Homophobia

csuguy

Well-known member
Why would I want a discussion with a pervert when I admit to being homophobic?

For starters, it doesn't sound like you are actually afraid of homosexuals - it sounds like you hate them. Hence you went out of your way to taunt them. If you do actually fear them - the best way to get over it is to be around homosexuals and realize they are just people.

Secondly, a Christian is called to spread the good news to all people - especially the sinners. Did Jesus eat with the righteous, or the sinners?
 

Truster

New member
For starters, it doesn't sound like you are actually afraid of homosexuals - it sounds like you hate them. Hence you went out of your way to taunt them. If you do actually fear them - the best way to get over it is to be around homosexuals and realize they are just people.

Secondly, a Christian is called to spread the good news to all people - especially the sinners. Did Jesus eat with the righteous, or the sinners?

Messiah didn't eat with homosexuals....or have I missed a scripture somewhere?
 

Truster

New member
You're completely out of any reasoned or intelligent responses, aren't you. You're down to this, now. You've really got nothing else to offer.

And yet you still have to keep "defending" yourself. How pathetic.

I have nothing to defend. My position is outlined in the OP, but you don't seem to be very sympathetic.
 

GFR7

New member
Nope.

Resisting homos is part of the battle on the side that will win.
Understood. But what my post meant was, if you ask gay advocates to accept your feelings as they want theirs accepted, you are fighting a losing battle. They have the semantics all figured out.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Understood. But what my post meant was, if you ask gay advocates to accept your feelings as they want theirs accepted, you are fighting a losing battle. They have the semantics all figured out.
Just to clarify, there are no "gay advocates". There are gay people, and there are equal rights advocates. But there's no one advocating being gay. Secondly, no one is "accepting or rejecting" anyone else's feelings. We all have our own feelings, and this will remain so. What is being asked is that we respect the right of other people to feel differently than we do about this issue. And that's a request that applies to people on both sides.
 

GFR7

New member
Just to clarify, there are no "gay advocates". There are gay people, and there are equal rights advocates. But there's no one advocating being gay. Secondly, no one is "accepting or rejecting" anyone else's feelings. We all have our own feelings, and this will remain so. What is being asked is that we respect the right of other people to feel differently than we do about this issue. And that's a request that applies to people on both sides.
Well, the press will refer to "leading gay advocate Andrew Sullivan" or "internationally known gay advocate Michelangelo Signorile". All their books, debates, MSNBC appearances, etc., have all been advocating for gay rights or same sex marriage. Yes, I agree, all have a right to their own feelings, on both sides. But gay advocacy will label with "hater", "bigot" even when you are being really and truly respectful and decent. :(
 

PureX

Well-known member
Well, the press will refer to "leading gay advocate Andrew Sullivan"…
Yes, but for the most part, the 'press' is full of shinola. And many of them don't even know how to properly use the English language.
All their books, debates, MSNBC appearances, etc., have all been advocating for gay rights or same sex marriage.
Of course, equal rights advocates tend to advocate for equal rights. Including the equal rights of homosexuals. But that doesn't mean they're advocating for homosexuality, itself. And until the "right" finally gets this into their heads, they will continue to misunderstand and misrepresent both homosexuals and equal rights advocates. They consistently make this same mistake with the abortion and separation of church and state, issues, too.

I used to watch Bill O'Reilly bring Al Sharpton on his show and introduce him as a "spokesmen for the liberal democrats". But no one appointed Al Sharpton spokesmen for anything or anyone, except Bill O'Reilly. Al Sharpton would go on to spew his personal views on all sorts of issues, and Bill O'Reilly would continue to make fun of "those liberal democrats" as if all liberal democrats were exact reproductions of Al Sharpton, and the audiences ate it all up like a sick dog eating it's own puke.

Welcome to the media circus, where anything that generates phony outrage and biased indignation also generates audiences, and that sells ad time. It's all about the money, honey.
Yes, I agree, all have a right to their own feelings, on both sides. But gay advocacy will label with "hater", "bigot" even when you are being really and truly respectful and decent. :(
Well, … you THINK you are being respectful and decent. The thing is, when you want to maintain laws that force gays into being second-class citizens, you are actually doing them harm. You are actually causing them to suffer. And although you think you aren't doing this, you are still doing it. And that's why even though you don't think you're being a bigot, you're still acting like a bigot. And you're still advocating a bigoted course of action.

No one is denying you your right to want to harm homosexuals by forcing them to be treated like lessor human beings. But you can't expect the people you want to harm, and those who support their right to be treated as equals, not to speak out against this abuse. And not to be angry that you want to abuse them. Just because you've fooled yourself into believing that you mean them no harm doesn't mean you've fooled them into believing it.
 
Last edited:

csuguy

Well-known member
Messiah didn't eat with homosexuals....or have I missed a scripture somewhere?

Jesus ate with sinners - among which may very well may have been some homosexuals. Jesus didn't set homosexuals apart as somehow worse than other sinners - and neither should you.
 

oatmeal

Well-known member
There was an article about how disgusting homophobic's are in our local paper today. I was a little upset about this so I added this comment. I fully expect it to be deleted.

''Homophobia is a fear of homosexuals and it can't be helped. I'm homophobic and I can honestly say it is not through choice...its the way I am and I would ask people to accept me the way I am''.

Is this not a reasonable request?

It is clever and makes a very clear point.
 

GFR7

New member
Yes, but for the most part, the 'press' is full of shinola. And many of them don't even know how to properly use the English language.
Of course, equal rights advocates tend to advocate for equal rights. Including the equal rights of homosexuals. But that doesn't mean they're advocating for homosexuality, itself. And until the "right" finally gets this into their heads, they will continue to misunderstand and misrepresent both homosexuals and equal rights advocates. They consistently make this same mistake with the abortion and separation of church and state, issues, too.

I used to watch Bill O'Reilly bring Al Sharpton on his show and introduce him as a "spokesmen for the liberal democrats". But no one appointed Al Sharpton spokesmen for anything or anyone, except Bill O'Reilly. Al Sharpton would go on to spew his personal views on all sorts of issues, and Bill O'Reilly would continue to make fun of "those liberal democrats" as if all liberal democrats were exact reproductions of Al Sharpton, and the audiences ate it all up like a sick dog eating it's own puke.

Welcome to the media circus, where anything that generates phony outrage and biased indignation also generates audiences, and that sells ad time. It's all about the money, honey.
Well, … you THINK you are being respectful and decent. The thing is, when you want to maintain laws that force gays into being second-class citizens, you are actually doing them harm. You are actually causing them to suffer. And although you think you aren't doing this, you are still doing it. And that's why even though you don't think you're being a bigot, you're still acting like a bigot. And you're still advocating a bigoted course of action.

No one is denying you your right to want to harm homosexuals by forcing them to be treated like lessor human beings. But you can't expect the people you want to harm, and those who support their right to be treated as equals, not to speak out against this abuse. And not to be angry that you want to abuse them. Just because you've fooled yourself into believing that you mean them no harm doesn't mean you've fooled them into believing it.
I don't mean any harm. Not having marriage does not harm them. I do NOT want to abuse them. I know this.
 

PureX

Well-known member
I don't mean any harm. Not having marriage does not harm them. I do NOT want to abuse them. I know this.
Denying them the right to marry whom they choose does them great harm, just as it would harm you, if this right were denied you.
 

Truster

New member
Jesus ate with sinners - among which may very well may have been some homosexuals. Jesus didn't set homosexuals apart as somehow worse than other sinners - and neither should you.

The fact that homosexuals are set apart by the author of scripture means that Messiah, as the third person of the Elohimhead, did and does set them apart for destruction. I'm not going to provide the verses you'll have to find them yourself.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
The fact that homosexuals are set apart by the author of scripture means that Messiah, as the third person of the Elohimhead, did and does set them apart for destruction. I'm not going to provide the verses you'll have to find them yourself.

The scriptures do not set homosexuals apart as worse than anyone else. The scriptures say that to break one commandment is to be guilty of breaking the whole covenant. God desires for ALL to be saved, and Christ died for ALL men that there sins might be forgiven.
 

Truster

New member
The scriptures do not set homosexuals apart as worse than anyone else. The scriptures say that to break one commandment is to be guilty of breaking the whole covenant. God desires for ALL to be saved, and Christ died for ALL men that there sins might be forgiven.

Pervert.
 

Truster

New member
I quote the scriptures, and therefore I'm a pervert... :plain:

You pervert the very scriptures you quote.

There is condemnation upon those that approve of homosexuality as well as those that practise the perversion. You and your attitude are proof of the condemnation. Not only blinded to the sin yourself you encourage others to practice the abomination.

You are perverted beyond your own understanding.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
You pervert the very scriptures you quote.

There is condemnation upon those that approve of homosexuality as well as those that practise the perversion. You and your attitude are proof of the condemnation. Not only blinded to the sin yourself you encourage others to practice the abomination.

You are perverted beyond your own understanding.

I never gave any approval for homosexuality: I said it is no worse than any other sin. Your hate is blinding you.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Denying them the right to marry whom they choose does them great harm, just as it would harm you, if this right were denied you.

James 5:19 My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth and one turns him back, 20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
Your love of perversion has judicially blinded you.My hatred of sin is healthy and is proof of life.

If your hatred of sin has led you to hate the sinner - then you yourself are sinning, for hate is the antithesis of Christianity.

Love God, and love your fellowman - these are the Great Commandments from which all others derive. Hate is the opposite of love - it is evil.
 
Top