Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
The ignorance is on your end. I've never in this thread or anywhere else, said that anything other than SSB itself is grave matter, and not being gay or having a desire or proclivity or attraction to SSB. That's an affliction, and those people are victims, and deserve support. I'm floating the notion right now that these people deserve professional medical treatment if they desire it, and I'm picturing something really nice like a non-end-of-life, specialized palliative care, that includes the victim, and the victim's family, to help them all with this very serious trial, that none of them asked for or wanted.

Thanks for the clarification. Although I dont agree that LGBTQ people are 'afflicted' or 'victims'. That is a seriously 'messed up' point of view.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Looking closer at the so called 'scriptures'........

Looking closer at the so called 'scriptures'........


Rev. Matt Miofsky and others have come to a different conclusion about what the Bible says about homosexuality. Good presentation :thumb:
 

MrDante

New member
The ignorance is on your end. I've never in this thread or anywhere else, said that anything other than SSB itself is grave matter, and not being gay or having a desire or proclivity or attraction to SSB. That's an affliction, and those people are victims, and deserve support. I'm floating the notion right now that these people deserve professional medical treatment if they desire it, and I'm picturing something really nice like a non-end-of-life, specialized palliative care, that includes the victim, and the victim's family, to help them all with this very serious trial, that none of them asked for or wanted.

Why would the entire medical and psychiatric community to do away with medical ethics and go along with this?
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
So for clarity, you deny homosexuals the freedom to consider their condition a disorder that they are afflicted with?

Quit blowing this huge smokescreen and pretending that you're on the side of God and decency on this subject. You've acknowledged that "consent" should be the standard for deciding whether something should be illegal or not.

Originally Posted by Nihilo
They're analogous, in that they are moral matters concerning consenting people.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5115710&viewfull=1#post5115710

You've even said that the Bible shouldn't be used as the foundation for civil laws:

Originally posted by Nihilo:
I'm not proposing forcing the Church's morality upon people.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5115710&viewfull=1#post5115710

Why isn't overeating illegal again?

Did you just compare sexual perversion with dietary issues? That's a typical smokescreen that those who defend sodomy use.

Take your issue up with God, as unlike sexual sins where He ordered death to those who partake in them, the excessive consumption of food has never carried a civil penalty.
 
Last edited:

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Rev. Matt Miofsky and others have come to a different conclusion about what the Bible says about homosexuality. Good presentation :thumb:

Yet another God-hating fraud that reinterprets Holy Scripture to meet his own selfish desires.

Since you couldn't do it, perhaps you can point out one place (just one) in the blasphemer's 42+ minute video where Holy Scripture embraces what God had said and continues to say is sexual perversion?
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Yet another God-hating fraud that reinterprets Holy Scripture to meet his own selfish desires.

Since you couldn't do it, perhaps you can point out one place (just one) in the blasphemer's 42+ minute video where Holy Scripture embraces what God had said and continues to say is sexual perversion?

This is one pastor among others who is being intellectually honest with scriptural interpretation who also has a heart after God's own heart like David.

You are still holding to your presumption that 'God' has said such a thing. The problem is in the 'interpretation'. God's love embraces every individual.
 

SabathMoon

BANNED
Banned
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I'm here to expose your fraudulent Libertarian ideology and political movement. When are you going to start defending it?



I've exposed both Daddy Paul and Jr. Paul in an earlier thread. Jr. Paul is more polished than the old geezer (while Jr. embraces homosexuality and decriminalizing recreational drugs, he avoids hot topics like kiddy porn):

Child Obscenity And Pornography Prevention Act
25 June 2002 2002 Ron Paul 62:3
Legislation outlawing virtual pornography is, to say the least, of dubious constitutionality. The constitution grants the federal government jurisdiction over only three crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy. It is hard to stretch the definition of treason, counterfeiting, or piracy to cover sending obscene or pornographic materials over the internet. Therefore, Congress should leave the issue of whether or not to regulate or outlaw virtual pornography to states and local governments.
http://ronpaulquotes.com/concordance/pornography.html
ABSOLUTELY WEAK, and LIBELOUS. Even if you have Ron drinking the hippy juice; you have failed to implicate Rand the "aqua buddha". It is well known Rand Paul is married; what is your point.

Unlike Today's Tom Sawyers, I have presented classical liberalism as Libertarian. Unless you have a problem with Federic Bastiat, I doubt you find all forms of Libertarianism disagreeable.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
Sounds like you are saying "It's OK when I do it."
I was pretty much just relaying what's in the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the topic of the immoral behavior of deliberate deceit. Its gravity depends upon any harm done.
 

MrDante

New member
I was pretty much just relaying what's in the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the topic of the immoral behavior of deliberate deceit. Its gravity depends upon any harm done.

So you think lying is OK as long as you can pretend it doesn't actually hurt anyone.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Yet another God-hating fraud that reinterprets Holy Scripture to meet his own selfish desires.

Since you couldn't do it, perhaps you can point out one place (just one) in the blasphemer's 42+ minute video where Holy Scripture embraces what God had said and continues to say is sexual perversion?

This is one pastor among others who is being intellectually honest with scriptural interpretation who also has a heart after God's own heart like David.

You are still holding to your presumption that 'God' has said such a thing. The problem is in the 'interpretation'. God's love embraces every individual.

I'm just asking for one (just one) verse or passage in Holy Scripture that embraces "loving" bestial, incestuous, adulterous and homosexual relationships, behaviors that God clearly condemns throughout both the Old and New Testaments.

Of course Matt Miofsky is just one of many perverts that has invaded the Christian Church in an attempt to further show his HATRED of God, something that wouldn't happen if homosexuality were still a criminal act and hence sexual perversion hadn't been allowed to go mainstream and create an 'agenda'.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I've exposed both Daddy Paul and Jr. Paul in an earlier thread. Jr. Paul is more polished than the old geezer (while Jr. embraces homosexuality and decriminalizing recreational drugs, he avoids hot topics like kiddy porn):

ABSOLUTELY WEAK, and LIBELOUS.

You're a fine one to be talking about libel. Your recent attempt at smearing the late great anti communist J. Edgar Hoover is just once example of you doing so.

From my thread "The Politically Incorrect Truth About Martin Luther King Jr." :

Edward S. Miller, a lifetime FBI man of high rank and stature, recently passed away at the age of 89. A good man and good American, Miller, who was also a veteran of World War II (Okinawa), faithfully served his family, country, and God. He also faithfully served the agency that hired him in 1950, as well as the longtime head of that agency, J. Edgar Hoover.
I was fortunate to spend a long Saturday afternoon with Ed Miller back in March, at long last meeting him after previously only corresponding with him. (He was an alumnus of Grove City College, where I teach.) It was a time I won't forget, and Miller had some things he wanted me not to forget -- and to share with the public. Foremost among them was his take on J. Edgar Hoover. He wanted the world to know what he insisted was the real J. Edgar Hoover --

"...Ed Miller told me that the claims of Hoover having Clyde Tolson as a "gay lover" were "absolutely false." He said that Hoover was a heterosexual who had love affairs with beautiful women such as the glamorous actress Dorothy Lamour. Their romance, in fact, almost led to marriage. Hoover, however, was married to his job. "She dumped him because he was married to his job!" said Miller. "He had one hell of an interesting job, Paul. And he was always very busy."
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ther-King-Jr&p=4906526&viewfull=1#post4906526
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ther-King-Jr&p=4906531&viewfull=1#post4906531
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ther-King-Jr&p=4906778&viewfull=1#post4906778

Hoover+&+Dorothy+Lamour.png

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YhPEFakvH.../tJpaNervV5c/s320/Hoover+&+Dorothy+Lamour.png

Even if you have Ron drinking the hippy juice; you have failed to implicate Rand the "aqua buddha". It is well known Rand Paul is married; what is your point.

I'm just refuting yet another one of your many lies:

Originally Posted by SabathMoon
I am not socially a libertarian, nor is Rand or Ron Paul.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5115846&viewfull=1#post5115846

Unlike Today's Tom Sawyers, I have presented classical liberalism as Libertarian. Unless you have a problem with Federic Bastiat, I doubt you find all forms of Libertarianism disagreeable.

If you want to make the case for sound economic policies using Libertarian doctrine, then do so, BUT, you can't borrow off of Judeo Christian doctrine because that would be 'stealing', and we all know how Libertarians feel about theft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top