Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
People and groups of people ("collectives") vote for politicians and political party platforms that match their ideology and often times their lifestyle.

It took a couple of posts (this time), but once again you are admitting it (aCW gives Al a patronizing pat on the head).

Just because there are right wing, apparently Christian based organisations for homophobic bigots to affiliate themselves with aCW, doesn't make all Christians homophobic bigots does it? Or perhaps you think that Christians too are a "collective"?

If someone who calls her or himself a "Christian" doesn't fit into your definition of a "homophobic bigot", then they better read the Bible more closely and have a heart to heart talk with God about their faith.

And yes Al, we Christians vote for politicians and political party platforms that match Judeo-Christian doctrine.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Notice that Grisham had clearly referred to drunk old guys, who did not know what they were doing, clicked on the wrong links, unaware......

I think that was his point: Let's lock up the roots of this thing, not drunken and confused people looking once...I cannot see where he was in any way excusing the making of child porn, nor the deliberate, sober acquisition of it. Not in any way.

Hillary Clinton Democratic John Grisham on child porn

So those who view child pornography (whether they're intoxicated while doing it or not) aren't real perverts, only those that touch innocent children are perverts? (No touch, no foul?).

If they haven't "hurt anybody", why would they "deserve some kind of punishment..whatever"?

 

[GFR7]

Hillary Clinton Democratic John Grisham on child porn

So those who view child pornography (whether they're intoxicated while doing it or not) aren't real perverts, only those that touch innocent children are perverts? (No touch, no foul?).

If they haven't "hurt anybody", why would they "deserve some kind of punishment..whatever"?

NOT what I said. Only trying to explain the context of his recent remarks. And yes, I would be happy to see total non-existence of child porn on the internet (and elsewhere).

 

[GFR7]

And now that gay men have a single, daily, pill to take, which prevents the risk of HIV contraction by 92%, we must focus more on the secondary effects gay marriage will have on social norms. Right? :think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

NOT what I said. Only trying to explain the context of his recent remarks ...).

Surely you're not naïve enough to believe that someone would go to prison for 3 years solely because they "pushed a wrong button" on the internet are you?

If you are, pull up a court document showing such a case or cases.

Avid Hilary Clinton supporter and defender of pedophilia John Grisham has an issue with the American Criminal Justice System. He believes that young blacks are disproportionately imprisoned for drug crimes* and that those who view child pornography aren't "real abusers".

"Asked about the argument that viewing child pornography fuelled the industry of abuse needed to create the pictures, Mr Grisham said that current sentencing policies failed to draw a distinction between real-world abusers and those who downloaded content, accidentally or otherwise."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...watch-child-porn-are-not-all-paedophiles.html

*Granted, Joe Biden's son, who was recently discharged from the Navy for testing positive for cocaine, won't spend a day in jail, but that's a topic for another time.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...fter-reportedly-testing-positive-for-cocaine/

According to avid Hilary Clinton supporter and defender of child pornography John Grisham, people who view pictures of children being abused, aren't the "real abusers".

 

[GFR7]

Surely you're not naïve enough to believe that someone would go to prison for 3 years solely because they "pushed a wrong button" on the internet are you?

If you are, pull up a court document showing such a case or cases.

Avid Hilary Clinton supporter and defender of pedophilia John Grisham has an issue with the American Criminal Justice System. He believes that young blacks are disproportionately imprisoned for drug crimes* and that those who view child pornography aren't "real abusers".

"Asked about the argument that viewing child pornography fuelled the industry of abuse needed to create the pictures, Mr Grisham said that current sentencing policies failed to draw a distinction between real-world abusers and those who downloaded content, accidentally or otherwise."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...watch-child-porn-are-not-all-paedophiles.html

*Granted, Joe Biden's son, who was recently discharged from the Navy for testing positive for cocaine, won't spend a day in jail, but that's a topic for another time.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...fter-reportedly-testing-positive-for-cocaine/

According to avid Hilary Clinton supporter and defender of child pornography John Grisham, people who view pictures of children being abused, aren't the "real abusers".

Well, I certainly think the producers of child pornography are the worst; but of course viewing it is wrong, and creates a market for it. So VERY wrong. And yes, I suppose I took Grisham at his word, which makes me naive.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

And now that gay men have a single, daily, pill to take, which prevents the risk of HIV contraction by 92%, we must focus more on the secondary effects gay marriage will have on social norms. Right? :think:

Your memory is failing you GFR7. You tried this ploy earlier in the thread (check the table of contents for page and post #).

While it's still uncertain if this miracle sodomy drug will work when it comes to HIV/AIDS, what about all of the other diseases that disproportionately afflict those who engage in homosexual behavior (anal cancer, syphilis, gonorrhea, etc. etc. etc.)? What about the violence that comes with the lifestyle of those that engage in the 'gay' culture?

What about drug and alcohol abuse and other harmful behaviors that disproportionately affect those who engage in homosexual behavior?

(Sigh, he tries so hard. In fact GFR7 is a shoe-in for this years "He tries so hard!" award).

What about

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Well, I certainly think the producers of child pornography are the worst; but of course viewing it is wrong, and creates a market for it. So VERY wrong. And yes, I suppose I took Grisham at his word, which makes me naive.

 

[GFR7]

:think: .............................. :AMR1:

 

[alwight]

If someone who calls her or himself a "Christian" doesn't fit into your definition of a "homophobic bigot", then they better read the Bible more closely and have a heart to heart talk with God about their faith.

And yes Al, we Christians vote for politicians and political party platforms that match Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Maybe some Christians in the US even vote Democrat then aCW?
Christians are not a "collective" then.
What about average gay folks?
Some in the US even vote Republican I gather, and not just ex-ex-gay pastors.:think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
If someone who calls her or himself a "Christian" doesn't fit into your definition of a "homophobic bigot", then they better read the Bible more closely and have a heart to heart talk with God about their faith.

And yes Al, we Christians vote for politicians and political party platforms that match Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Maybe some Christians in the US even vote Democrat then aCW?

Can a person vote for a political party that amongst other things boo's God at their last presidential convention and legislates things that He abhors and still call themselves a follower of Christ?

Christians are not a "collective" then.
What about average gay folks?
Some in the US even vote Republican I gather, and not just ex-ex-gay pastors.:think:

Some of those that proudly and unrepentantly engage in homosexual behavior don't vote republican for it's social platform, they vote republican because they like to hold onto some of the hard earned dollars that they earn styling hair or arranging floral bouquets. I've talked about the Log Cabin Republicans, etc. in earlier threads, review the table of contents to see what their social stance is.

 

[GFR7]

Notwithstanding the STDs , alcoholism, suicide rates, etc. of gays, I would say this HIV preventative pill is a massive advance for them in terms of the disease model argument. (Look how far they've come since the late 1980s, simply from the medications available to slow the advance of AIDS).

It doesn't detract from the gay marriage being unnecessary argument.

HRC backs use of HIV-prevention pill; calls on physicians, insurance cos. to endorse


NEW YORK (AP) -- The largest U.S. gay-rights organization Saturday endorsed efforts to promote the use of a once-a-day pill to prevent HIV infection and called on insurers to provide more generous coverage of the drug.

Some doctors have been reluctant to prescribe the drug, Truvada, on the premise that it might encourage high-risk, unprotected sexual behavior. However, its preventive use has been endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and many HIV/AIDS advocacy groups

The Human Rights Campaign, which recently has been focusing its gay-rights advocacy on same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination issues, joined those ranks with the release of a policy paper strongly supporting the preventive use of Truvada. It depicted the drug as "a critically important tool" in combatting HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

"HRC does not take this position lightly," the policy paper said. "We recognize there is still ongoing debate ... and that there are those out there who will disagree with our stance."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-10-18-12-46-13

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Notwithstanding the STDs , alcoholism, suicide rates, etc. of gays, I would say this HIV preventative pill is a massive advance for them in terms of the disease model argument. (Look how far they've come since the late 1980s, simply from the medications available to slow the advance of AIDS).

Yes, look how far they've (those who engage in homosexual behavior) come since the late 80's. Isn't it great that children are now contracting a deadly incurable sexually transmitted disease?

Setting aside the fact that homosexual behavior is nothing but a 'deathstyle', and that the child molesting agenda that is run by a bunch of thugs who would have fit in perfectly in the Third Reich is more than enough reason to recriminalize homosexuality, let's take a look at this new sodomy wonder drug that you and the sodomite movement seem to be going ga-ga over.

Without consulting Dark Radiance, who seems to be our resident expert on sodomy medication, let me give a shot at what I've learned about the new sodomy wonder drug (Truvada PrEP).

$13,000-$14,000 a year. Not to worry, sugar daddy (the American tax payer) will pick up the tab so that you boyz can still engage in your disgusting disease ridden behavior and hopefully remain HIV/AIDS free (did I mention that sodomy is financially costly? See the segment on the high cost of sodomy in Part 2).

If not taken daily, yes, if you miss a dose, it's ineffective.

Side effects? Possible kidney damage which would make healthy people resistant to PrEP.

The worst thing about this new drug is that it will give morally confused people the idea that they can engage in sexually deviant behavior without any consequences.

Sorry GFR7, but your sodomite movement has a long way to go before they can defeat God.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...-hiv-pill-will-give-a-false-sense-of-security

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/03/09/hiv-pill-for-prevention-debated-as-fda-ruling-nears/

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I'd like to know what church or denomination you are or have been
associated with? Can I get a straight answer?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I'd like to know what church or denomination you are or have been
associated with? Can I get a straight answer?

No, because this thread isn't about me.

Now if you would like to tell the readers of this thread why you believe homosexuality, abortion, adultery and pornography shouldn't be recriminalized, please do.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

No, because this thread isn't about me.

Now if you would like to tell the readers of this thread why you believe homosexuality, abortion, adultery and pornography shouldn't be recriminalized, please do.

I really didn't expect a "guy" like you to answer a "Christian oriented"
question. I find you extremely 'repulsive and disgusting.' I wouldn't
have someone like you near myself or any member of my family.

You're totally, repugnant, debased, obscene, anti-Christian, boorish,
and anti-social. I really don't believe a "religious extremest zealot"
such as yourself is safe to be around descent folks! I don't trust
"Crazies" like yourself! Now, knowing the kind of "creature" you
are, you'll probably accuse me and my family members as, being
rampant Homosexuals and deviates. Have at it! I have NO respect
for "persons" of your low caliber! If anyone around TOL is a deviate,
it's you, my friend!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Care to offer a retort?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I really didn't expect a "guy" like you to answer a "Christian oriented"
question. I find you extremely 'repulsive and disgusting.' I wouldn't
have someone like you near myself or any member of my family.

You're totally, repugnant, debased, obscene, anti-Christian, boorish,
and anti-social. I really don't believe a "religious extremest zealot"
such as yourself is safe to be around descent folks! I don't trust
"Crazies" like yourself! Now, knowing the kind of "creature" you
are, you'll probably accuse me and my family members as, being
rampant Homosexuals and deviates. Have at it! I have NO respect
for "persons" of your low caliber! If anyone around TOL is a deviate,
it's you, my friend!

(Sigh, someone is off his meds tonight).

For those of you that don't know about Grossie Marowbe, he's been a huge fan of this thread going back to Part 1 (or did you start posting your profound thoughts in Part 2 Grossie?).

Now anyone with an ounce of common sense would ask this question:

Why would someone be so vicious in attacking a person that is showing the truth behind this absolutely filthy behavior, one that God abhors, a behavior that since being decriminalized has amongst other things created a movement that has an agenda that corrupts innocent children?

On that note, I'll leave Grossie Marowbe to wallow in his hatred of all things good and decent.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

(Sigh, someone is off his meds tonight).

For those of you that don't know about Grossie Marowbe, he's been a huge fan of this thread going back to Part 1 (or did you start posting your profound thoughts in Part 2 Grossie?).

Now anyone with an ounce of common sense would ask this question:

Why would someone be so vicious in attacking a person that is showing the truth behind this absolutely filthy behavior, one that God abhors, a behavior that since being decriminalized has amongst other things created a movement that has an agenda that corrupts innocent children?

On that note, I'll leave Grossie Marowbe to wallow in his hatred of all things good and decent.

For those interested, we're now living in, what the Apostle Paul
called; "The Dispensation of Grace." You see, Christ died for ALL
of mankind's sins, including the abominable sin of Homosexuality.

However, ONLY those who hear the message of God's Grace and
respond with faith in Christ as their Lord and Savior will benefit
from Christ's death and resurrection. ALL of the "unsaved" will
stand before God and be judged according to their WORKS; not
their sins (murder, adultery, thievery, homosexuality, etc.) Why
won't the unsaved be judged according to their sins? Simply
because, Christ died for ALL the sins of mankind, even ACWs
hated homosexuals! Revelation 20:12 states; "And I saw the
dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were
opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life:
and the dead were judged out of those things which were
written in the books, according to their works.

So, you can see by this verse of Scripture that, no one will be
judged according to their sins (Christ paid the price for ALL sin)
however, they'll be judged by their works, and cast into the "Lake
of Fire!" ACW has chosen, one "PET" sin to unload his hatred on!

Why he chose this particular sin, to rant and rave about, is known
only to him and God! There's nothing in Scripture that says that,
the homosexual people will someday take over the world! Yet,
ACW preaches his hatred of those who participate in this, "Lust
of the flesh!" What does he hope to accomplish? Try to win them
over for Christ, or have them drawn and quartered in the public
square? Souls are at stake and all ACW has an interest in is how
these "Gays" can be gotten rid of or whatever else he has in mind?

Anyway (even gays) can hear of God's Grace, and place their faith
in Christ, be sealed/indwelt by the Holy Spirit and positioned into
the "Body of Christ!" Is it better to exterminate, imprison, or
execute gays or try and preach Paul's Gospel of Grace through
faith?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

In conclusion, I earnestly believe that, ACW is very, "Sick in the head and soul!"

This may be a "Political thread" but, it has Spiritual ramifications! The two can't
be separated!