Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4

[Arthur Brain]

So start a thread about re-criminalizing cohabitation then, and do so with the same vitriol and vigour you've applied with this scrap heap!

:thumb:

 

[aikido7]

It's difficult to dialogue with people who see a certain meaning in the Bible because they themselves "just know" what it says or else cling to what they have been told by biblically illiterate clergy or fellow believers.

It is much more enlightening to find out what the original writers of those ancient passages were intending to say.

It makes for a richer faith, but it is not easy to do. It involves research and study and seeing the truth for yourself--not taking ANYONE'S opinion at face value.

 

[aikido7]

Welcome back to the WHMBR! threads aikido7. Fill us in on what you've been doing since the last time you graced us with your moral relativist presence:

How many homosexual 'weddings' have you attended?

How many homosexual funerals have you attended?

How many HRC/GLSEN/GLAAD meetings have you attended and what is new when it comes to the homosexual agenda?

I look to people like you to keep me informed aikido7, so don't let me down.

I am still alive.

Your comment here shows silliness and a real mental deficit because you are not choosing to engage.

You have no interest in becoming biblically literate on the subject of homosexuality. You are unable or unwilling to find out just what the original writers meant or intended by what they wrote.

You would be surprised, but I suspect you already know that on some level. The truth of Scripture will undercut the mythic shelters that all Christian bigots and homophobes hide out in today.

I thank God that the global culture is bending toward liberty and justice and human rights for ALL--just as Jesus did. His compassion, open commensality with the outcast and his God of mercy and forgiveness shine through all the chaotic words of men who fall short of the Redeemer.

 

[alwight]

*Ex out Fox News' Megan Kelly, as she's a liberal wolf hiding in conservative sheep's clothing (refer to "people profile" in the index on page 1 to learn about Megan Kelly).

I know who Megyn Kelly is but perhaps you just can't be bothered to spell her name properly at this time, such is your disregard and contempt?
As should be apparent to all who can get their facts right that almost everyone is left of you aCW, ..except perhaps Pat Robertson and possibly Donald Trump, your hero (he who was so viciously and unfairly attacked by the evil leftie Megyn during that time of the month)?lain:

 

[TracerBullet]

Yeah, I think Ted Shoebat had his words confused:

Those kind, loving and ever so tolerant homosexuals that have been so supportive of religious freedom are going to tie Kim Davis up and make her watch while they rape her husband.

Yeah that's even funnier

 

[aCultureWarrior]

So start a thread about re-criminalizing cohabitation then, and do so with the same vitriol and vigour you've applied with this scrap heap!

:thumb:

Let's do it right now:

"Why cohabitation MUST be recriminalized!"

Out of wedlock sex has brought nothing but misery to our nation. Laws against cohabitation (two unwed people of the opposite sex living together in a romantic relationship), adultery, abortion and laws allowing no-fault divorce MUST be legislated once again.

The floor is yours Art, tell us how 'consenting adults" should be able to do anything that they want, but be sure to ignore all of the harm that comes with such actions.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It's difficult to dialogue with people who see a certain meaning in the Bible because they themselves "just know" what it says or else cling to what they have been told by biblically illiterate clergy or fellow believers.

It is much more enlightening to find out what the original writers of those ancient passages were intending to say.

It makes for a richer faith, but it is not easy to do. It involves research and study and seeing the truth for yourself--not taking ANYONE'S opinion at face value.

Yeah, it's pretty tough to figure out the original intent behind

"a man should not lie with another man, it is a detestable sin..."

and "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?"

This one is really confusing:

"Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality,..",

as well as this:

"That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved."

Now that I'm questioning the "original intent" behind such abstruse verses and passages, I feel so much more "enlightened" thanks to you aikido7.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Welcome back to the WHMBR! threads aikido7. Fill us in on what you've been doing since the last time you graced us with your moral relativist presence:

How many homosexual 'weddings' have you attended?

How many homosexual funerals have you attended?

How many HRC/GLSEN/GLAAD meetings have you attended and what is new when it comes to the homosexual agenda?

I look to people like you to keep me informed aikido7, so don't let me down.

I am still alive.

But still as spiritually dead as before.

Your comment here shows silliness and a real mental deficit because you are not choosing to engage.

You act as if you're ashamed to admit that you have friends that engage in homosexual behavior and partake in faux marriage ceremonies and because of their extremely harmful behavior, go to the grave way before they should.

Why is that?

You have no interest in becoming biblically literate on the subject of homosexuality. You are unable or unwilling to find out just what the original writers meant or intended by what they wrote.

I questioned the "original intent" behind those terribly confusing verses and passages in my last post. I'm currently looking into that extremely confusing verse "Thou shalt not commit adultery" to find what God really meant when He said that.

You would be surprised, but I suspect you already know that on some level. The truth of Scripture will undercut the mythic shelters that all Christian bigots and homophobes hide out in today.

i.e. the Old and New Testaments will be burned and replaced with the new "state authorized version" :

The Queen James Bible.

I thank God that the global culture is bending toward liberty and justice and human rights for ALL--just as Jesus did. His compassion, open commensality with the outcast and his God of mercy and forgiveness shine through all the chaotic words of men who fall short of the Redeemer.

I've been meaning to ask:

How many homosexual 'weddings' have you attended?

How many homosexual funerals have you attended?

How many HRC/GLSEN/GLAAD meetings have you attended and what is new when it comes to the homosexual agenda?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Yeah, I think Ted Shoebat had his words confused:

Those kind, loving and ever so tolerant homosexuals that have been so supportive of religious freedom are going to tie Kim Davis up and make her watch while they rape her husband.

Spoiler

Yeah that's even funnier

You were able to find and post a picture of social conservative and Presidential candidate Ted Cruz standing beside persecuted Christian Kim Davis and her husband without going into cardiac arrest TracerBullet?

The things that you homosexual activists do for your cause truly amazes me.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
*Ex out Fox News' Megan Kelly, as she's a liberal wolf hiding in conservative sheep's clothing (refer to "people profile" in the index on page 1 to learn about Megan Kelly).

I know who Megyn Kelly is but perhaps you just can't be bothered to spell her name properly at this time, such is your disregard and contempt?

Did I spell Meggun Kely's name wrong Al? (How can I ever live with myself after such an atrocious act?).

American's For Truth About Homoseuxality's Peter LaBarbera spelled her name correctly when he posted this picture of her at a banquet where she obviously feels very comfortable.

As should be apparent to all who can get their facts right that almost everyone is left of you aCW, ..except perhaps Pat Robertson and possibly Donald Trump, your hero (he who was so viciously and unfairly attacked by the evil leftie Megyn during that time of the month)?lain:

I like the idea of a Ted Cruz/Donald Trump ticket, as it would get the social conservative and conservative/moderate/soft core libertarian vote.

Regarding the Trump-Kely (did I spell her name right this time Al?) "interaction".

She's a fag hag and I have no problem with her being scorned.

 

[TracerBullet]

You were able to find and post a picture of social conservative and Presidential candidate Ted Cruz standing beside persecuted Christian Kim Davis and her husband without going into cardiac arrest TracerBullet?

The things that you homosexual activists do for your cause truly amazes me.

That picture was plastered all over the media. Deal with it.

 

[TracerBullet]

How many homosexual 'weddings' have you attended?

weddings of people you have chosen to hate are still just weddings

How many homosexual funerals have you attended?

no such thing

How many HRC/GLSEN/GLAAD meetings have you attended and what is new when it comes to the homosexual agenda?

There is no agenda

 

[aikido7]

Yeah, it's pretty tough to figure out the original intent behind

"a man should not lie with another man, it is a detestable sin..."

and "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?"

This one is really confusing:

"Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality,..",

as well as this:

"That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved."

Now that I'm questioning the "original intent" behind such abstruse verses and passages, I feel so much more "enlightened" thanks to you aikido7.

First, let's agree that the very word "homosexuality" was unknown in ancient times. The word makes its first appearance during the early 1940s, so common sense tells us that translating what was said in the Iron Age to a modern meaning is intellectually dishonest.

Men lying with men was about phallic aggression, not homosexual relationships. Or about pagan temple rites with prostitutes.

The Bible is clear on one thing and one thing only. There is nothing about homosexuality as we know it in the Bible. Even the Sodom and Gomorrah myth was about hospitality, not gay sex.

There may well have been references to what we today call homosexual relationships, such as the references to David and Jonathan's curious "bro-mance." And the ancient medieval church held and blessed "same-sex pairings." But there is no indication this meant sexual relations.

Now that historical methodology and biblical scholarship is being disseminated to anyone and everyone, people like yourself are caught unawares. You really don't know how to assimilate facts, evidence and honest data that challenges your ancient understandings of reality.

 

[aikido7]

Open commensality and acceptance of those we deem human trash. Jesus did this or he didn't. We can't have it both ways.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

You were able to find and post a picture of social conservative and Presidential candidate Ted Cruz standing beside persecuted Christian Kim Davis and her husband without going into cardiac arrest TracerBullet?

The things that you homosexual activists do for your cause truly amazes me.

That picture was plastered all over the media. Deal with it.

I love the fact that an elected official (Ted Cruz) stands up for religious liberty and people who are persecuted by the ever so tolerant homosexual movement solely because they believe in God's Word.

Thanks for reminding me why I'm ardently backing Ted Cruz for President.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior View
Yeah, it's pretty tough to figure out the original intent behind

"a man should not lie with another man, it is a detestable sin..."

First, let's agree that the very word "homosexuality" was unknown in ancient times.

"Ewwwww, that's disgusting!" was probably the most common term used when talking two guys buggerizing each other.

The word makes its first appearance during the early 1940s, so common sense tells us that translating what was said in the Iron Age to a modern meaning is intellectually dishonest.

Call it what you like (homosexuality, sodomy, buggery, etc.) it's still an absolutely filthy behavior that will send anyone who engages in it to Hell if they don't repent their sinful ways first.

Men lying with men was about phallic aggression, not homosexual relationships. Or about pagan temple rites with prostitutes.

I've heard all of the lies from your Queen James Bible and your wicked "preachers" (little Mattie Vines, Vicky Eugene Robinson, etc.), there is no need to repeat them.

The Bible is clear on one thing and one thing only.

Yes, it's very clear that sexual relations should only be between one man and one woman united in matrimony.

There is nothing about homosexuality as we know it in the Bible. Even the Sodom and Gomorrah myth was about hospitality, not gay sex.

Uh huh.

There may well have been references to what we today call homosexual relationships,...

Ya think?

Now that historical methodology and biblical scholarship is being disseminated to anyone and everyone, people like yourself are caught unawares. You really don't know how to assimilate facts, evidence and honest data that challenges your ancient understandings of reality.

Now that you've been "intellectually honest", have you attended any homosexual 'weddings', funerals

or HRC/GLSEN/GLAAD meetings since you last graced us with your presence in the WHMBR! threads?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

And today's cartoon is dedicated to 'gay' christian* aikido7 for bastardizing God's Word like his homosexual preachers do so well.

*Not to be confused with adulterous, incestuous or bestial christians.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Let's do it right now:

"Why cohabitation MUST be recriminalized!"

Out of wedlock sex has brought nothing but misery to our nation. Laws against cohabitation (two unwed people of the opposite sex living together in a romantic relationship), adultery, abortion and laws allowing no-fault divorce MUST be legislated once again.

The floor is yours Art, tell us how 'consenting adults" should be able to do anything that they want, but be sure to ignore all of the harm that comes with such actions.

Er, this is just lame. Where's the lugubrious cut 'n' pastes? The links to far right nutball blogs? Put your back into it man. Anyone would think you only get on your soapbox properly when the subject is about gay men...

 

[alwight]

Did I spell Meggun Kely's name wrong Al? (How can I ever live with myself after such an atrocious act?)..

It seems that Donald Trump floats your boat more than Megyn Kelly aCW, there's no accounting for taste perhaps.

I like the idea of a Ted Cruz/Donald Trump ticket, as it would get the social conservative and conservative/moderate/soft core libertarian vote.

Yes I suppose you would.

Regarding the Trump-Kely (did I spell her name right this time Al?) "interaction".

She's a fag hag and I have no problem with her being scorned.

I wouldn't climb over her to get to you aCW. :nono:

 

[Lexington'96]

Something makes me think that Christians in 33 AD weren't concerned about lobbying the Emperor to criminalize sinful behaviors.