Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Observation: Four of Five Top Threads in Politics Involve Homosexuality

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Observation: Four of Five Top Threads in Politics Involve Homosexuality

    Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

    What's the deal?
    "Auto correct has become my worst enema."

  • #2
    Originally posted by Mocking You View Post
    Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

    What's the deal?
    For many people it's a bellweather of social/political change, one way or the other. That attracts attention. With some threads it's mostly a car wreck slowing traffic.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life






    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Mocking You View Post
      Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

      What's the deal?
      The biggest concern, I believe, is related to freedoms lost. For instance, the church being sued for 'equal access' of their building, is a clear infringement on the free exercise of religion. Indiana was told it has no right, as a state, to make its own law to protect this religious freedom.

      If I don't have a right to protect my family from other's values, I don't have a right to homeschool any longer either. The slope is slippery and we are seeing an assault on our values and our rights, as Christians. Society will not tolerate bigotry, and in so doing, is bigoted itself, but that pendulum swing will cause a lot of damage as the massive wrecking ball that it is.

      It will and does undermine biological families. It does and will continue to assault religious value. I don't hate gays, but I do want to protect my family from the onslaught and assault. The national assault against Indiana is an assault on a necessity: We HAVE to be in the world, but not of it, and have nothing to do with them. Ephesians 5:11

      Thus, a restriction on a Christian's ability to buy and sale is the mark of the beast. Christians will not be able to buy and sale, if they are to follow these teachings. So far, it is just about 'sell.'

      The issues then, are much larger than the context of an unbeliever's sin. We have never been assaulted by polygamists, adulters, or other practicing sinners to accept their sin as normal nor a demand that we not see it as sin. I can refuse a drunk. I can't refuse a homosexual? If I can't refuse ANYBODY, to protect my family, my values, or my business, I've lost significant rights, in favor of the offender.
      My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
      Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
      Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
      Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
      No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
      Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

      ? Yep

      Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

      ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

      Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

      Comment


      • #4
        Homosexuality is in the news because activists want to be able to discriminate against Christians ... legally. They don't like the state laws that mirror the federal laws and are misinforming the gullible public into believing Christians will use the law to discriminate against gays. If I had a business, everyone's money is as good as everyone elses. But some Christians have moral objections, which I respect. I do not believe this law does anything but protect those Christian business people from being forced to compromise their beliefs or go out of business.
        Eph 2:8 For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God's gift --
        Eph 2:9 not from works, so that no one can boast.
        Eph 2:10 For we are His creation, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time so that we should walk in them. [HCSB]

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mocking You View Post
          Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

          What's the deal?
          Homosexuals can't live in open sin, no more than someone who assaults another, nor an adulterer and expect preferetial treatment.
          "I will guard my ways That I may not sin with my tongue; I will guard my mouth as with a muzzle While the wicked are in my presence." I was mute and silent, I refrained even from good, And my sorrow grew worse. My heart was hot within me, While I was musing the fire burned; Then I spoke with my tongue:"LORD, make me to know my end And what is the extent of my days; Let me know how transient I am. NASB

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Lon View Post
            The biggest concern, I believe, is related to freedoms lost. For instance, the church being sued for 'equal access' of their building, is a clear infringement on the free exercise of religion. Indiana was told it has no right, as a state, to make its own law to protect this religious freedom.

            If I don't have a right to protect my family from other's values, I don't have a right to homeschool any longer either. The slope is slippery and we are seeing an assault on our values and our rights, as Christians. Society will not tolerate bigotry, and in so doing, is bigoted itself, but that pendulum swing will cause a lot of damage as the massive wrecking ball that it is.

            It will and does undermine biological families. It does and will continue to assault religious value. I don't hate gays, but I do want to protect my family from the onslaught and assault. The national assault against Indiana is an assault on a necessity: We HAVE to be in the world, but not of it, and have nothing to do with them. Ephesians 5:11

            Thus, a restriction on a Christian's ability to buy and sale is the mark of the beast. Christians will not be able to buy and sale, if they are to follow these teachings. So far, it is just about 'sell.'

            The issues then, are much larger than the context of an unbeliever's sin. We have never been assaulted by polygamists, adulters, or other practicing sinners to accept their sin as normal nor a demand that we not see it as sin. I can refuse a drunk. I can't refuse a homosexual? If I can't refuse ANYBODY, to protect my family, my values, or my business, I've lost significant rights, in favor of the offender.
            You and your kind are the problem.
            And I look forward to your kind dying off or converting.
            And most are doing the latter, as their sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and FATHERS and GRANDFATHERS come out of the closet and finally admit they've been lying to themselves for generations.
            “In many ways the evidence of our faith is found in our ability to control our tongue (or our keyboard)."
            -Adam Hamilton

            “Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.”
            -Ralph Waldo Emerson

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mocking You View Post
              Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

              What's the deal?
              Obviously there's an obsession. Why? One can only speculate. But it is interesting that states in the "Bible Belt" lead the US in consumption of gay porn.
              "The way to deal with superstition is not to be polite to it, but to tackle it with all arms, and so rout it, cripple it, and make it forever infamous and ridiculous." --H.L. Mencken

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jose Fly View Post
                Obviously there's an obsession. Why? One can only speculate. But it is interesting that states in the "Bible Belt" lead the US in consumption of gay porn.
                Yep!
                The more religious people outwardly try to oppress an idea, the more they secretly embrace it in the dark.
                Thus so many "conservative" homophobic male politicians have been caught with male prostitutes.

                It was true with interracial coupling, and its true with same-sex coupling.
                The most outspoken white supremacists in the olden days were the ones keeping the biggest number of bed-warming slaves.
                “In many ways the evidence of our faith is found in our ability to control our tongue (or our keyboard)."
                -Adam Hamilton

                “Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.”
                -Ralph Waldo Emerson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Jose Fly View Post
                  Obviously there's an obsession. Why? One can only speculate. But it is interesting that states in the "Bible Belt" lead the US in consumption of gay porn.
                  Sadly, pornography is legal using the first amendment. When homosexuals define their religion, then the Pandora's box of man's depravity tord self and money will be exposed.
                  "I will guard my ways That I may not sin with my tongue; I will guard my mouth as with a muzzle While the wicked are in my presence." I was mute and silent, I refrained even from good, And my sorrow grew worse. My heart was hot within me, While I was musing the fire burned; Then I spoke with my tongue:"LORD, make me to know my end And what is the extent of my days; Let me know how transient I am. NASB

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mocking You View Post
                    Four of the top five threads in Politics forum have homosexuality as the subject matter. One thread is 10 years old and has over 4,200 posts, but another one is barely 9 months old and has over 6,800 posts, and is Part III (Continued)!

                    What's the deal?
                    It's the *interest* factor.
                    TRUST
                    is a fragile thing.

                    Easy to break, Easy to lose
                    and one of the hardest things to
                    ever get back.







                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Lon View Post
                      The biggest concern, I believe, is related to freedoms lost. For instance, the church being sued for 'equal access' of their building, is a clear infringement on the free exercise of religion. Indiana was told it has no right, as a state, to make its own law to protect this religious freedom.
                      With you on the first part, oppose you on the second. I don't think the law protects religious freedom. I think it advances a particular religious view under color of law.

                      If I don't have a right to protect my family from other's values, I don't have a right to homeschool any longer either.
                      Hadn't heard. We do here on the homeschooling. I don't follow on the first part. The world mostly thinks Christ is a dead man. It won't impact my relation and shouldn't anyone elses. I mistrust any idea that requires silence or insulation for its life. Christianity isn't one of those.

                      It will and does undermine biological families.
                      We'll never agree on this for the same sort of reason I just went into. Similarly, the divorce rates among Christians doesn't move me to disparage the institution or question my faith.

                      It does and will continue to assault religious value.
                      Some religious value in the sense that any competing notion could be considered an assault. Now if your right to your beliefs is infringed upon that's another story. So if you ever own a bakery and someone says you have to write, "Lon's Bakery is a Proud Supporter of Gay Pride Day!" I'll represent you gratis and we'll win.

                      I don't hate gays, but I do want to protect my family from the onslaught and assault. The national assault against Indiana is an assault on a necessity: We HAVE to be in the world, but not of it, and have nothing to do with them. Ephesians 5:11
                      Rather, Indiana has chosen to attempt to defend discriminatory practice without a compelling business interest to justify it. This is religious legislation and that's contrary to the law of our land.

                      Thus, a restriction on a Christian's ability to buy and sale is the mark of the beast. Christians will not be able to buy and sale, if they are to follow these teachings. So far, it is just about 'sell.'
                      I don't believe there is a single law on the books anywhere forbidding a Christian from doing any lawful thing. But there are laws on the books forbidding homosexuals from otherwise lawful acts. And that's simply unacceptable, unless one day when you and I are old men we want to be subject to the whim of whatever majority is empowered.

                      The issues then, are much larger than the context of an unbeliever's sin. We have never been assaulted by polygamists, adulters, or other practicing sinners to accept their sin as normal nor a demand that we not see it as sin. I can refuse a drunk. I can't refuse a homosexual? If I can't refuse ANYBODY, to protect my family, my values, or my business, I've lost significant rights, in favor of the offender.
                      You can't refuse a person based on their moral choices unless those choices violate the law and actually infringe on your rights. You don't have a right not to be offended. Neither do they, comes to it.

                      SObG, there are a couple of significant differences between Indiana's law and the federal. I'll come back to that when I come back. I'm glad you nudged the point. I don't think most people realize it and it needs to be discussed.
                      You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                      Pro-Life






                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Buzzword View Post
                        You and your kind are the problem.
                        And I look forward to your kind dying off or converting.
                        And most are doing the latter, as their sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and FATHERS and GRANDFATHERS come out of the closet and finally admit they've been lying to themselves for generations.
                        It really is bigotry vs bigotry and the bigger bigot will win. I will meet in houses if I can't have a worship building, well until I "can't" exclude them from my home either. Then I'll be in a jail cell, but not with a homosexual, because that isn't a crime. Not wanting to/being command not to be around them is

                        Put me in jail or execute me, then.
                        My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
                        Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
                        Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
                        Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
                        No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
                        Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

                        ? Yep

                        Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

                        ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

                        Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          With you on the first part, oppose you on the second. I don't think the law protects religious freedom. I think it advances a particular religious view under color of law.
                          Well it is states vs State, in thinking and constitution.


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          We'll never agree on this for the same sort of reason I just went into. Similarly, the divorce rates among Christians doesn't move me to disparage the institution or question my faith.
                          You then, don't have a problem with a homosexual couple engaging in those activities in a church? Kissing one another? Wearing leather?
                          Is the only place I am free to 'not' see it in my home (unless I have a television)?


                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          Some religious value in the sense that any competing notion could be considered an assault. Now if your right to your beliefs is infringed upon that's another story. So if you ever own a bakery and someone says you have to write, "Lon's Bakery is a Proud Supporter of Gay Pride Day!" I'll represent you gratis and we'll win.
                          Why? If someone asks me to write #)($U)*$%)(#% on a cake (profanity), do I have to accommodate because I write whatever anybody else wants on their cake too (like "Happy Birthday, Joey!")?
                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          Rather, Indiana has chosen to attempt to defend discriminatory practice without a compelling business interest to justify it. This is religious legislation and that's contrary to the law of our land.
                          Again, see above and help me out. Why is it okay (presuming it is) to refuse to write a profanity, but it is not okay to say no to "Congratulations Adam and Steve!" I couldn't 'congratulate' them. Being forced to do a lot of these accommodations becomes communism rather than democracy, doesn't it?

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          I don't believe there is a single law on the books anywhere forbidding a Christian from doing any lawful thing. But there are laws on the books forbidding homosexuals from otherwise lawful acts. And that's simply unacceptable, unless one day when you and I are old men we want to be subject to the whim of whatever majority is empowered.
                          I think we already are. That is majority rule. I do understand you protecting 'our' rights but I think there is a need for 'diversity' to be protected too. What I mean is, fair is an understood concept, but I don't believe it is 'fair' for a women to go into my restroom. I'm not even talking about gay or straight, I just don't believe it a good idea to give women equal access to a standard stall. They can get their 'own' and they do have it. I'm okay with equal access in accommodation, but that means to me, if there is no bakery you 'can' go to, then I might need to bake your cake, but if you can go to another and get equality, a lawsuit is frivolous in my mind.

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          You can't refuse a person based on their moral choices unless those choices violate the law and actually infringe on your rights.
                          So we cannot ask Satanists to leave our church service? What rules can be employed? Do I have the right to ask them not to wear upside-down crosses when they come? Can I ask them from refraining from wearing chicken blood when they enter? Are any of my 'rights' violated by their upside down cross, or is it just my sensibilities and I really have no leg to stand on? What about 20 cross-dressing men? Can they sit in the 4 and 5 year old class even though there seems to be an implied restriction? Am I powerless to enforce that 'rule?'

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          You don't have a right not to be offended. Neither do they, comes to it.
                          That's a double-negative. What are you meaning?

                          Originally posted by Town Heretic View Post
                          SObG, there are a couple of significant differences between Indiana's law and the federal. I'll come back to that when I come back. I'm glad you nudged the point. I don't think most people realize it and it needs to be discussed.
                          My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
                          Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
                          Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
                          Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
                          No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
                          Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

                          ? Yep

                          Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

                          ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

                          Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            "Rather, Indiana has chosen to attempt to defend discriminatory practice without a compelling business interest to justify it. This is religious legislation and that's contrary to the law of our land."


                            This is what I receive by turning off the ignore list. Your rhetoric is the same as those who concieved it. Read the legislation as written, read Scripture, the federal act, then read the Constitution,as written, not what you feel anyone else has said. Don't have to have a degree to argue with a lawyer who doesn't practice law of any kind.
                            "I will guard my ways That I may not sin with my tongue; I will guard my mouth as with a muzzle While the wicked are in my presence." I was mute and silent, I refrained even from good, And my sorrow grew worse. My heart was hot within me, While I was musing the fire burned; Then I spoke with my tongue:"LORD, make me to know my end And what is the extent of my days; Let me know how transient I am. NASB

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by dreadknought View Post
                              "Rather, Indiana has chosen to attempt to defend discriminatory practice without a compelling business interest to justify it. This is religious legislation and that's contrary to the law of our land."
                              Well copied. Spot on.

                              This is what I receive by turning off the ignore list.
                              Yes, yes, I'd imagine that's about the only way you'd receive anything you'd rather not hear.

                              Your rhetoric is the same as those who concieved it.
                              My rhetoric is my own. What do you use?

                              Read the legislation as written, read Scripture, the federal act, then read the Constitution,as written, not what you feel anyone else has said.
                              I have. I can tell you of two distinct and important differences in the Indiana law and the federal law it doesn't actually mirror by virtue of the difference. I bet you can't without a quick Google.

                              Oh, here's a link to help you out (in case you're the sort who have difficulty crediting me): http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...ferent/388997/

                              Don't have to have a degree to argue with a lawyer who doesn't practice law of any kind.
                              To give that what it merits: that was a stupid thing to say. I'm not saying you're stupid but when you write that you might as well be.

                              Or, to go one better, as uninformed as suggesting that if a Justice retires from practice tomorrow it's an even playing field between you. It isn't.
                              You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

                              Pro-Life






                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X