Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 6

marke

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:
Now back to my other questions that you seemed to have missed:

Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ marke?

If people had to be correct in all their doctrinal views to be saved then likely nobody would be saved. The Apostle Paul had to correct the Apostle Peter on his wrong views and I believe both men were saved. Therefore, yes I believe a person can be saved and still be misled into wrong views.
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:


Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ marke?

When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be marke in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?

If people had to be correct in all their doctrinal views to be saved then likely nobody would be saved.
Good point, if everyone supported evil leaders like Donald Trump who amongst other things openly supports the God-hating, child molesting/indoctrinating, institution destroying rainbow flag of perversion death movement, no one would be saved (note that I dropped the word "likely").
Looking at paintings of Sodom and Gomorrah, aside from Lot and his family, I don't see evidence of anyone being spared.

Sodom-and-Gomorrah-John-Martin-1852-469x300.jpg
 

Omniskeptical

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:


Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ marke?

When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be marke in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?


Good point, if everyone supported evil leaders like Donald Trump who amongst other things openly supports the God-hating, child molesting/indoctrinating, institution destroying rainbow flag of perversion death movement, no one would be saved (note that I dropped the word "likely").
Looking at paintings of Sodom and Gomorrah, aside from Lot and his family, I don't see evidence of anyone being spared.

Sodom-and-Gomorrah-John-Martin-1852-469x300.jpg
Tell the Coast Guard. We are drowning in salvation dogma.
 

marke

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:


Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ marke?

When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be marke in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?


Good point, if everyone supported evil leaders like Donald Trump who amongst other things openly supports the God-hating, child molesting/indoctrinating, institution destroying rainbow flag of perversion death movement, no one would be saved (note that I dropped the word "likely").
Looking at paintings of Sodom and Gomorrah, aside from Lot and his family, I don't see evidence of anyone being spared.

Sodom-and-Gomorrah-John-Martin-1852-469x300.jpg
There is not a Christian on earth who pleases God by supporting sodomy.
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Tell the Coast Guard. We are drowning in salvation dogma
Good point, with Cheap Grace Theology out there, people are drowning because they don't know the truth.

Back to one of the reasons that they are drowning: more of "Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry"
 

Idolater

Well-known member
Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ ...?
What about absolute monarchists, or absolute democrats? Both of them conflict with the liberal institutions constitutionalism, separation of powers, civilian control of the military and the rule of law. Can you be a Christian and believe in absolute monarchism? Don't forget that for most of history absolute monarchism was the government of choice for most nations, including Israel after hundreds of years of Judges.
When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be ... in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?
Human rights; constitutionalism, separation of powers, civilian control of the military and the rule of law.
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:
Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ ?
Can you be a Christian and believe in absolute monarchism?

You're confusing a Godless ideology (libertarianism) with a form of government (a monarchy). If the monarch rules based on libertarian ideology ("It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"...i.e. pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro recreational drug use, etc.), then explain to the people following this 6 part thread why that person couldn't be a Christian, i.e. a follower of Christ.

aCultureWarrior said:
When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?
Human rights; constitutionalism, separation of powers, civilian control of the military and the rule of law.
How about something more simplistic like when voting, follow the commands of God in Exodus 18:21, as well as knowing what the role of civil government is as shown in Romans 13 and making certain that the civil leaders elected abide by those important rules?
 

Idolater

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:
Do you think someone can embrace libertarian ideology and still be a follower of Christ ?


You're confusing a Godless ideology (libertarianism) with a form of government (a monarchy).
Political ideologies form the forms of government. Monarchism forms monarchies, liberalism forms liberal regimes, socialism forms socialist regimes.
If the monarch rules based on libertarian ideology ("It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"...i.e. pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro recreational drug use, etc.), then explain to the people following this 6 part thread why that person couldn't be a Christian, i.e. a follower of Christ.
Monarchs can't rule based on libertarian ideology (which is a bent of liberalism---a bent towards anarchism---as opposed to conservatism, which is another bent of liberalism, that is towards paternalism) because liberalism conflicts with monarchism, unless it's a "constitutional monarchy", which is itself a form of liberalism.
aCultureWarrior said:
When it comes to supporting God's requirements for salvation, what would those requirements be in the area of civil government and selecting civil leaders?

How about something more simplistic like when voting, follow the commands of God in Exodus 18:21, as well as knowing what the role of civil government is as shown in Romans 13 and making certain that the civil leaders elected abide by those important rules?
The sword is for punishing evil, and if the law authorizes penalty for evil, then what you're supporting here is the rule of law, which is a liberal institution that I mentioned before. You're a liberal, which is what a conservative is, because all conservatives believe in the rule of law, constitutionalism, the separation of powers, civilian control of the military, and human rights. (We differ on what those rights are, and who has them, but you believe in them.)
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:
If the monarch [or any civil ruler] rules based on libertarian ideology ("It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"...i.e. pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro recreational drug use, etc.), then explain to the people following this 6 part thread why that person couldn't be a Christian, i.e. a follower of Christ.

Because no one can love God (and His institutions) with all of their heart, soul and mind and love their neighbor as they loves himself if they embrace libertarian ideology.
 
Last edited:

marke

Well-known member
There is not a Christian on earth who pleases God by supporting sodomy.
If you refuse to vote for someone who displeases God for supporting evil make sure you don't turn around and vote for a different politician who displeases God even more.
 

Idolater

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:
If the monarch [or any civil ruler] rules based on libertarian ideology ("It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"...i.e. pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro recreational drug use, etc.), then explain to the people following this 6 part thread why that person couldn't be a Christian, i.e. a follower of Christ.

Because no one can love God (and His institutions) with all of their heart, soul and mind and love their neighbor as they loves himself if they embrace libertarian ideology.
You're overstepping, which you might have guessed. Of course no one knows our hearts except God. And the Scripture doesn't even give us full clarity in terms of trying to ascertain whether someone really believes in Christ, so how can we now, well after the fact, deign to pronounce limits to what someone cannot believe and still be a Christian?

Libertarian ideology, which I've previously explained is a form of liberal ideology (separation of powers, rule of law, constitutionalism, civilian control of the military; human rights) with a bent towards anarchism (a distinct ideology from liberalism), is not the right ideology to my mind, but I know plenty of Christians who are not conflicted about their ideology and their faith in the Lord.

Conservativism is liberalism with a bent toward paternalism, which is pretty much the polar opposite of anarchy, so it's little wonder that you target libertarianism all the time.
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:
If the civil ruler rules based on libertarian ideology ("It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"...i.e. pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro recreational drug use, etc.), then explain to the people following this 6 part thread why that person couldn't be a Christian, i.e. a follower of Christ.

Because no one can love God (and His institutions) with all of their heart, soul and mind and love their neighbor as they loves himself if they embrace libertarian ideology.
You're overstepping, which you might have guessed.
For those viewing this 6 part thread from outside of Theologyonline who aren't familiar with TOL, it's a libertarian friendly forum. Many of the people who post here are into 'Cheap Grace Theology'.

Libertarian ideology, which I've previously explained is a form of liberal ideology (separation of powers, rule of law, constitutionalism, civilian control of the military; human rights) with a bent towards anarchism (a distinct ideology from liberalism), is not the right ideology to my mind, but I know plenty of Christians who are not conflicted about their ideology and their faith in the Lord.

I'll go with the definition that life long libertarians like Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Walter Block and Lew Rockwell wrote in the Libertarian Party Platform:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others...
Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

Looks good on paper doesn't it folks? That is until you scroll down and they explain what words like "liberty" and "peaceful and honest" mean in libertarian terms: the legalization* of homosexuality, abortion, pornography, prostitution, recreational drug use, things that anyone with common sense knows enslaves people to sin, it doesn't "free" them.

*Legalization falls under NAP/ Non Aggression Policy, which libertarians use to justify supporting all kinds of moral depravity, i.e. "without interference from government or any authoritarian power."
 
Last edited:

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:
I'll go with the definition that life long libertarians like Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Walter Block and Lew Rockwell wrote in the Libertarian Party Platform:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others...
Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

https://www.lp.org/platform/


Looks good on paper doesn't it folks? That is until you scroll down and they explain what words like "liberty" and "peaceful and honest" mean in libertarian terms: the legalization* of homosexuality, abortion, pornography, prostitution, recreational drug use, things that anyone with common sense knows enslaves people to sin, it doesn't "free" them.

*Legalization falls under NAP/ Non Aggression Policy, which libertarians use to justify supporting all kinds of moral depravity, i.e. "without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

anyone.gif
 

Idolater

Well-known member
aCultureWarrior said:
I'll go with the definition that life long libertarians . . .
Go with the definition given by life long political scientists. Libertarians are liberals, like conservatives---they just lean their liberalism toward anarchism, while conservatives lean their liberalism toward paternalism. But they're both liberals. You can check this on the internet, this is how the political scientists define libertarianism.

like Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Walter Block and Lew Rockwell wrote in the Libertarian Party Platform:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others...
Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."
The government (police, criminal justice system) has the power to kill you if justified, or they can imprison you indefinitely, or they can just fine you, they have a lot of power, and the libertarians do not like this one bit, but bear in mind that the government is there because of violent crime, Romans 13 re: "the sword". If you don't commit violent crime, and if you don't associate with violent criminals, then you'll probably avoid any very serious interaction with the government.
https://www.lp.org/platform/


Looks good on paper doesn't it folks? That is until you scroll down and they explain what words like "liberty" and "peaceful and honest" mean in libertarian terms: the legalization* of homosexuality, abortion, pornography, prostitution, recreational drug use, things that anyone with common sense knows enslaves people to sin, it doesn't "free" them.
Totally agreed on that sentiment. But you're just incorrect that people should be penalized by the government ("the sword") because they masturbate "wrong". Whether it's premarital masturbation, adultery masturbation, same-sex masturbation or orgy masturbation, the state shouldn't be nosing in these non-violent-crimes.

Even though masturbation "enslaves people" and "doesn't 'free' them', and as distasteful as it is to conceive of, let alone say it, we have the right to masturbate. You have the right to masturbate. I have the right to masturbate. Whether we do or not, is our free choice. The free choice to either enslave ourselves, or to free ourselves (or remain free).
*Legalization falls under NAP/ Non Aggression Policy, which libertarians use to justify supporting all kinds of moral depravity, i.e. "without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

anyone.gif
The government should interfere in immoral violations of human rights, if possible and plausible. To punish people for masturbating "wrong" is itself an immoral violation of human rights.

What is the official Catholic teaching about homosexuality?

. . . Homosexuals, like everyone else, should not suffer from prejudice against their basic human rights. They have a right to respect, friendship, and justice. They should have an active role in the Christian community.… The Christian community should provide them a special degree of pastoral understanding and care.” . . .
.
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
aCultureWarrior said:
I'll go with the definition that life long libertarians like Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Walter Block and Lew Rockwell wrote in the Libertarian Party Platform:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others...
Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."
Go with the definition given by life long political scientists. Libertarians are liberals, like conservatives---they just lean their liberalism toward anarchism, while conservatives lean their liberalism toward paternalism. But they're both liberals. You can check this on the internet, this is how the political scientists define libertarianism.
Why are you so threatened to acknowledge that the core tenet of libertarianism is the supposed right to do with one's body as he or she pleases without government interference?
The government (police, criminal justice system) has the power to kill you if justified, or they can imprison you indefinitely, or they can just fine you, they have a lot of power, and the libertarians do not like this one bit, but bear in mind that the government is there because of violent crime, Romans 13 re: "the sword". If you don't commit violent crime, and if you don't associate with violent criminals, then you'll probably avoid any very serious interaction with the government.

There, that's better (for those of you that don't read libertarian, idolater just made a plug for "victimless crimes", the two words libertarians frequently use to promote their Godless agenda. Anything short of murder is supposedly "victimless", especially homosexuality and recreational drug use).

aCultureWarrior said:
https://www.lp.org/platform/


Looks good on paper doesn't it folks? That is until you scroll down and they explain what words like "liberty" and "peaceful and honest" mean in libertarian terms: the legalization* of homosexuality, abortion, pornography, prostitution, recreational drug use, things that anyone with common sense knows enslaves people to sin, it doesn't "free" them.

Totally agreed on that sentiment. But you're just incorrect that people should be penalized by the government ("the sword") because they masturbate "wrong".

For those that haven't followed the idolater dog and pony show, he compares same sex buggery with that of masturbation. I guess that's what the homosexual Catholic Priests told 12 year old altar boys how to look at it.

In any event, I've contacted the White House to see if they have any extra of these lying around (I suspect that idolater takes his in pencil-neck small)

c4d0ddfff11e3fa3dd5b88e46975622a--sherlock-fandom-straight-jacket.jpg
 
Last edited:

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Before I continue with "Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry:

It looks like SCOTUS in a 9-0 ruling threw a wrench into the spokes of Donald Trump's not so tough on crime Presidency, when they ruled that low-level crack cocaine offenders cannot benefit under a 2018 federal law that reduced certain prison sentences in part to address racial disparities detrimental to Black defendants.

"The justices in an opinion by conservative Justice Clarence Thomas ruled 9-0 against a Florida man named Tarahrick Terry who had asked them to include offenders like him - people who had been arrested in possession of small amounts of crack cocaine - within the scope of the First Step Act signed into law by former President Donald Trump."
Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u...es-to-expand-crack-cocaine-reforms/ar-AAL1P6j

It all goes back to those supposed "victimless crimes" that Trump and his libertarian supporters love to talk about so much (homosexuality and recreational drug use being the two favorite).

Many following this thread will remember that I talked about Donald Trump giving a Presidential Pardon to drug queen pin Alice Marie Johnson who had ties to a Colombian drug cartel.

Yep, those drug cartels are "peaceful and honest", I can see why Trump pardoned Alice Marie Johnson.

Warning! "Peaceful and honest" pictures of the Colombian Drug Cartels in action.

Spoiler
5fc5ab97e2b666b5305313d22816142a.jpg
 

Idolater

Well-known member
Why are you so threatened to acknowledge that the core tenet of libertarianism is the supposed right to do with one's body as he or she pleases without government interference?
Yawn.
There, that's better (for those of you that don't read libertarian, idolater just made a plug for "victimless crimes", the two words libertarians frequently use to promote their Godless agenda. Anything short of murder is supposedly "victimless", especially homosexuality and recreational drug use).
Violent crime is the problem that our government and police need to solve, which includes every offense against every human right, which you admit, includes the right to masturbate. Probably because it's "victimless". Hypocrite.
For those that haven't followed the idolater dog and pony show, he compares same sex buggery with that of masturbation.
Close. Buggery is as offensive against Christian chastity as all other forms of masturbation are, in terms of gravity or seriousness. The oldest Christian traditions condemn them all equally. Compare that to this newfangled (basically iow 'liberal') disfigured modern Protestant sexual ethic, that approves of all sorts of masturbation, it being of course, "victimless".

And you Protestants wonder why it's just your churches with all the rainbow flags waving. Ie not Catholic, not Orthodox. Go to Mass. Spend time with the Blessed Sacrament, spend time with Jesus.
I guess that's what the homosexual Catholic Priests told 12 year old altar boys how to look at it.

In any event, I've contacted the White House to see if they have any extra of these lying around (I suspect that idolater takes his in pencil-neck small)
Oo, good burn. :plain
 

aCultureWarrior

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Continuing from page 36, post #708 and

Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry

Something every Pastor should study and explain the importance of to his flock on a regular basis.

"Neglect one institution (the family, the Church, civil government ) and you inevitably impair the functioning of the other two, and with it the testimony of godly men to each other and to others. Neglect one institution and you reduce the ability of God's elect to glorify God, to teach, obey and enforce His law. Neglect one institution and you distort and retard the progress of the Kingdom of God."


I repeated that paragraph from post #708 because it rings so true. Look at the family today: fatherless homes/massive out of wedlock pregnancies, abortion; the Church: teaching what I call "limp wristed Christianity, ie. cheap grace theology and the fear of even mentioning sinful behavior, especially homosexuality. Heck, there are even churches that embrace sin ("loving" homosexual relationships) and hence the numbers of people who believe in God are declining rapidly. Then there's of course civil government, where even the Republican Party elects as President someone who stands for things that God abhors. No wonder politicians get a bad reputation, because people fail to hold them up to high standards.
 
Top