of referring to one another not as members of a demographic, but as people with needs, dreams, and pains of our own, rather than as mere intersections on a Venn diagram.

If there is no way to say what you want to say, without referring to demography, the chances are that it is not worth saying.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Hardly. This is the reason it would be better if child molesters were shot on sight, regardless of their social status.

Priorities people...

a reply to: Darth_Prime

Mostly through indoctrination the media does because they report on events as if everything revolves around the social issue of the day.

The biggest killer of morality is the pc crowd

It is a shallow tactic to tell yourself that someone is referring to specifically you as they address an entire culture.

If the weight of all this fell on the shoulders of one person then it could be dealt with.

Thinking that freedom means one can do absolutely anything they want and it will not effect everyone is wrong way to view our actions.

When a person presents themselves in a manner that screams "i have my stuff together" then that is far better than "i do what I want"

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: deadeyedick

I think the only way that confusion could have come about there, between yourself and Darth_Prime, is if you were making the cardinal error of generalising so hard that any statement you made or theory you based upon that generalisation, became banal or ridiculous before you even uttered it.

Want to make a point? Refer to individuals, not movements, not agendas, not entire demographic groups, and I will bet this little problem never comes up again. Try it for a month. Trust me, you will never go back once you get used to it.

Oh ok you want individuals? How about Kevin Jennings school safety czar teaching specific sexual techniques to teens in a public conference setting. Do you not think that is beyond the pale of moral decency in any society and why would you or anyone else condone it?

originally posted by: Gemwolf

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
...

I think the agenda the OP is speaking of is that early sustained exposure that children suffer.
...

With the suicide rate amongst of LGBT teens being 30%-40% don't you think it's time that kids also learn that it's fine to be homosexual?

Your statistic is absurd. I have known many gays throughout my life and not one of them has killed themselves.

a reply to: deadeyedick

That doesn't explain how Me or any GLBTQ+ person is Undermining your culture.

If someone said Religion is Evil wouldn't that include those that believe in it? if someone said Guns are Evil, and you owned a Gun wouldn't you think people are saying that if you own a Gun you fall into that Category?

So saying that GLBTQ+ is a threat to Society, wouldn't i assume you are Grouping me into it?

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Sure, let's have a thread on that individual and his behaviour. While we at at it though, let's see a thread on that where at no point are homosexuals in general, or a homosexual agenda are ever referred to!

See, I agree that Jennings should have been far less...graphic and should have probably avoided the entire discussion of technique, but that is an individuals failing, and not the failing of an entire demographic. So, in short, I agree with you. He may well be a butt-hat. However, the actions of an individual are THEIR OWN to account for, not for the entirety of the demographic, or demographics they fit into, to answer for.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: humanityrising

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: GoShredAK
Let me ask you something why do you cherry pick what is right and wrong from your religion?.

THIS.

If you're going to cite biblical law as your source for the sinfulness of homosexuality then you must include:

- eating shellfish
- eating pork
- women braiding their hair
- women wearing gold
- tearing clothes
- tattoos/piercings
- divorcing
- remarrying
- gossiping
- gluttony
- women speaking in church(that's a NEW testament one, absolutely no excuse to exclude it)
- playing American football(touching pig skin)
- wearing garments made with two or more kinds of material
- pulling out during sex
- want a DEATH penalty? Easy, just work on the Sabbath!
- round haircuts
- trimming your beard
- masturbating
- eating fat


Where is the outrage for these abominations? I have yet to hear a rebuttal to this as there is not a valid one. They just pick and choose which of God's laws to follow. It is the epitome of hypocrisy. I welcome responses from any Christians out there...any takers? Why is the unequivocal word of God read selectively?

AHem. Those(except the NT one) are part of HEBREW TRADITION not GENTILE TRADITION. WHole diffrent covenant and the reasons for it does not apply to anyhwhere but their homeland in the med. Where did you see th ewomen shall not speak in church at? Cite the verse please.

Jesus gave us three or four things to do as christians and if HE said it we are to do it. Im sure you can look up what he said for us to do. Its a typical cop out to use the Line no part of the law will fade away btw. Jesus fulfilled the law though and as such it still there but its not in force to non hebrews. How about actually read it and study it objectively without bias sometime.

As promised:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35, “As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church”

I'm sure you will make up some excuse for why no one follows this one but it's right there black and white.


Regarding how Jesus felt about old testament law, it seems you are the one who is copping out.

1) For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so.

2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasnt the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

3b) "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

3c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. (Matthew 15:4-7)

6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)

7) Peter says that all slaves should be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the good and gentle. This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

8) Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).

9) ...the scripture cannot be broken. --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: deadeyedick

That doesn't explain how Me or any GLBTQ+ person is Undermining your culture.

If someone said Religion is Evil wouldn't that include those that believe in it? if someone said Guns are Evil, and you owned a Gun wouldn't you think people are saying that if you own a Gun you fall into that Category?

So saying that GLBTQ+ is a threat to Society, wouldn't i assume you are Grouping me into it? [/qwww.abovetopsecret.com...

here is one example

a reply to: deadeyedick

That is a Poor example, unless you are trying to point out the Religious Tyranny some people support?