Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[Arthur Brain]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What homosexualists Art Brain and alwight just said is this:

'We're fascinated with the GLAAD media awards nomination article that you posted and would really like to learn more about some of the other nominations'.

Gee fellas, all you had to do was ask.

My buithineth ith none of yourth...

Oopth...

*ahem* One meant to say 'Kindly take your deluded nonsense and deposit it in the nearest available trash can, although unfortunately that would probably be this thread so in fairness that backfired a bit'...

 

[Arthur Brain]

If there ever is a lurking audience here aCW, which I doubt, I'm quite sure that your patronising contempt of their abilities to understand for themselves what is said will not exactly endear you to them. :nono:

Well to be fair there often is, but Connie seems to equate the longevity of a thread and the amount of views received as a sign of support. It deflates rather rapidly when it's patently obvious that constantly bumping one's own thread is going to keep it on the 'radar' anyway, and that most people are going to be reflecting the majority just on here, that aCW is somewhat of a loon...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It appears that I might have to put the Masters and Johnson segment on hold for a bit, as there is a confused Libertarian (and who thought I would ever write those two words side by side?) who isn't sure what the proper role of government is.


drbrumley (aka Doc) here's your chance to refute Part 1's most important post and question God's 3 Divine Institutions.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3310948&postcount=4195

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/issue08/civil_government.htm

http://www.westwalkerchurchofchrist.org/sermons/2008/THREEDIVINEINSTITUTIONS.pdf

 

[alwight]

Al, please keep the conversations that you and the boyz have in gay bathhouses where they belong.

Not being at all familiar with any "gay bathhouses" nor "sodomy chambers" nor what might therefore be said and done in them, I'll simply have to defer to your greater knowledge and experience aCW.

That being said: When I show one of the findings that Masters and Johnson's study revealed, let me put it this way Al: You'll be pounding your head against the wall yelling

"Why didn't I know that 35 years ago!"

Another aCW teaser, can I bear it? :think:

 

[alwight]

Well to be fair there often is, but Connie seems to equate the longevity of a thread and the amount of views received as a sign of support. It deflates rather rapidly when it's patently obvious that constantly bumping one's own thread is going to keep it on the 'radar' anyway, and that most people are going to be reflecting the majority just on here, that aCW is somewhat of a loon...

I don't suppose it takes lurkers too long to spot the loon...

 

[jsjohnnt]

As to the silliness of considering the imprisonment of homosexuals, maybe the "Warrior" and others, should try reading the biblical message without their tinted glasses. In Romans, chapter one, Homosexuals are abandoned only when they abandon God. Beginning with Ro 1:21, Paul "condemns" those who practice homosexuality AND abandon God. By the end of the chapter, Paul has named a host of other departures that are equally disturbing, and then, in Romans 2, reminds us all that "such were some of you." Romans 1 -8 is all about man's sinfulness and God's unmerited, undeserved grace. I am absolutely positive that the Warrior has skeletons in his closet that render him wholely unacceptable to the Pious Community. To push for prison time for an act of sinfulness would find us all in jail, with no one left to write comments on this wonderful site. Good grief.

Understand that I believe Homosexuality to be a sin, along with arguing with parents, and any number of "sins of omission." Homosexuals do not need to "justify their way of life" to be accepted into the Christian community. What they need to do is accept that Christ has justified them them, not their sin, and join the rest of us sinners in working against our sins while praising our Lord and working to bring others into his undeserved grace.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
That being said: When I show one of the findings that Masters and Johnson's study revealed, let me put it this way Al: You'll be pounding your head against the wall yelling

"Why didn't I know that 35 years ago!"

Another aCW teaser, can I bear it? :think:

There seems to be some question by one of TOL's many L/libertarians about what the role of government is in a society that honors God.

I've private messaged drbrumley a special invitation to this thread so that we can go over Part 1's most important post(s).
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4198015&postcount=5083

I'm hoping that Doc will respond soon so that he will understand that the homosexual loving/baby murdering, pornography (kiddy porn included)-prostitution loving, drug pushing Liberatarian Ron Paul wasn't what God had in mind as a leader when He ordained civil government as one of three institutions for the governance of man.

So be patient Al, the segment on Masters and Johnson will resume soon!

 

[aCultureWarrior]

As to the silliness of considering the imprisonment of homosexuals, maybe the "Warrior" and others, should try reading the biblical message without their tinted glasses.

(Because 2,000 years of Judeo-Christian laws had it all wrong and a bunch of drag queens, dykes and fairies finally got it right).

In Romans, chapter one, Homosexuals are abandoned only when they abandon God. Beginning with Ro 1:21, Paul "condemns" those who practice homosexuality AND abandon God.

('Gay' Christian alert! 'Gay' Christian alert! You can practice homosexuality and at the same time not abandon God. I wonder if our newbie feels that way about incest and adultery as well?).

Understand that I believe Homosexuality to be a sin, along with arguing with parents, and any number of "sins of omission."

(...and taking 3 plates of food at all you can eat buffets).

Homosexuals do not need to "justify their way of life" to be accepted into the Christian community. What they need to do is accept that Christ has justified them them, not their sin, and join the rest of us sinners in working against our sins while praising our Lord and working to bring others into his undeserved grace.

Thanks for stopping by jsj. On that note I think I hear little Mattie Vines calling your name.

 

[jsjohnnt]

('Gay' Christian alert! 'Gay' Christian alert! You can practice homosexuality and at the same time not abandon God. I wonder if our newbie feels that way about incest and adultery as well?).


I feel the same way bout those who are deceitful, who talk back to or disobey their parents, who are guilty of gossip, who are arrogant (could this be you, Warrior). I read and accept Paul's words, " . . . for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself." (Ro 2:1).

Sorry your view of self leaves you with the impression that you are sinless. Do I have that right? You are without sin? I leave you, for the moment, with John's statement in I Jo 1:8, using present tense verbiage, he writes, "If we say we are having no sin, we make him a liar and the word has no place in our lives. "

Let's stay on subject, shall we, and leave off the "newbie" nonsense. I would not be surprised to know that I have been around and in the word longer than you. Your ad hom attack has nothing to do with this discussion, btw.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I find it endlessly interesting that those who want to force OT law onto America don't want any of the OT laws they would find inconvenient, they only want OT laws that would allow them to attack, imprison and even engage in violence towards minorities.

Well, there are the actual theonomists (who started with Rushdoony and Bahnsen) and then there are the fakers on this website.

Real theonomists believe in using the Biblical law, with the exception of ceremonial laws, as the basis for governmental code. While you could quibble about certain line drawing, that's a reasonable position to hold.

The people here just want far right politics and are using the OT as a means of doing so.

Would you two quit pretending that you're adversaries? You're both consensual moralists which is one of the key ingredients to sexual anarchy.

I'm actually probably, (and this kind of horrifies actually) closer to your position than his.

BTW Jr., I've been meaning to ask you:

Being the (alleged) son of a Christian pastor and someone who was blessed to grow up with Holy Scripture as a main part of your life, what happened in your life that made you want to identify with a bunch of abortionists, homosexuals/pedophiles/pederasts, pornographers (kiddy porn included), hookers (both male and female) and drug pushers that make up the L/libertarian ideology and political movement?

Inquiring minds needsta know.

The question is based on a false premise.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
('Gay' Christian alert! 'Gay' Christian alert! You can practice homosexuality and at the same time not abandon God. I wonder if our newbie feels that way about incest and adultery as well?


I see that you didn't answer my question jsj, but since you're obviously a homosexualist (someone who is either a practicing sodomite or someone who isn't but promotes homosexual behavior and the agenda that goes with it) I'm really not interested in your answer.

I feel the same way bout those who are deceitful, who talk back to or disobey their parents, who are guilty of gossip, who are arrogant (could this be you, Warrior). I read and accept Paul's words, " . . . for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself." (Ro 2:1).

Sorry your view of self leaves you with the impression that you are sinless. Do I have that right? You are without sin? I leave you, for the moment, with John's statement in I Jo 1:8, using present tense verbiage, he writes, "If we say we are having no sin, we make him a liar and the word has no place in our lives. "

Let's stay on subject, shall we, and leave off the "newbie" nonsense. I would not be surprised to know that I have been around and in the word longer than you. Your ad hom attack has nothing to do with this discussion, btw.

Yes, by all means let's do stay on the subject of why homosexuality MUST be recriminalized. You're in the politics forum which is about government and the way it legislates. If you want to talk about things such as repentance and redemption, I'm afraid you'll have to wait until I begin the segment entitled

"The 3 tenets of atheism"

(1. There is no God
2. I HATE Him
3. I HATE Him so much that I'll redefine Scripture to meet my selfish desires).

Thanks for stopping by though jsj, and my best to little Mattie Vines.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Would you two quit pretending that you're adversaries? You're both consensual moralists which is one of the key ingredients to sexual anarchy.

I'm actually probably, (and this kind of horrifies actually) closer to your position than his.

(i.e. Jr.'s cult of the week is...the nutcases at American Vision who are disciples of Ron Paul and want things like prostitution and recreational drug use legal because they can't find anything specific in the Bible condemning either).

Sorry Jr., but when we agree on anything I'll go out and get fitted for a straightjacket.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

BTW Jr., I've been meaning to ask you:

Being the (alleged) son of a Christian pastor and someone who was blessed to grow up with Holy Scripture as a main part of your life, what happened in your life that made you want to identify with a bunch of abortionists, homosexuals/pedophiles/pederasts, pornographers (kiddy porn included), hookers (both male and female) and drug pushers that make up the L/libertarian ideology and political movement?

Inquiring minds needsta know.

The question is based on a false premise.

Remember Jr., you're in a thread that deals with reality. I sense something happened in your life that made you HATE God with all your might, which lead you to embrace the doctrine of others that HATE Him as much as you do.

On that note: thanks for stopping by, I believe I hear the loonatarian train leaving for loonyville and I wouldn't want you to miss it.

 

[jsjohnnt]

Warrior, I did answer your question. If disrespecting your parents is a sin but covered by God's grace, then OF COURSE, anything you plug into that scenario is covered, as well. Secondly, you write:

Yes, by all means let's do stay on the subject of why homosexuality MUST be recriminalized. You're in the politics forum which is about government and the way it legislates. If you want to talk about things such as repentance and redemption, I'm afraid you'll have to wait until I begin the segment entitled

Tell me, oh great Warrior, how do you "criminalize" homosexuality without going to the bible to make you point? What, you go to the Koran, where you can make your case? Homosexuality in this country, has never been a criminal offense. Sodomy has, but not the larger homosexuality. There have been folks charged with and found guilty of committing sodomy as a criminal act of torture, that had nothing to do with sex. So, again, I say, homosexuality, per se, has never been a criminal offense if defined by national or state law.

Oh, and on that Mattie Vines childishness, lets act like adults in this discussion. For certain, I plan to.

As to the politics of this discussion, tell me how you get to a thorough going condemnation of homosexuality apart from the grace of God without using the Bible in your argument? I am going back and read your arguments, If there is any scripture in your comments, I will continue to use scripture . . . after all, this forum is called "Theology online" and that is the only reason I am here . . . . to discuss theology.

Update: I just scrolled down to find this comment by wannabe Warrior:

"The 3 tenets of atheism"

(1. There is no God
2. I HATE Him
3. I HATE Him so much that I'll redefine Scripture to meet my selfish desires).

Do I take this comment to mean that you are an atheist? If so, I will leave off a biblical approach to this. In fact, I have will have to decide if I even want to discuss this topic with an existentialist, which is what you are if not a man of faith.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Warrior, I did answer your question. If disrespecting your parents is a sin but covered by God's grace, then OF COURSE, anything you plug into that scenario is covered, as well.

While it's very important to respect your parents (as long as your parents aren't two guys by the name of Adam and Steve or a couple of crack cocaine smoking Libertarians) and there always have been laws on the legislative books endorsing such (age of consent laws, etc), those who were caught engaging in buggery (amongst other terms, the Founding Fathers used that term to describe homosexuality) were charged with felonies throughout the history of the US.

Secondly, you write:

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Yes, by all means let's do stay on the subject of why homosexuality MUST be recriminalized. You're in the politics forum which is about government and the way it legislates. If you want to talk about things such as repentance and redemption, I'm afraid you'll have to wait until I begin the segment entitled

Tell me, oh great Warrior, how do you "criminalize" homosexuality without going to the bible to make you point? What, you go to the Koran, where you can make your case?

(They give themselves away every time). God abhorred homosexuality so much that He destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (not to be confused with the cities of Sodomy and Gonorrhea North and South, Seattle and San Franswishco). He also commanded the Jews (via their government) that they punish those who were caught and convicted of homosexuality with the death penalty (as shown earlier in this thread the punishment phase was rescinded with the New Testament).

So much for your knowledge of Scripture when it comes to homosexuality Johnny boy.

Homosexuality in this country, has never been a criminal offense. Sodomy has, but not the larger homosexuality. There have been folks charged with and found guilty of committing sodomy as a criminal act of torture, that had nothing to do with sex. So, again, I say, homosexuality, per se, has never been a criminal offense if defined by national or state law.

Homosexuality was treated as a criminal offense in all of the original thirteen colonies, and eventually every one of the fifty states (see Robinson, 2003; “Sodomy Laws...,” 2003). Severe penalties were invoked for those who engaged in homosexuality. In fact, few Americans know that the penalty for homosexuality in several states was death—including New York, Vermont, Connecticut, and South Carolina (Barton, 2000, pp. 306,482). Most people nowadays would be shocked to learn that Thomas Jefferson advocated “dismemberment” as the penalty for homosexuality in his home state of Virginia, and even authored a bill to that effect (1781, Query 14; cf. 1903, 1:226-227).
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=1126

So much for your knowledge of US history when it comes to the criminalization of homosexuality Johnny boy.

Oh, and on that Mattie Vines childishness, lets act like adults in this discussion. For certain, I plan to.

Get used to being mocked, I do it to all proud and unrepentant sinners.

As to the politics of this discussion, tell me how you get to a thorough going condemnation of homosexuality apart from the grace of God without using the Bible in your argument? I am going back and read your arguments, If there is any scripture in your comments, I will continue to use scripture . . . after all, this forum is called "Theology online" and that is the only reason I am here . . . . to discuss theology.

Being that the law is an act of love, those miserable souls who are trapped in the homosexual 'deathstyle' would get the help that they so desperately need (reparative therapy counseling, prison ministries, etc. etc. etc) once homosexuality is recriminalized.

Oh and Johnny boy, it will be recriminalized some day, as God and His "warriors" will win this culture war.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Update: I just scrolled down to find this comment by wannabe Warrior:

"The 3 tenets of atheism"

(1. There is no God
2. I HATE Him
3. I HATE Him so much that I'll redefine Scripture to meet my selfish desires).

Do I take this comment to mean that you are an atheist? If so, I will leave off a biblical approach to this. In fact, I have will have to decide if I even want to discuss this topic with an existentialist, which is what you are if not a man of faith.

Yeah, I'm the atheist and you and little Mattie Vines are the real Christians (in case you didn't know, practically every post that I write is dripping with sarcasm, this one included).

Edit: You might want to take up existentialism with homosexualist GFR7 (he's the one whose avatar is of a proud and unrepentant homosexual who he claims is a long lost relative), as that's his forte' not mine.

 

[jsjohnnt]

Re: Warrior and his atheism: Here is the deal. As an existentialist, you have no authority outside of yourself. As an existentialist, you have no way of speaking against the sexual practices of others, since it is all about your opinion about what others do. Sounds a bit silly to me, as to this thread. I mean, this is not about homosexuality and its criminalization so much as it is about YOUR opinion about same. Your only political power is the bias of others who might agree with you, and hate. You hate the gay folk. And a happy atheist you apparently are . . . . geeeeeesh. What we need to be discussing is the reasoning why your personal opinion on any subject, should be of higher regard to my opinion or anyone else's on this thread. Right? So tell me, why is your opinion, more important than my opinion?

 

[alwight]

Re: Warrior and his atheism: Here is the deal. As an existentialist, you have no authority outside of yourself. As an existentialist, you have no way of speaking against the sexual practices of others, since it is all about your opinion about what others do. Sounds a bit silly to me, as to this thread. I mean, this is not about homosexuality and its criminalization so much as it is about YOUR opinion about same. Your only political power is the bias of others who might agree with you, and hate. You hate the gay folk. And a happy atheist you apparently are . . . . geeeeeesh. What we need to be discussing is the reasoning why your personal opinion on any subject, should be of higher regard to my opinion or anyone else's on this thread. Right? So tell me, why is your opinion, more important than my opinion?

You really won't get a rational conversation with the loon otherwise known as aCW here. :nono:
He could perhaps be a deliberate parody of the cause he claims to be fighting for, rather than the inept unwitting one that perhaps is more the truth.

I suggest that you are very careful about any personal information you tell him because as sure as God-made-little-green-apples (atheist humour ) it will be used against you in the future if it serves to annoy you in some way.
Honest rational debate is not what to expect here from the likes of aCW.

 

[jsjohnnt]

Re: alwright. Thanks for the info. I am an old guy, came out of a very legalistic churched fellowship. and have been dealing with the likes of this Warrior fellow for years. I learned a long time ago, not to abandon my sense of humor when dealing with folks who are as judgmental as Warrior. Thanks for the advice. I will leave it at that.

 

[drbrumley]

So what passage does AcW believe to be true?

So what passage does AcW believe to be true?

It appears that I might have to put the Masters and Johnson segment on hold for a bit, as there is a confused Libertarian (and who thought I would ever write those two words side by side?) who isn't sure what the proper role of government is.


drbrumley (aka Doc) here's your chance to refute Part 1's most important post and question God's 3 Divine Institutions.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3310948&postcount=4195

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/issue08/civil_government.htm

http://www.westwalkerchurchofchrist.org/sermons/2008/THREEDIVINEINSTITUTIONS.pdf

So what passage does AcW believe to be true?

This one...Romans 13...?

13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. 8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

OR

1 Corinthians 6

6 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? 4 If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? 6 But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers! 7 Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?

Both are true, which lays waste to acw's interpretation.

 

[alwight]

Re: alwright. Thanks for the info. I am an old guy, came out of a very legalistic churched fellowship. and have been dealing with the likes of this Warrior fellow for years. I learned a long time ago, not to abandon my sense of humor when dealing with folks who are as judgmental as Warrior. Thanks for the advice. I will leave it at that.

I'll be 64 next month myself and rapidly running out of things that I'm too young for.
:e4e: