Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4

[aCultureWarrior]

In three prior posts I expressed my concerns regarding the defense the pro Christian legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADL) will be presenting to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) when their client Jack Phillips' case goes before them.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5093991&viewfull=1#post5093991

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5094364&viewfull=1#post5094364

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5094448&viewfull=1#post5094448

My point is that it is of the utmost importance that a free society have religious freedom, and that freedom shouldn't be watered down by tying it in with the supposed right to 'artistic expression'.

I'll address the last argument point by point.

4 Key Arguments We Are Making To Defend Jack Phillips At The Supreme Court
https://adflegal.org/detailspages/b...-to-defend-jack-phillips-at-the-supreme-court

by Sarah Kramer, August 31, 2017

[4]The government cannot declare that certain beliefs are unacceptable and push them out of the public square.

Sure it can, that's what government i.e. laws are all about: to curtail the actions of a person, based on that person's beliefs; actions that government, i.e. laws deem immoral. Remember that all laws have a moral teaching: Either they say "thou shalt, or thou shalt not". Since homosexuality was made legal by various States and through the bogus Lawrence v Texas SCOTUS ruling, homosexuality falls under the "thou shalt" category.

In a righteous society abortion, homosexuality, adultery and pornography would be illegal. A person can believe that they have a right to engage in those behaviors, but that doesn't mean they have a right to take action on those beliefs.

When the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges to redefine marriage, it was careful to note that the freedom of individuals to hold to “decent and honorable religious” beliefs about marriage must also be upheld. Most major religions believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. One Supreme Court decision does not make this belief any less valid—and the Court recognized that.

The dissenting SCOTUS Justices in Obergefell v Hodges saw the ruling as a huge red flag on religious freedom.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5083715&viewfull=1#post5083715

Again: you can believe that homosexuality and thus homosexual faux marriage is wrong, but you can't take actions on those beliefs.

If the government is permitted to decide which beliefs are acceptable, that should concern us all. Cultures and governments change, and it could be your ideas or beliefs that the government targets next – which is why we must advocate for the freedom of all to peacefully live and work according to their beliefs, regardless of whether we agree.

Ah, the coexist/Rodney King's "Why can't we all just get along?" mentality. In order to coexist Ms. Kramer, someone has to give up their values/beliefs and thus their actions based on those values/beliefs.

It doesn’t matter where you stand on same-sex marriage. That’s not what this case is about. This case is about the freedom to live and work according to your deeply held beliefs. If you want that freedom for yourself – then supporting Jack is a no-brainer.

This case is about a Christian baker who refused to cater to the homosexual agenda. While it appears that the ADL wants to water down the importance of religious freedom to win this case, I would prefer that Christian and baker Jack Phillips lose this case so that a precedent isn't set that would ultimately lessen the importance of religious freedom.

On more thing: I keep reading where Christians who refused to cater to homosexual wedding events (florists, bakers, etc.) tell the proud and unrepentant sinners businesses that will cater to their immoral actions.

What's with that?

That's like security personnel on the Golden Gate Bridge telling someone who is going to jump to their death that he or she can't do it on their bridge, but gives directions to another bridge where the person can do himself in.

http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/11/26/34/2451246/7/1024x1024.jpg

 

[Arthur Brain]

My point is that it is of the utmost importance that a free society have religious freedom, and that freedom shouldn't be watered down by tying it in with the supposed right to 'artistic expression'.

"Free society"?! You don't advocate anything of the sort. You promote a theocratic state that would enforce laws based on your own religious beliefs and obsessions whether people under such laws believed the same as you or not and most of them wouldn't. You have religious freedom - to believe as you will but that ends when you try to force it onto others, as it should be in a 'free' society. Don't like it? Set up your own community with like "minds".

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
My point is that it is of the utmost importance that a free society have religious freedom, and that freedom shouldn't be watered down by tying it in with the supposed right to 'artistic expression'.

"Free society"?! You don't advocate anything of the sort. You promote a theocratic state that would enforce laws based on your own religious beliefs and obsessions whether people under such laws believed the same as you or not and most of them wouldn't. You have religious freedom - to believe as you will but that ends when you try to force it onto others, as it should be in a 'free' society. Don't like it? Set up your own community with like "minds".

Surely after spending this much time in a Christian forum you know what a theocracy is? (psssst, legislating righteous laws against such things as abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery doesn't make a nation a "theocracy". A state run church that requires the citizens of the country to embrace that religious doctrine is what makes a theocracy).

Here's a clue to help your ever so lying tongue confused mind. This particular religion is strong allies with the LGBTQ movement, even though LGBTQ'ers know that this theocratic religion murders homosexuals.

The LGBTQueer movement overlooks being murdered by their fellow barbarians because the inseparable bond between this theocratic religion and the LGBTQueer movement is their mutual HATRED for Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Any idea what religion I'm talking about?

https://mrb562.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/theocracy-of-hate.png?w=540&h=470

Be thankful for the Christian religion Art, as we don't want to murder homosexuals, we want them to come to the realization that they, like all sinners, need Jesus Christ in their lives.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Surely after spending this much time in a Christian forum you know what a theocracy is? (psssst, legislating righteous laws against such things as abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery doesn't make a nation a "theocracy". A state run church that requires the citizens of the country to embrace that religious doctrine is what makes a theocracy).

Here's a clue to help your ever so lying tongue confused mind. This particular religion is strong allies with the LGBTQ movement, even though LGBTQ'ers know that this theocratic religion murders homosexuals.

The LGBTQueer movement overlooks being murdered by their fellow barbarians because the inseparable bond between this theocratic religion and the LGBTQueer movement is their mutual HATRED for Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Any idea what religion I'm talking about?

Be thankful for the Christian religion Art, as we don't want to murder homosexuals, we want them to come to the realization that they, like all sinners, need Jesus Christ in their lives.

Hey, doofus, never mind trying to deflect away with your usual blabbering. What you endorse is imposing laws on people based on religion and that is not a free society. If you're for enforcing penalties on adults for consenting sexual practices out of wedlock then that isn't a free society by any stretch. I'm thankful that pious puritans and projecting windbags ain't able to enforce their tyrannical constraints on people in the West and if you don't like that then again - start your own commune somewhere you dingbat.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
...Be thankful for the Christian religion Art, as we don't want to murder homosexuals, we want them to come to the realization that they, like all sinners, need Jesus Christ in their lives.

Hey, doofus, never mind trying to deflect away with your usual blabbering. What you endorse is imposing laws on people based on religion and that is not a free society. If you're for enforcing penalties on adults for consenting sexual practices out of wedlock then that isn't a free society by any stretch. I'm thankful that pious puritans and projecting windbags ain't able to enforce their tyrannical constraints on people in the West and if you don't like that then again - start your own commune somewhere you dingbat.

"Theocracy!" "Police State!" Typical scaremongering tactics used by the sexual anarchist movement.

I'd ask Art Brain the following questions (which has silenced many a sexual anarchist in this 4 part thread) :

1). If you're against humans having sex with animals and believe that there should be laws against it, would that make you a "theocrat"?

2). When laws were enforced against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery here in the United States prior to Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, etc., was the United States considered a theocratic nation?

I would ask those questions, but since Art Brain can't even give a simple answer as to why he's at a Christian forum....

Next up: Seattle Mayor Ed Murray has been a very naughty boy.

 

[Arthur Brain]

"Theocracy!" "Police State!" Typical scaremongering tactics used by the secular anarchist movement.

I'd ask Art Brain the following questions (which has silenced many a secular anarchist in this 4 part thread) :

1). If you're against humans having sex with animals and believe that there should be laws against it, would that make you a "theocrat"?

2). When laws were enforced against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery here in the United States prior to Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, etc., was the United States considered a theocratic nation?

I would ask those questions, but since Art Brain can't even give a simple answer as to why he's at a Christian forum....

Next up: Seattle Mayor Ed Murray has been a very naughty boy.

You haven't "silenced" anyone in this five year borefest of a blog you wingnut. This car crash would have died looooong ago if it weren't for you propping the thing up with a tent peg each day...

You advocate laws based on your own "religious reasoning" that would take away the rights of people and force them into jail or "therapy" or back into where you are - the closet. It wasn't a free society when draconian laws were in place that denied homosexuals equal rights along with blacks and women. It is now so suck it up.

Oh, and why I join any forum isn't any of your business anyway and I sure ain't obligated to explain to the likes of you. The only reason you're here is because it's one of the few left that probably tolerates you and that's wearing thin...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

...You advocate laws based on your own "religious reasoning" that would take away the rights of people and force them into jail or "therapy" or back into where you are - the closet. It wasn't a free society when draconian laws were in place that denied homosexuals equal rights along with blacks and women. It is now so suck it up.

1). If you're against humans having sex with animals and believe that there should be laws against it, would that make you a "theocrat"?

2). When laws were enforced against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery here in the United States prior to Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, etc., was the United States considered a theocratic nation?

Next up: When discussing the legacy of Seattle Mayor Ed the ped Murray (not to be confused with Peter the pedophile Tatchell), can anyone guess what it will be?

 

[Arthur Brain]

1). If you're against humans having sex with animals and believe that there should be laws against it, would that make you a "theocrat"?

2). When laws were enforced against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery here in the United States prior to Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, etc., was the United States considered a theocratic nation?

Next up: When discussing the legacy of Seattle Mayor Ed the ped Murray (not to be confused with Peter the pedophile Tatchell), can anyone guess what it will be?

Ah, the same usual bunk. Laws are in place that protect animals, children and vulnerable people from being exposed to abuse, be that sexual, physical or else, a lot more so than they were when homosexuality was still considered a 'crime' ironically.

You would impose laws on consenting adults through your own beliefs and penalize them if they didn't at least pretend to be straight...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

"Free society"?! You don't advocate anything of the sort. You promote a theocratic state that would enforce laws based on your own religious beliefs ...

1). If you're against humans having sex with animals and believe that there should be laws against it, would that make you a "theocrat"?

2). When laws were enforced against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and adultery here in the United States prior to Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, etc., was the United States considered a theocratic nation?

Ah, the same usual bunk. Laws are in place that protect animals, children and vulnerable people from being exposed to abuse, be that sexual, physical or else, a lot more so than they were when homosexuality was still considered a 'crime' ironically.

You would impose laws on consenting adults through your own beliefs and penalize them if they didn't at least pretend to be straight...

So your answer to both questions would be "No".

Speaking of bestiality: Unlike homosexual pioneer/icon Frank Kameny who had no problem with human-animal sexual relations (as long as the animal didn't mind) :
https://americansfortruth.com/2008/...tiality-ok-as-long-as-the-animal-doesnt-mind/

why is bestiality wrong in your ever so confused mind Art, and what foundation (moral basis) is that alleged condemnation based on?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

For those of you that haven't heard, the openly homosexual Mayor of Seattle, Ed Murray, has been accused of yet another child rape stemming from several decades ago. The latest accusation came from his cousin, who was 13 at the time (I guess that not only makes Ed Murray an accused homosexual-child rapist-sexual predator, but an accused homosexual-incestuous-child rapist-sexual predator).

Mayor Ed Murray’s cousin: He sexually abused me, too

Sept. 12, 2017

A younger cousin of Seattle Mayor Ed Murray on Tuesday became the fifth man to publicly accuse the mayor of sexual abuse, saying Murray repeatedly molested him as a teenager in the 1970s.
Murray announced his resignation hours after the new allegation surfaced.

Joseph Dyer, 54, a dialysis technician and Air Force veteran, says he was 13 when Murray forced him into sex for about a year while the two shared a bedroom in Dyer’s mother’s home in the Long Island town of Medford, New York.

“There would be times when I would fake sleeping because I didn’t want him touching me,” Dyer, a married father who now lives in another state, recalled during an interview with The Seattle Times.
“And that’s when he would molest me. And my mother would be right there in the house, she’d be in the living room … watching TV, at that time it was probably “M*A*S*H.” And my sisters would be in their rooms, sleeping. And I would be in my room, and he would be in there, molesting me...

Read more: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/mayor-ed-murrays-cousin-he-sexually-abused-me-too/

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray resigns after fifth child sex-abuse allegation

Sept. 12, 2017

For five months, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray rejected calls for his resignation amid allegations he sexually abused teens decades before entering politics.
But Murray couldn’t withstand a devastating new allegation from within his own family.

He announced his resignation Tuesday, hours after news emerged that a younger cousin was publicly accusing Murray of molesting him in New York in the 1970s.

Read more: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...signs-after-fifth-child-sex-abuse-allegation/

This news came as a real shock to me, as former Mayor Ed Murray came into Office with stellar references:

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kuow/files/201307/IMG_3316.JPG

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I haven' talked about the LGBTQ flag waving Degenerate in Chief Donald Trump in a few days, let's see what he's up to:

Trump’s Spending Deal with Democrats Is Funding Planned Parenthood

Sept. 12, 217

President Donald Trump’s spending deal that – according to him – made “everybody happy” is not making his pro-life base happy at all.

The deal Trump cut with Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi – and that the Republican-led Congress passed – funds abortion giant Planned Parenthood into fiscal year 2018 with taxpayer funds from the Medicaid program and Title X family planning grants.

The spending bill passed the Senate by a vote of 80-17 and was approved by the House, 316 to 90. Trump signed the bill into law on Friday.

The deal places the president in the position of abandoning a specific promise made to his conservative base during his 2016 campaign.
Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence outlined a pro-life agenda for a Trump administration.

“I am committed to…Defunding Planned Parenthood as long as they continue to perform abortions, and re-allocating their funding to community health centers that provide comprehensive health for women,” Trump said in a letter to national pro-life leaders in 2016.

Republicans, of course, claim to be a pro-life party, but have failed to defund Planned Parenthood, despite promises to the contrary.

Terence Jeffrey, editor-in-chief at CNSNews.com, observes this is “the third spending deal President Trump has signed that funds Planned Parenthood”:

Read more: http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ng-deal-democrats-funding-planned-parenthood/

Trump's supports the LGBTQ agenda and Planned Parenthood: and democrats call Donald Trump their enemy?

http://i2.wp.com/dailyrunneronline.com/wp-content/uploads/Photo-Jan-27-4-28-52-PM.jpg?resize=800,445

 

[Arthur Brain]

So your answer to both questions would be "No".

Speaking of bestiality: Unlike homosexual pioneer/icon Frank Kameny who had no problem with human-animal sexual relations (as long as the animal didn't mind) :
https://americansfortruth.com/2008/...tiality-ok-as-long-as-the-animal-doesnt-mind/

why is bestiality wrong in your ever so confused mind Art, and what foundation (moral basis) is that alleged condemnation based on?

I ain't confused dude, I leave that for projecting cranks like yourself to deal with. There's no getting around the fact that you would impose laws on the whole population based on your own religious beliefs. That is not a "free society", it's one subjected to religious rule. Not interested in your usual rabbit trails...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
...why is bestiality wrong in your ever so confused mind Art, and what foundation (moral basis) is that alleged condemnation based on?

I ain't confused dude, I leave that for projecting cranks like yourself to deal with. There's no getting around the fact that you would impose laws on the whole population based on your own religious beliefs. That is not a "free society", it's one subjected to religious rule. Not interested in your usual rabbit trails...

It appears that Art doesn't want to talk about theocracies or the fact that one of the major icons in the modern day homosexual movement (Frank Kameny was responsible for threatening his fellow American Psychiatric Association members into removing homosexuality as a mental illness, thus paving the way for decriminalization) had no problem with human-animal sexual relations.

How about we talk about homosexual/activist former Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and the latest accusation of him raping his 13 year old cousin? (thus making Ed the ped Murray not only a homosexual child rapist, but a homosexual incestuous child rapist).

OR, we could talk about Donald the Degenerate Trump supporting Planned Parenthood funding (you've heard of Planned Parenthood Art, it was founded by the sexual anarchist that you refused to call a racist).

There are so many things to talk about other than me Art, when can we start?

 

[Arthur Brain]

It appears that Art doesn't want to talk about theocracies or the fact that one of the major icons in the modern day homosexual movement (Frank Kameny was responsible for threatening his fellow American Psychiatric Association members into removing homosexuality as a mental illness, thus paving the way for decriminalization) had no problem with human-animal sexual relations.

How about we talk about homosexual/activist former Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and the latest accusation of him raping his 13 year old cousin? (thus making Ed the ped Murray not only a homosexual rapist, but a homosexual incestuous rapist).

OR, we could talk about Donald the Degenerate Trump supporting Planned Parenthood funding (you've heard of Planned Parenthood Art, it was founded by the sexual anarchist that you refused to call a racist).

There are so many things to talk about other than me Art, when can we start?

No bunny trails being follwed today aCW. Now, if laws are imposed on society through religious rule then what is that exactly?

:think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
...There are so many things to talk about other than me Art, when can we start?

No bunny trails being follwed today aCW. Now, if laws are imposed on society through religious rule then what is that exactly?

:think:

Oh good, Art finally wants to talk about something other than me: the basis for a society's law.

First of all, let's be more specific in this conversation and not use the term "religious rule", as that could also involve the LGBTQ movements close ally and fellow barbarian: Islam and Sharia Law:

According to Sharia law (see links for details):
•*Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (Quran 5:38 - includes graphic image).
•*Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
•*Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
•*Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
•*A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (See Compulsion).
•*A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
•*A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
•*A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
•*Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
•*A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
•*A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see "Islamophobia").
•*A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
•*Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
•*A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
•*A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
•*Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
•*A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
•*A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband's consent to divorce.
•*A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
•*A woman's testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man's.
•*A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits (see Mathematics in Quran).
•*A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
•*A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
•*Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be "Halal."
•*Muslims are to subjugate the world under Islam (see Quran 9:29 and Palestine Issue).
•*Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
•*The list goes on...
http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html

What we're talking about is laws based on Judeo-Christian doctrine (thou shalt not murder unborn babies in the womb, even if a racist says that it's ok; thou shalt not sodomize your 13 year old cousin while his mom watches M*A*S*H* in the next room, etc. etc. etc.).

If you have a problem with Judeo-Christian doctrine being the basis for a country's criminal and civil laws, how about we start off with:

Leviticus 18:23

 

[Arthur Brain]

Oh good, Art finally wants to talk about something other than me: the basis for a society's law.

First of all, let's be more specific in this conversation and not use the term "religious rule", as that could also involve the LGBTQ movements allies and fellow barbarians: Islam and Sharia Law:

If you have a problem with Judeo-Christian doctrine being the basis for a country's criminal and civil laws, how about we start off with:

Leviticus 18:23

I've been talking about your ideals to impose laws on society based on religion and as before, no bunny trails are being followed today. I'm rather surprised that you're so reticent to admit you support your own brand of theocracy, why? You'd force homosexuals to live in the closet or lock them up, drive them into abuse therapy etc, all because of your interpretations of the bible, namely old testament laws. Under your ideals all of society would be subject to laws policing people's relationships and sexual lives regardless of what they believe themselves. We already have laws that protect children, the vulnerable in society and animals from cruelty and abuse and as you know, those laws have tightened and become more stringent through the years. What you propose is not a 'free society'. It's one run under religious rule.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
First of all, let's be more specific in this conversation and not use the term "religious rule", as that could also involve the LGBTQ movements ally and fellow barbarians: Islam and Sharia Law:

If you have a problem with Judeo-Christian doctrine being the basis for a country's criminal and civil laws, how about we start off with:

Leviticus 18:23

I've been talking about your ideals to impose laws on society based on religion and as before, no bunny trails are being followed today.

A basis for a country's criminal and civil laws: Judeo-Christian doctrine vs secular humanist man's. Based on your lack of an answer on the criminalization of bestiality, it appears that you want to borrow off of Judeo Christian doctrine when it meets your moral relativist needs (I believe that's called "cherry picking").

I'm rather surprised that you're so reticent to admit you support your own brand of theocracy, why?

You and the LGBTQ movement's support of Islam, makes you and them the theocrats.

You'd force homosexuals to live in the closet or lock them up, drive them into abuse therapy etc, all because of your interpretations of the bible, namely old testament laws. Under your ideals all of society would be subject to laws policing people's relationships and sexual lives regardless of what they believe themselves.

That's what righteous laws are for Art: to punish the guilty and thus help them in the long run. Note that I put your last sentence in bold: "regardless of what they believe themselves". Are you sure that you want to open up that nasty can of worms Art?

We already have laws that protect children, the vulnerable in society and animals from cruelty and abuse and as you know, those laws have tightened and become more stringent through the years.

Quit telling the same old lie about laws protecting children Art, it's getting boring.

And yes, those laws that you spoke about were legislated based on Judeo-Christian doctrine, not moral relativist secular humanist men.

Unfortunately they're not being enforced.

The bottom line is this Art:

Sinful man needs God to protect him from himself.

 

[Arthur Brain]

A basis for a country's criminal and civil laws: Judeo-Christian doctrine vs secular humanist man's. Based on your lack of an answer on the criminalization of bestiality, it appears that you want to borrow off of Judeo Christian doctrine when it meets your moral relativist needs (I believe that's called "cherry picking").

Hardly. I don't need a text to know that cruelty and abuse towards animals should be illegal. Do you?

You and the LGBTQ movement's support of Islam, makes you and them the theocrats.

Total bunny trail and total bunk.

That's what righteous laws are for Art: to punish the guilty and thus help them in the long run. Note that I put your last sentence in bold: "regardless of what they believe themselves". Are you sure that you want to open up that nasty can of worms Art?

They're there to protect society in the main, not to police people's relationships. Where it comes to people's beliefs then not sure what 'can of worms' you're referring to but let me spell this out just so even you should be clear. We live in the West. We have freedoms and liberties that tyrannies and despotic states do not allow. In other words, nobody gets to subjugate other people based on whatever particular belief they happen to hold, be that fundamentalist Christianity, atheism or any particular set. Provided people operate within the parameters of established, civilized law then they're free to believe that the moon is made of blancmange if they want. That is effectively a 'free society' or at least one that values individual freedom and liberty, the opposite of a totalitarian state.

Quit telling the same old lie about laws protecting children Art, it's getting boring.

If it's a 'lie' then refute it. I'll wait while that doesn't happen, just as how it didn't when you were repeatedly schooled by several others on the matter quoting the increasing stringency of laws pertaining to children and you were reduced to your usual blabber. TH had you pegged on it and I'm more than familiar with the laws in regards to safeguarding children and vulnerable adults, the human rights act etc etc.

And yes, those laws that you spoke about were legislated based on Judeo-Christian doctrine, not moral relativist secular humanist men.

Unfortunately they're not being enforced.

The bottom line is this Art:

Sinful man needs God to protect him from himself.

So you support a theocracy, not a 'free society'. Why did you bother to deny this to begin with?

:AMR:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

A basis for a country's criminal and civil laws: Judeo-Christian doctrine vs secular humanist man's. Based on your lack of an answer on the criminalization of bestiality, it appears that you want to borrow off of Judeo Christian doctrine when it meets your moral relativist needs (I believe that's called "cherry picking").

Hardly. I don't need a text to know that cruelty and abuse towards animals should be illegal. Do you?

The late homosexual pioneer/icon Frank Kameny did.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
You and the LGBTQ movement's support of Islam, makes you and them the theocrats.

Total bunny trail and total bunk.

The theocratic religion of Islam and it's barbarian Sharia law is reality.

Quote: Originally posted by aCulureWarrior
That's what righteous laws are for Art: to punish the guilty and thus help them in the long run. Note that I put your last sentence in bold: "regardless of what they believe themselves". Are you sure that you want to open up that nasty can of worms Art?

They're there to protect society in the main, not to police people's relationships. Where it comes to people's beliefs then not sure what 'can of worms' you're referring to but let me spell this out just so even you should be clear.

Peter Tatchell, Ed Murray, and practically every leader of the LGBTQueer movement has been a pedophile, a pederast or promoted sex with children, i.e. their "belief system" was that adult-child sex is perfectly normal. That's just one ugly part of the nasty can of worms that you shouldn't open.

We live in the West. We have freedoms and liberties that tyrannies and despotic states do not allow. In other words, nobody gets to subjugate other people based on whatever particular belief they happen to hold,..

Unless it's the LGBTQueer movement punishing people based on their Christian faith (i.e. Jack Phillips' up coming SCOTUS case).

No Art, we can't all just get along.

be that fundamentalist Christianity, atheism or any particular set. Provided people operate within the parameters of established, civilized law then they're free to believe that the moon is made of blancmange if they want. That is effectively a 'free society' or at least one that values individual freedom and liberty, the opposite of a totalitarian state.

First of all, there is only one kind of Christianity, i.e. being a follower of Christ and His Word.

Second: This 4 part thread has shown that homosexual behavior, the culture and agenda that go with it are far from "civilized". If you need to review the evidence from the index on page 1, I'll gladly review it with you.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Quit telling the same old lie about laws protecting children Art, it's getting boring.

If it's a 'lie' then refute it. I'll wait while that doesn't happen, just as how it didn't when you were repeatedly schooled by several others on the matter quoting the increasing stringency of laws pertaining to children and you were reduced to your usual blabber. TH had you pegged on it and I'm more than familiar with the laws in regards to safeguarding children and vulnerable adults, the human rights act etc etc.

Children being exposed to sexual perversion at 'gay' pride parades while pro LGBTQ city officials sit blindly watching it happen. The indoctrination of children, even though CDOM (contributing to the delinquency of a minor) laws prohibit it. Taking away parental rights so that children as young as 15 can have abortions and genital mutilation surgery to pretend they are of a different gender than they were born as, etc. etc. etc. You've heard it all before, but you conveniently pretend to forget it as fast as I post it.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
And yes, those laws that you spoke about were legislated based on Judeo-Christian doctrine, not moral relativist secular humanist men.

Unfortunately they're not being enforced.

The bottom line is this Art:

Sinful man needs God to protect him from himself.

So you support a theocracy, not a 'free society'. Why did you bother to deny this to begin with

Again, your ignorance of the meaning of "theocracy" is duly noted.

We've seen what has happened since society moved away from it's belief in God:

Misery, disease and death, i.e. sexual anarchy.

http://obit.glbthistory.org/olo/images/mosaic.jpg

http://obit.glbthistory.org/olo/index.jsp

 

[Arthur Brain]

The late homosexual pioneer/icon Frank Kameny did.

Predictable bunny trail. Point was made.

The theocratic religion of Islam and it's barbarian Sharia law is reality.

You mean the one that executes homosexuals? Well aware of how fanatical religious zealots operate and that's why it's a good thing the West is free of such theocratic rule.

Peter Tatchell, Ed Murray, and practically every leader of the LGBTQueer movement has been a pedophile, a pederast or promoted sex with children, i.e. their "belief system" was that adult-child sex is perfectly normal. That's just one ugly part of the nasty can of worms that you shouldn't open.

Laws in regards to child molesting are in black and white and enforced along with any manner of abuse. This is just you blabbering on and conflating homosexuality with pedophilia which is your usual bunk. None of this addresses anything I actually said or argued which is no surprise where it comes to you.

Unless it's the LGBTQueer movement punishing people based on their Christian faith (i.e. Jack Phillips' up coming SCOTUS case).

No Art, we can't all just get along.

And more of the same...

First of all, there is only one kind of Christianity, i.e. being a follower of Christ and His Word.

In that case, lying, spreading sleazy rumours and innuendo must inform part of it as well then. Noted.

Second: This 4 part thread has shown that homosexual behavior, the culture and agenda that go with it are far from "civilized". If you need to review the evidence from the index on page 1, I'll gladly review it with you.

Well, no. It's just shown that the author is a deranged nutcase who's likely in the closet himself.

Children being exposed to sexual perversion at 'gay' pride parades while pro LGBTQ city officials sit blindly watching it happen. The indoctrination of children, even though CDOM (contributing to the delinquency of a minor) laws prohibit it. Taking away parental rights so that children as young as 15 can have abortions and genital mutilation surgery to pretend they are of a different gender than they were born as, etc. etc. etc. You've heard it all before, but you conveniently pretend to forget it as fast as I post it.

Oh, I remember your usual and as per usual you conveniently forget all those debunked photoshopped pictures and misinformation over the years...

Again, your ignorance of the meaning of "theocracy" is duly noted.

We've seen what has happened since society moved away from it's belief in God:

Misery, disease and death, i.e. sexual anarchy.

Well, no, what's obvious is your reticence to take ownership of what you advocate. Enforcing laws on people based on your own religious beliefs. That's not a free society, it's one under religious rule if enacted. Was society under better laws when kids were sweeping chimneys and women were denied a voice?