Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[GFR7]

Steve Baldwin, who is the former Executive Director of the Council for National Policy, a former State Assemblyman in California, and a longtime conservative Republican activist, wrote a great article entitled:

Why Are Media Conservatives Promoting Homosexual Propaganda?

Nov. 14, 2014

Over the last few years we have witnessed a headlong rush by many conservatives in the media in support of various aspects of the homosexual agenda. Some were socially liberal all along and some appear to be pushed into such a position due to pressure upon them by their colleagues or the media corporations they work for. Regardless, it is disturbing to witness their willingness to go along with this trend without even questioning the cultural impact such issues will have. Frankly, it is embarrassing how ignorant many of “our” conservative media stars are when it comes to the homosexual agenda.

Indeed, even Fox News has ignored huge stories that reflect negatively on the homosexual movement and the few times they do cover such stories, it is oftentimes inaccurate or incomplete. I wince as I watch Bill O’Reilly, Tucker Carlson, Dana Perino, Bernie Goldberg, Mary Catherine Hamm, Megyn Kelly, Shepard Smith, Margaret Hoover and others use the same arguments used by the homosexual community even to the point of using the exact same phrases and buzz words. They should know better.


For example, many media conservatives happily use the term “gay” or “gay rights” and the phrase that he or she “has come out of the closet.” However, such wording assumes people are born homosexual, a myth that not even the pro-homosexual American Psychiatrist Association will support anymore. After years of research, dozens of pro-homosexual scientists have failed to find the homosexual gene and the few that did claim to find it were later discredited for engaging in fraudulent or sloppy methodology. Moreover, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, enlisted over 150 of the world’s top geneticists to decode the human genome and they could not find a “gay” gene. It simply does not exist.

Let’s be clear here so that the Fox News crew understands. No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period. No one “comes out of the closet.” Rather they are simply choosing to publicize their homosexual behavior. Further evidence that homosexuality is NOT genetic is the fluidness of homosexual behavior. As many as a third of homosexuals revert back to heterosexuality as Kinsey, Masters & Johnson and numerous other liberal sex researchers have all reported.

Moreover, the very existence of thousands of ex-homosexuals in America demonstrate how tentative homosexuality really is. And yes, due to the addictive nature of homosexual behavior, some ex-homosexuals do relapse just as some drug addicts, alcoholics and others enslaved to addictive behaviors do. No big surprise here.

Read more: http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/2014/11/media-conservatives-promoting-homosexual-propaganda/

You've heard those words in this thread many times, and you'll continue to hear them:

"No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period."

There are plenty of people who call themselves "anti-gay" and "anti-gay marriage".

No one uses the term "homosexual" unless they are well over 50. It's a semantics problem.

A generation gap issue, as it were.

"Know what I mean, aCW???"

 

[alwight]

For example, many media conservatives happily use the term “gay” or “gay rights” and the phrase that he or she “has come out of the closet.” However, such wording assumes people are born homosexual, a myth that not even the pro-homosexual American Psychiatrist Association will support anymore. After years of research, dozens of pro-homosexual scientists have failed to find the homosexual gene and the few that did claim to find it were later discredited for engaging in fraudulent or sloppy methodology. Moreover, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, enlisted over 150 of the world’s top geneticists to decode the human genome and they could not find a “gay” gene. It simply does not exist.

Let’s be clear here so that the Fox News crew understands. No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period. No one “comes out of the closet.” Rather they are simply choosing to publicize their homosexual behavior. Further evidence that homosexuality is NOT genetic is the fluidness of homosexual behavior. As many as a third of homosexuals revert back to heterosexuality as Kinsey, Masters & Johnson and numerous other liberal sex researchers have all reported.

Utter twaddle aCW, this is just more lies and typical misinformation.
Francis Collins and his colleagues weren't even looking for a gay gene. Their task was to sequence the whole human genome, a massive task on its own, not to understand exactly what all the genetic information did.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/edexcel_pre_2011/genes/dnarev3.shtml

 

[alwight]

No one uses the term "homosexual" unless they are well over 50. It's a semantics problem.

The word is nevertheless "homosexual". Younger people at least will simply accept that some people are just born that way, no big deal, but not aCW of course being the aging gay in denial that he is.
aCW apparently claims that he can choose to be homosexual or heterosexual at will, so clearly then only a bisexual who loathes his gay side would think that way, that or a rather determined long term Poe.

 

[serpentdove]

Surely you're not implying that those in the LGBT so-called "community" are intolerant of anyone that doesn't follow their goosestep marching orders are you serpentdove?

No, of course not. We tolerate them. We do not tolerate their sin. They don't tolerate us or our Christian theology.

Lev 18:22, 20:13, 1 Ki 14:24, Ro 1:24, 26, 27 :vomit:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
...You've heard those words in this thread many times, and you'll continue to hear them:

"No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period."

There are plenty of people who call themselves "anti-gay" and "anti-gay marriage".

No one uses the term "homosexual" unless they are well over 50. It's a semantics problem.

A generation gap issue, as it were.

I've always speculated that many of those who constantly use the word "gay" (and refuse to use the word "homosexual") acknowledge that the word "homosexual" is something immoral and unnatural. They've gone through life feeling bad about partaking in a behavior that they inherently know is wrong and try to make themselves feel better by redefining a word that really means "joyful" and "carefree".
This article on the origin of the word "gay" confirms my suspicions.

How ‘Gay’ Came to Mean ‘Homosexual’

The word “gay” seems to have its origins around the 12th century in England, derived from the Old French word ‘gai’, which in turn was probably derived from a Germanic word, though that isn’t completely known. The word’s original meaning meant something to the effect of “joyful”, “carefree”, “full of mirth”, or “bright and showy”.

However, around the early parts of the 17th century, the word began to be associated with immorality. By the mid 17th century, according to an Oxford dictionary definition at the time, the meaning of the word had changed to mean “addicted to pleasures and dissipations. Often euphemistically: Of loose and immoral life”. This is an extension of one of the original meanings of “carefree”, meaning more or less uninhibited.

Fast-forward to the 19th century and the word gay referred to a woman who was a prostitute and a gay man was someone who slept with a lot of women, often prostitutes. Sort of ironical that today a gay man doesn’t sleep with women. Also at this time, the phrase “gay it” meant to have sex.

With these new definitions, the original meanings of “carefree”, “joyful”, and “bright and showy” were still around; so the word was not exclusively used to refer to prostitutes or a promiscuous man. Those were just accepted definitions, along with the other meanings of the word.

Around the 1920s and 1930s, however, the word started to have a new meaning. In terms of the sexual meaning of the word, a “gay man” no longer just meant a man who had sex with a lot of women, but now started to refer to men who had sex with other men. There was also another word “gey cat” at this time which meant a homosexual boy.

By 1955, the word gay now officially acquired the new added definition of meaning homosexual males. Gay men themselves seem to have been behind the driving thrust for this new definition as they felt (and most still do), that “homosexual” is much too clinical sounding and is often thought of as offensive among gay people due to sounding like a disorder...

Read more: http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/how-gay-came-to-mean-homosexual/

 

[GFR7]

The word is nevertheless "homosexual". Younger people at least will simply accept that some people are just born that way, no big deal, but not aCW of course being the aging gay in denial that he is.
aCW apparently claims that he can choose to be homosexual or heterosexual at will, so clearly then only a bisexual who loathes his gay side would think that way, that or a rather determined long term Poe.

:think: Indeed. What is a Poe?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

... Moreover, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, enlisted over 150 of the world’s top geneticists to decode the human genome and they could not find a “gay” gene. It simply does not exist.

Let’s be clear here so that the Fox News crew understands. No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period. No one “comes out of the closet.” Rather they are simply choosing to publicize their homosexual behavior. Further evidence that homosexuality is NOT genetic is the fluidness of homosexual behavior. As many as a third of homosexuals revert back to heterosexuality as Kinsey, Masters & Johnson and numerous other liberal sex researchers have all reported.

Utter twaddle aCW, this is just more lies and typical misinformation.
Francis Collins and his colleagues weren't even looking for a gay gene. Their task was to sequence the whole human genome, a massive task on its own, not to understand exactly what all the genetic information did.

"Homosexuality Is Not Hardwired," Concludes Dr. Francis S. Collins, Head Of The Human Genome Project

Dr. Frances S. Collins

...Dr. Collins noted that environment, particularly childhood experiences as well as the role of free will choices affect all of us in profound ways..
http://narth.org/docs/nothardwired.html

I make a point of posting articles showing people that have left homosexual behavior behind (and often times desires) when I run across them Al. I also highlight the environmental factors that had a strong influence on these people choosing to engage in homosexual behavior.

I was hoping that you'd be motivated by this lady, who is right around your age (it's possible to change at any age).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4114853&postcount=3191

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GFR7
No one uses the term "homosexual" unless they are well over 50. It's a semantics problem.

The word is nevertheless "homosexual". Younger people at least will simply accept that some people are just born that way, no big deal, but not aCW of course being the aging gay in denial that he is.
aCW apparently claims that he can choose to be homosexual or heterosexual at will, so clearly then only a bisexual who loathes his gay side would think that way, that or a rather determined long term Poe.

At this stage in my life Al I couldn't choose to engage in homosexual behavior. Being raised in a loving home where my dad played the role of a father and my mom a mother, and now being married to the most beautiful woman in the world and having feisty kids (who take after their old man), those important environmental factors in my life just wouldn't allow me to partake in such deviant behavior.

However, had things been different in my childhood (as I've shown repeatedly in the Part 2 post entitled "What causes homosexual desire and can it be changed?")
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3393262&postcount=17


who knows, I could be just like you and GFR7: living a lie.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Surely you're not implying that those in the LGBT so-called "community" are intolerant of anyone that doesn't follow their goosestep marching orders are you serpentdove?

No, of course not. We tolerate them. We do not tolerate their sin. They don't tolerate us or our Christian theology.

Lev 18:22, 20:13, 1 Ki 14:24, Ro 1:24, 26, 27 :vomit:

Don't you think it's time that people of faith and those who believe in decency become intolerant of immoral behavior and the unrighteous laws that have been legislated associated with that behavior by doing something about it?

 

[alwight]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

... Moreover, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, enlisted over 150 of the world’s top geneticists to decode the human genome and they could not find a “gay” gene. It simply does not exist.

Let’s be clear here so that the Fox News crew understands. No one is “gay” or born “gay.” Instead, people engage in homosexual behavior period. No one “comes out of the closet.” Rather they are simply choosing to publicize their homosexual behavior. Further evidence that homosexuality is NOT genetic is the fluidness of homosexual behavior. As many as a third of homosexuals revert back to heterosexuality as Kinsey, Masters & Johnson and numerous other liberal sex researchers have all reported.



"Homosexuality Is Not Hardwired," Concludes Dr. Francis S. Collins, Head Of The Human Genome Project

Dr. Frances S. Collins

...Dr. Collins noted that environment, particularly childhood experiences as well as the role of free will choices affect all of us in profound ways..
http://narth.org/docs/nothardwired.html

Here's the response from Collins himself:

"It troubles me greatly to learn that anything I have written would cause anguish for you or others who are seeking answers to the basis of homosexuality. The words quoted by NARTH all come from the Appendix to my book “The Language of God” (pp. 260-263), but have been juxtaposed in a way that suggests a somewhat different conclusion that I intended. I would urge anyone who is concerned about the meaning to refer back to the original text.

The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable."

Not that what he really thinks will matter to you of course aCW.
http://www.exgaywatch.com/2007/05/major-geneticist-francis-collins-responds-to-narth-article/

I make a point of posting articles showing people that have left homosexual behavior behind (and often times desires) when I run across them Al. I also highlight the environmental factors that had a strong influence on these people choosing to engage in homosexual behavior.

I was hoping that you'd be motivated by this lady, who is right around your age (it's possible to change at any age).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4114853&postcount=3191

Maybe she is rather like you aCW, shall we say ambiguous about their sexuality?
But perhaps not quite as manically in denial and hung up as you clearly are. :think:

 

[alwight]

At this stage in my life Al I couldn't choose to engage in homosexual behavior. Being raised in a loving home where my dad played the role of a father and my mom a mother, and now being married to the most beautiful woman in the world and having feisty kids (who take after their old man), those important environmental factors in my life just wouldn't allow me to partake in such deviant behavior.

However, had things been different in my childhood (as I've shown repeatedly in the Part 2 post entitled "What causes homosexual desire and can it be changed?")
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3393262&postcount=17

Thank God then aCW that you were saved from your potentially gay self.:up:

who knows, I could be just like you and GFR7: living a lie.

If living a lie involves being tolerant of those who are just a bit different, then so be it. :salute:

 

[GFR7]

If living a lie involves being tolerant of those who are just a bit different, then so be it. :salute:

It really annoys me that he can't see that anyone could be tolerant and kindly towards gays
(even in my own case, while being against gay marriage)
without themselves being gay.

Really a form of willful ignorance on his part.

He can dish it out, but can't take it. Fie on him.

 

[alwight]

It really annoys me that he can't see that anyone could be tolerant and kindly towards gays
(even in my own case, while being against gay marriage)
without themselves being gay.

That's slightly rather too condescending for me GF but tolerance is the main point here.

Really a form of willful ignorance on his part.

He can dish it out, but can't take it. Fie on him.

He is well used to not being particularly popular but that doesn't seem to worry him too much imo. :nono:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Here's the response from Collins himself:

Not that what he really thinks will matter to you of course aCW.
http://www.exgaywatch.com/2007/05/major-geneticist-francis-collins-responds-to-narth-article/

Thanks for the link from exgaywatch.com Al, a website dedicated to harassing those who have left homosexual behavior (and often times desires) behind.
The article was quite informative, let me share the first part with those that didn't read it:

Francis Collins is a respected geneticist most recognized for his leadership of the Human Genome Project. He has championed the free, open access of genomic information to the worldwide scientific community so that as many minds as possible can work on solving the connections between genes and disease. He envisions a world where disease can be prevented and citizens of even the least developed nations can benefit from that work.

Dr. Collins recently published a book, “The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.” As a man of faith, he rejects Creationism and Intelligent Design, but instead sees evidence of God in boundless scientific discoveries. His own understanding of the nature of life and the universe is called Theistic Evolution. It is an approach I find intriguing and refreshingly honest.

I can see how a atheist/moral relativist/homosexual like David Roberts of exgaywatch.com would find the theism of Francis Collins "refreshingly honest".

10 Dangers of Theistic Evolution

In this system God is not the omnipotent Lord of all things, whose Word has to be taken seriously by all men, but He is integrated into the evolutionary philosophy.

https://answersingenesis.org/theistic-evolution/10-dangers-of-theistic-evolution/

The best part of the exgaywatch.com article for me was this:

Francis Collins writes:

"...No one has yet identified an actual gene that contributes to the hereditary component (the reports about a gene on the X chromosome from the 1990s have not held up), but it is likely that such genes will be found in the next few years."

It's been 7+ years since the article was written Al, where's evidence of the 'gay gene'?

 

[GFR7]

That's slightly rather too condescending for me GF but tolerance is the main point here.


He is well used to not being particularly popular but that doesn't seem to worry him too much imo. :nono:

You mean I am condescending to be kind while being against gay marriage?

Being against all rights, while being kind, would be horribly condescending.
But believing the marriage thing to be illusory and cooked up by activists who have misled them
- is not condescending.

Being popular is not important; but lying about others, defining what they are and do while in
truth knowing nothing about them, is dreadful. Deliberate cruelty is dreadful.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It really annoys me that he can't see that anyone could be tolerant and kindly towards gays...
without themselves being gay.

Really a form of willful ignorance on his part.

By allowing those who partake in homosexual behavior to continue their destructive lifestyle due to unrighteous laws, you're being anything but "kindly" towards them, you're being hateful.

But then it was shown in Part 3's most important post (soon to be linked in the table of contents) that you have a deep seated hatred of those that engage in homosexual behavior.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

You mean I am condescending to be kind while being against gay marriage?

Being against all rights, while being kind, would be horribly condescending.
But believing the marriage thing to be illusory and cooked up by activists who have misled them
- is not condescending.

Being popular is not important; but lying about others, defining what they are and do while in
truth knowing nothing about them, is dreadful. Deliberate cruelty is dreadful.

Give it a rest, you're only a martyr in your own eyes. Unlike me, you start thread after thread about homosexuality just to rub it in the face of people of faith and those who believe in decency that the movement that you're a big part of is winning the culture war.

I started this thread to show what has happened since homosexuality was decriminalized, and what needs to be done to return to a sane society.

 

[GFR7]

Give it a rest, you're only a martyr in your own eyes. Unlike me, you post thread after thread about homosexuality just to rub it in the face of people of faith and those who believein decency that the movement that you're a big part of is winning the culture war.

I started this thread to show what has happened since homosexuality was decriminalized, and what needs to be done to return to a sane society.

Don't tell me why I post.

Don't presume to give me my motives or emotions.

I am NO part of winning any culture war. I am NO form of martyr.
I post to kill time. Period.

And you will never succeed, but are just adding fuel to the fire of those who despise social cons and hate Christians:

Congratulations for nearly single-handedly winning more people over to secularism , turnip head.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Give it a rest, you're only a martyr in your own eyes. Unlike me, you post thread after thread about homosexuality just to rub it in the face of people of faith and those who believein decency that the movement that you're a big part of is winning the culture war.

I started this thread to show what has happened since homosexuality was decriminalized, and what needs to be done to return to a sane society.

Don't tell me why I post.

Don't presume to give me my motives or emotions.

Your documented posts in this thread show your "motives and emotions" clearly.

I am NO part of winning any culture war. I am NO form of martyr.
I post to kill time. Period.

Someone needs to get a life. With all of that free time on your hands, do something constructive, read this:

And you will never succeed, but are just adding fuel to the fire of those who despise social cons and hate Christians:

Your hatred of Judeo-Christian doctrine is well documented.

Congratulations for nearly single-handedly winning more people over to secularism , turnip head.

Wow, I knew that all 3 threads have just under 3 quarters of a million views, I just didn't know that I was that influential.

 

[GFR7]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Give it a rest, you're only a martyr in your own eyes. Unlike me, you post thread after thread about homosexuality just to rub it in the face of people of faith and those who believein decency that the movement that you're a big part of is winning the culture war.

I started this thread to show what has happened since homosexuality was decriminalized, and what needs to be done to return to a sane society.



Your documented posts in this thread show your "motives and emotions" clearly.



Someone needs to get a life. With all of that free time on your hands, do something constructive, read this:

Your hatred of Judeo-Christian doctrine is well documented.



Wow, I knew that all 3 threads have just under 3 quarters of a million views, I just didn't know that I was that influential.

You don't know why I have this free time, do you?
You don't know why I'm killing time.
I have a background in writing on gay marriage and it's easier to stick with it than to research anything new.
I've read the Bible - including the Apocrypha and 5 translations -
enough to last me a lifetime, thanks. I know it far better than do you.

And stop blowing your own trumpet about your "hits".
Most people view you as a parody, and you have more gay readers
and people who view you as satire, than you know.

You're a hero only in your own eyes. Don't tell me what I hate, you blabbering old wind-bag.