Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
From Bryan Fischer's article: Ben Carson supports civil unions for homosexual couples.

So Bryan Fischer can apparently choose which sex he finds sexually attractive to him, just like you aCW.

God chose natural sexual desires for mankind in the womb, both Fischer and myself were fortunate enough in our childhood not to have them perverted by environmental factors such as sexual molestation or growing up in a dysfunctional family environment.

Dr. Ben Carson:
“In a recent interview on CNN, I realized that my choice of language does not reflect fully my heart on gay issues,” Carson said. “I do not pretend to know how every individual came to their sexual orientation. I regret that my words to express that concept were hurtful and divisive. For that I apologize unreservedly to all that were offended.”
Source

If Carson had been honest (but he's more concerned with being politically correct and not offending the LGBTQueer movement...as if he's going to get their vote) he would have gone further with that statement and explained what causes unnatural sexual desires.

But then maybe Dr. Ben Carson never researched the subject and really doesn't know.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

Let's start with the lack of parental rights to seek therapy for their sexually or gender confused child. As shown, many of these sexually confused children were sexually molested as a child and in their formidable teen years take on same sex desires.

Do you agree with the LGBTQueer movement that therapy for sexually and gender confused youth is harmful, or do you believe that parents know what's best for their child and should be able to seek therapy for them?

If you agree with the latter, how would you go about attacking the massive movement (nationwide) that is taking away the very foundation of parenthood:

The God given right to do what is (morally) best for their child.

(Darn, more silence from Town Heretic. And here I was so looking forward to working with him to restore parental rights throughout our nation).

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Why are there always rainbow flags at pro-abortion rallies?

Why does that matter? It doesn't begin to address my point about the Court holdings and what they rest on, the things that make gay marriage and abortion fundamentally separate issues.

It shows the fundamental mentality of the homosexual-abortion movements: the rejection of life and the destruction of life.

"Both camps strive for the acceptance of sex without consequence, thus aligning themselves with like-minded individuals."


If you're still confused, I'll come back with the 3 articles from Peter LaBarbera that I posted earlier.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
What a coincidence: Those who engage in homosexual behavior disproportionately smoke cigarettes (some studies show up to 200% more than heterosexuals to be addicted to tobacco). You really should review the index.

Again, why do you think that number (and I'm not suggesting your source material is accurate, only of no particular value) matters? What's the difference in cancer rates between smokers and non-smokers? And more importantly, what point does it alter?

I had pointed out in an earlier post how physically destructive homosexuality is and you responded with how destructive tobacco is. I'm simply pointing out (as I did with Art Brain in an earlier thread) that homosexuals are not only engaging in extremely destructive sex, they're doing things on the side that is harmful as well.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Since I'm talking about the index, you should check out how our Founding Fathers (you've probably heard of them, they're the ones that wrote the Constitution) felt about homosexuality.

The ones who said all men were created equal and owned slaves?

Yes! Those very same Founding Fathers! (And who says Town Heretic doesn't study his left-wing history books?) While we're on the subject: they wisely gave all men "unalienable rights"
http://www.gemworld.com/USA-Unalienable.htm

from God and gave us things never seen before like freedom of (responsible) speech and freedom of religion. Since the incarceration of Rowan County Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis and the numerous other cases where Christians have been fined or fired for standing up for God's Word, we as a country no longer have freedom of speech or religion.

Regarding the current state of the American Black: I covered how (thanks to the left and race baiters like the guy you helped put into the White House close to 8 years ago) Black Americans today are in a sad state of affairs in my "Racism in America" thread.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4357354#post4357354

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Yet another simple question that obviously doesn't warrant a response from someone who defends homosexual legislation, but interesting enough not other deviant sex acts.

I'm not particularly interested in deviant sex acts of any sort,..

You're interested enough to defend one of the most perverse and disease ridden sexual acts: homosexuality.

Quote: Originally posted by aCutureWarrior
If "studies" helped you changed your moral convictions towards homosexuality,...

See...that's just you lying again. And I mean by that you are a practiced and open liar, there being no other way to see it given my repeated responses on the moral foundation and my response, one of the ones you lack an answer for, directly on the point.

Or, you can support a right without supporting every use of the right. So I'm for free speech without supporting how the Klan uses it, or you.

Tell us again why sodomites have a supposed "right" to engage in an absolutely filthy disease ridden act, but those who want to have sex with a close family member or their beloved pet don't.

Quote:
The LGBTQueer movement is an extremely powerful movement, i.e. they get what they want.

I see your paranoia, but it's steeped in an profound and willful ignorance of the law and what the law rests on, as I pointed out repeatedly prior.

Art Brain currently holds the "Queen of Denial" title, but I bet if you ask him nicely he'll turn it over to you.
 

GFR7

New member
I probably shouldn't even open myself up to abuse here, but aCW, I have always seen all these points; understood how they are inter-connected, and taken a stand against them. I have presented papers on this topic. I have been derided for my social conservative stance.

Yet you call me a liar; say I don't believe any of it, and am on the other side. It's really unjust. :nono: :sigh:
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
I probably shouldn't even open myself up to abuse here, but aCW, I have always seen all these points; understood how they are inter-connected, and taken a stand against them. I have presented papers on this topic. I have been derided for my social conservative stance.

Yet you call me a liar; say I don't believe any of it, and am on the other side. It's really unjust. :nono: :sigh:

I would never call you a liar GFR7.

Nope, never.

And now for some music.

The Castaways

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8rCy173y7Y#t=31
 

The Horn

BANNED
Banned
Poor Culture Warrior . So deluded . So paranoid . So misinformed and uninformed . So close-minded . So ignorant .
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
...It shows the fundamental mentality of the homosexual-abortion movements: the rejection of life and the destruction of life.
Why does that matter? It doesn't begin to address my point about the Court holdings and what they rest on, the things that make gay marriage and abortion fundamentally separate issues. .

...I had pointed out in an earlier post how physically destructive homosexuality is and you responded with how destructive tobacco is.
Actually I noted:
Arguable, outside of a particular moral perspective, but we've seen the harm smoking does, to the individual and the larger society left with the impact. We don't ban activities because some harm will come from it. You need to review the standard again, assuming you ever did.
That remains true.

Yes! Those very same Founding Fathers!
The ones who said all men were created equal and owned slaves? Why? As with women's rights and the Civil Rights Movement, living up to the founding principles of the nation is an ongoing process. Sometimes, as with Scott or Roe, we get a thing horribly wrong and advance dehumanization under the flag of law. But we have a good track record over time and I think Roe will meet a fate similar to Scott eventually.

God and gave us things never seen before like freedom of (responsible) speech and freedom of religion.
You really don't read history books then. No, those weren't unheard of prior, but the sum of our intent and the breadth of our freedoms, unencumbered by kings or particular religious rule was a startling creation.

You're interested enough to defend one of the most perverse and disease ridden sexual acts: homosexuality.
No, I've never defended homosexuality, have never called it other than sin. I've also been clear about rights and the law and the want of secular objection and what should follow from it.

Tell us again why sodomites have a supposed "right" to engage in an absolutely filthy disease ridden act, but those who want to have sex with a close family member or their beloved pet don't.
I'm fairly sure I've never offered an opinion about what anyone does or refrains from doing in their bedroom. But as with so much you have it backwards. The state has to justify its interference in people's business. So, tell me why you believe you have the legal right to determine what consenting adults do with one another in the privacy of their homes.

Re: aCW's fantasy nightmare of a legalized pedophilia.
Art Brain currently holds the "Queen of Denial" title, but I bet if you ask him nicely he'll turn it over to you.
Just complete nonsense as a concern for this society (in the sense of worrying after legalization on the point). Of course those fools will attempt it. People attempt all sorts of things in this culture, but it runs afoul of too many Constitutional entanglements and the foundation of contract law itself, among others.
Criminal law too, comes to it. Hope you didn't mind my meeting your repetition with prior work on point.
 

alwight

New member
I'm fairly sure I've never offered an opinion about what anyone does or refrains from doing in their bedroom. But as with so much you have it backwards. The state has to justify its interference in people's business. So, tell me why you believe you have the legal right to determine what consenting adults do with one another in the privacy of their homes.
As an old git TH I remember the expression "this is where I came in" I don't know if it's used much any more. ;)
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Poor Culture Warrior . So deluded . So paranoid . So misinformed and uninformed . So close-minded . So ignorant .

So decent.

Sooooo De Horn, why is it that the homosexuals here on TOL (and there are many) are ashamed to admit it? Just because it's an absolutely filthy behavior (albeit a changeable one through spiritual and psychological therapy) doesn't mean that they should be ashamed of admitting to engaging in it.

Inquiring minds needz sta know.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

Let's start with the lack of parental rights to seek therapy for their sexually or gender confused child. As shown, many of these sexually confused children were sexually molested as a child and in their formidable teen years take on same sex desires.

Do you agree with the LGBTQueer movement that therapy for sexually and gender confused youth is harmful, or do you believe that parents know what's best for their child and should be able to seek therapy for them?

If you agree with the latter, how would you go about attacking the massive movement (nationwide) that is taking away the very foundation of parenthood:

The God given right to do what is (morally) best for their child.

(Darn, more silence from Town Heretic. And here I was so looking forward to working with him to restore parental rights throughout our nation).

I feel like playing more music.

Silence is golden but my eyes still see

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n03g8nsaBro

Moving on...
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by Town Heretic
I'm fairly sure I've never offered an opinion about what anyone does or refrains from doing in their bedroom. But as with so much you have it backwards. The state has to justify its interference in people's business. So, tell me why you believe you have the legal right to determine what consenting adults do with one another in the privacy of their homes.


As an old git TH I remember the expression "this is where I came in" I don't know if it's used much any more. ;)

Psssst, Al. Ask Town Heretic what gives him the legal right to determine what consenting family members do with one another in the privacy of their homes.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
I probably shouldn't even open myself up to abuse here, but aCW, I have always seen all these points; understood how they are inter-connected, and taken a stand against them. I have presented papers on this topic. I have been derided for my social conservative stance.

Yet you call me a liar; say I don't believe any of it, and am on the other side. It's really unjust. :nono: :sigh:

So why would a supposed "social conservative" want to imprison a Christian (Rowan County Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis) for standing up for God's Word?

I think it is federal law, that one goes to jail for contempt of court;

just as one does for perjury.

Jail seems reasonable, and she is certainly not the only one to go for official misconduct.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4439779&postcount=44
 

alwight

New member
Psssst, Al. Ask Town Heretic what gives him the legal right to determine what consenting family members do with one another in the privacy of their homes.
Once again you have it backwards aCW. Within reason whatever consenting people choose to do or teach in the privacy of their own homes with their own families is of course their business not civil law, but allowing say quack "reparative" therapists to publically ply their trade selling their snake oil cures to anyone who'll listen is a rather different matter.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior Psssst, Al. Ask Town Heretic what gives him the legal right to determine what consenting family members do with one another in the privacy of their homes.

Once again you have it backwards aCW. Within reason whatever consenting people choose to do or teach in the privacy of their own homes with their own families is of course their business not civil law,...

Who is going to decide what's "within reason" Al?
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Paul went to jail :idunno:


I pray that God will turn Davis' travail to His good service

I've noticed that many pagans, atheists and even some "Evan-jellyfish" Christians have said that Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis should just resign.

Why aren't they comparing her to Rosa Parks* who refused to sit at the back of the bus even though the law said that she had to?

*Unlike Parks, who with her husband were regular attendees at Communist Party meetings in the 1930's,
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/02/the_communists_and_rosa_parks.html

Kim Davis is a follower of Christ.

Kim-Davis-Rosa-Parks.png
 

GFR7

New member
aCW, remember when I used to call you, "Kentucky"? :think:

Anyhoo, can we count on you to join us?


ImWithKimRallyFlyer.jpg
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I've noticed that many pagans, atheists and even some "Evan-jellyfish" Christians have said that Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis should just resign.

Why aren't they comparing her to Rosa Parks* who refused to sit at the back of the bus even though the law said that she had to?

Because they have nothing in common ...

Kim Davis would have been one of those demanding that Rosa Parks sits in the back of the bus ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top