By the way,
Esprix,
If you get a chance, could please make a copy of the official “agenda” for gay people and send it to me. I keep waiting for my bound version from the “So, you are gay” welcoming commitee but it must have been lost in the mail or something. I really feel out of my element without it.
Thanks in advance
The first rule of the Gay Agenda is never speak of the Gay Agenda.
Esprix
Well damn, I would have known that if I had received my copy.
I shall speak no more on this subject, master.
(ok, that sounded a little kinky)
Now, where were we?
I’m aware that the bible disagrees with current thinking to wit: “sexuality is not a choice” but an inate condition sort of like being born black. I’m interested in heaing your opinion on this, as well as your position on music guys post, specifically:
Different sins, in the OT, had different punishments/consequences. This is true even today. However, the Bible makes it very clear that in God’s eyes, a sin is a sin is a sin. Liars=bankrobbers=axe murderers=prostitutes=homosexuals-gossipers=etc etc. It’s all the same. (And I will set forth a theory right now: I can’t think of one sin that has done MORE overall damage throughout time than gossip.)
I could get into a discussion about why the 10 commandments were given to Moses and his crew, but that would totally hijack the thread.
As far as kids not giving kids of gay parents a hard time, I’m all for it. Parents are out doing extremely stupid/embarassing things these days with NO regard for how their kids feel about it, and you shouldn’t dump on a kid because of what their parents are doing.
My kid, however, does not need a show to teach them to be nice to people. That’s why I’m here.
And I’ll repeat again: we don’t have cable.
personally, I think Pat Robertson was raised by wolves…
Vanilla, you insult all members of the family canidae when you make statements like that.
Canis Lupus, canis latrans and canis domesticus all await your apology.
I think he was raised by sewer sludge, myself. 
WV_Woman: I propose that the sin of theft is the root of all immorality. Should we take this to another thread?
Oh, yeah, and Pat Robertson not to blame. Like the poor, the amazingly ignorant and bigoted will always be with us. Blame the people who, through virtue (HAH!) of belief (remember, kids, you can’t spell belief without spelling l-i-e!) support him.
Wow. Yow. God can’t distinguish between shoplifting and rape? Where the heck does it say that in the Bible?
So, what am I supposed to think about a god who would observe me loving my boyfriend, caring about him, supporting him in times of crisis, crying and laughing and learning with him, making love to him tenderly and lovingly, making both of our lives richer and fuller, and judge me just as guilty as if I had murdered him with an axe? Could I see such a god as just, or righteous, or even sane?
The god who I know understands compassion, and mercy, and most of all love. If your god can’t distinguish between love and murder, then I want no part of him.
robertl -
In This thread almost a year and a half ago*, we came to the conclusion that Hubris (pride) was the key to all immorality. Please keep up.**
As for Robertson…pffft. I’ve wasted enough brain cells on the man today.
*and, can I just say, OMG, was it really that long ago? Oh, man…
**For those who are humor-impaired, or who missed the smiley, this is a j o k e. Thanks for not taking me to the Pit over it.
MrVisible said
Not only do I agree with this, I thought it bore repeating.
Poly, thanks. You know why.
I’m not bothering. You’re not reading what I’m saying.
Screw it.
We’re reading it. We just don’t agree with it.
As I’ve said many times before, never confuse misunderstanding with disagreement.
Yup. Figures.
It’s become pretty obvious to me that there is no rational basis for the arguments people use to persecute homosexuals. It always comes down to “God said so” or “It’s icky.” And neither of those positions is subject to reason; you can argue yourself blue in the face, and someone who’s come to those conclusions will bluster, and rage, and get frustrated, but they’ll never change their minds. The conclusion wasn’t reached through logic, so logic has no effect on it.
However, I do have a sense of obligation. I feel that if someone is mired in irrational hatred, then it’s my duty to at least try and help them see that they don’t have to hate. So, I keep plugging away at it. Someday, something I’ve said here might be remembered by someone, and a child might not get thrown out of a home, or a beating might not take place, or an unkind word might not get said.
Which, (he said, neatly circling back to the OP) is what the program on Nick was all about. It wasn’t trying to change people’s minds; it was trying to make them realize that there are many, many ways of seeing this one issue. To make them realize that the people who are at the center of this debate aren’t issues, or political positions, but people. And that no political or religious beliefs are ever reason enough to hurt children.
One of the things I liked about the show was the honesty of the kids. Something adults lack sometimes.
No offense, WV_Woman, but I wish you wouldn’t just go away in a huff. If you truly believe in what you are saying, which is fine, at least stick around and defend your position. We are paying attention to what you are saying and we are not trying to belittle you. We just disagree which is what debate is all about. I, for one, appreciate your input, regardless of whether I agree with your position.
WV_Woman, God never said, “Thou shalt not be gay.” He appears to have commanded against specific acts, and apparently used the idea of formerly straight people who rejected Him feeling homosexual lust as a sort of shock treatment for them (Romans 1:27ff).
The distinction that I am drawing is that like yourself and everybody else, I am a sinner saved by His grace, and with my life reshaped through His mercy. Though I can still feel a kick to my libido seeing someone beautiful, I am committed to my wife, and will be for the remainder of our years together. Okay, here’s Joe Gayman, whose sexuality and love responses are oriented towards other men. What is God going to do with him when he finally accepts Him? Like the rest of us, he’ll be led to use his sexuality and his ability to love, along with the rest of him, in God’s service. It’s not a case of “being turned from a sinful lifestyle.” (BTW, I’ve never gotten an accurate definition of what “the gay lifestyle,” as used by those who oppose it, is intended to mean, and that’s not playing games with words – there are a bunch of related meanings that those words could have, and I really want to know what people mean by them, in order to discuss what they’re opposing more clearly.) Rather, it’s a case of God transfiguring every part of a person’s being, over a period of time, into someone who takes joy and finds fulfillment in following Him. A crabbed sense of guilt and mandated celibacy to which one does not feel called except out of guilt that “sex is sinful” is not that sort of new and richer life which He promises.
Think it through, doing the best job you can of seeing things from a gay person’s perspective in the process, and give me an honest response to what I’m posting. I’m not denying what you say so much as trying to engage you in some intelligent dialogue from a Christian perspective on the topic.
WV_Woman,
I wish you wouldn’t go away in a huff. I think we are reading what you are saying and we are not trying to belittle you. Some of us just don’t agree. That is essential for a debate. I do appreciate your input into this thread though
Poly, I know Joe Gayman—and I’m sorry, but that guy is just hopeless . . .
I do now humbly apologize to all wolves and wolverines.
FTR, my son wouldn’t have wanted to watch it had we been home.
He likes cartoons and funny stuff.
My guess is he would be like, “so?”
Sorry, I’m having a lot of trouble posting lately 