alwight
New member
Dr. Lively seems to be rather upset by gay push-back, the nerve of these people.
Nah, I'm sure like any other Christian Pastor would, Scott Lively openly embraced a 47 page federal lawsuit charging him with "crimes against humanity":
Soros-funded "civil rights" group in NY files huge 47-page lawsuit in federal court accusing Pastor Scott Lively of "crimes against humanity" — for pro-family speeches in Uganda!
I wonder what specifically is the context that requires a need for "pro-family speeches"? :think:
In some locations say the US Bible Belt he'd simply be preaching to the converted I suspect.
In San Francisco otoh it might be seen as a rather crass provocation or perhaps a borderline insult if directed at gays.
In Uganda however I would consider it as a deliberate encouragement for the nasty theocratic, homophobic regime there and its mindlessly bigoted persecution of homosexuals.
A country btw where AIDS is generally a straight disease.
STDs affect all versions of sexual intercourse aCW, a fact that you often seem to choose to disregard. As for a supposed eternal damnation, then that is just a bald evidence-free belief, not something that should be imposed on those who may well believe something else.So people who want more out of life than disease, misery and death not to mention spending eternity in damnation, leave the homosexual lifestyle and often times homosexual desires behind so that Scott Lively will benefit from it?I'd suggest that gays typically hate the idea of "ex-gay" and that Dr. Lively wilfully chooses to conflate things for his own benefit.
Only I don't believe in your God/designer aCW, I believe that we are clearly evolved imperfect creatures. I have no problem with those who stick to safe sex methods or those who campaign for safer sex in general. I reject those like you who would try to use disease as an false argument against homosexuality.Perhaps you should focus more on why those who engage in an absolutely filthy behavior that goes against God's design for the human body are disproportionately contracting AIDS.In any case a person who has AIDS should be ex-any kind of sexual intercourse whatever the sexual preference is. ...
That is still not an argument against all homosexuals, just those who take risks.Review my posts throughout this 3 part thread showing CDC reports on how those who engage in homosex are disproportionately contracting STD's.In the context of sexual intercourse generally there is nothing wrong with pointing out the dangers of any unsafe sex. However it is not an argument against specifically homosexual sex and that is what gay people will object to imo.
Misdirection aCW, I actually referred to "similar standards within a gay context" not that they claimed "traditional family values"Explain what "traditional family values" means in a homosexual context Al.Yes, gay people are probably all too well aware that when specifically Lively talks about good traditional family values it's really code for claiming that gay people are without similar standards within a gay context. But nice try anyway Dr. Lively.
I've got some shrimps in the fridge aCW, an abomination, right? :chew: