Sodom, Greece, Rome and homosexuality.

[AlAyeti]

Does allowing for diversity include parents having no voice in what their children are forced to be taught and have to accept?

Do Christians and the many other cultures and belief systems opposed to homosexuality have the right to have their culture and religious views respected in society when it comes to decent and natural sexual behavior in the education system and in public?

Are homosexuals demanding accesss to children under the label of diversity and anti-hate legislation?

This seems the number one issue between average and normal "family" people and the homosexual agenda.

Can there be laws passed that keeps homosexuality from becoming forced on children and families that oppose it, without the homosexual community and homosexual action organizations crying discrimination?

Is there such a thing anymore as heterosexual rights?

[1John2_26]

But of course it is no joke. As McCulloch so quickly siezed hold of is the typical side of the power being unleashed on the Christians. Anything "they" say is tainted, and everything the Gay Agenda says is good.

Reality.

http://www.straight-talk.net/gay/church.shtml

Christianity Under Attack

For "gay" and lesbian activists intent on molding American culture in their own image, the Church is seen as the most stalwart opponent resisting the triumph of homosexual philosophy. As Paul Varnell, a homosexual columnist and writer, says, "It can scarcely be doubted that the primary, and perhaps only sources of our culture's anti-gay hostility are the Christian denominations." To counter this threat, some activists have undertaken a long-term strategy of capturing the Church from within, in order to use its long-standing moral authority as an instrument of change.5

For example, Rev. Troy Perry (founder of the homosexually-oriented Metropolitan Community Church) said, "To condemn homosexuals, many denominations have intentionally misread and misinterpreted their Bibles to please their own personal preferences. (Emphasis added)5

"Gays can undermine the moral authority of homo-hating churches over less fervent adherents by portraying (them) as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step…with the latest findings of psychology. Against the atavistic tug of 'Old Time Religion' one must set the mightier pull of science and public opinion . . . Such an 'unholy' alliance has already worked well in America against the churches, on such topics as divorce and abortion…(T)hat alliance can work for gays." - Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's23

"Hilaire Belloc predicted in 1938 . . . the final attack on Catholicism is the world of secular humanism, attacking and intimidating the church - and the idea is that the Christian faiths of all denominations are to be pushed aside, marginalized, taken out of the political arena, demoralized, so that Christianity will become small mutant sects which will have no input into the history of the world."4

The agenda is attempting to demolish Christianity for once and for all, and it's happening now! Belloc said "[O]ne of the hallmarks of this final attack on Christianity will be reason and logic will no longer be applied and that it will be characterized by emotion, political correctness [he didn't use that word] and that these will be the first signs that the Christian faith is now under the final, most vicious and most ruthless attack."4

How has the Christian faith been attacked and demoralized? It has come about that the tool, the worm gnawing away at Christianity, has turned out to be the homosexual movement. It would have been unthinkable 20 years ago, but it is a reality now."4


Homosexuals are the front, the advance guard of humanism, secularism, materialism.4
We are fighting an evil and we must pronounce it as such. We must not be intimidated... it attacks the very essence of Christianity and accepting homosexuality will be, as Hilaire Beloc said, to lose our reason, our rational thought and to fall into emotion and intimidation.4

Homosexual activists are very closely involved in the abortion battle as well because they know it's deteriorating and breaking down the structure of society. 4


The homosexual activist movement is driving an agenda that will severely limit the ability to live and practice the Gospel, whether it is in the boardroom, the classroom, halls of government, private organizations, and even in places of worship.11

The biggest obstacle in the paths of the homosexual activists are people of faith who are serious about their faith; particularly evangelicals, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox Jews.

11

At a recent homosexual youth conference, activists readily admitted, "we know America was founded as a Christian nation, we are trying to get America away from that."11

A homosexual "pastor" stated: "There has been a radical shift in the past 10 years. Attitudes towards gays and lesbians have changed in the workplace, schools, and other civic entities. For the church to continue to stall seems archaic and irrelevant."11


"In the late 90's, the California Legislature voted to allow citizens to use public taxpayer money to sue Christian organizations (like radio stations or schools) that refer to homosexuality as a sin. (You know, like in the Bible?) This bill, AB257, actually passed in both Houses, only to be vetoed by outgoing Governor Pete Wilson. Another bill, AB310, would have put churches under state regulation, so they would be forced to hire homosexuals."10

"In any other context, this would be seen for what it is -- an Orwellian transformation of our culture with religious liberty sacrificed for the sake of a well organized group of moral revolutionaries. But, in our current day of moral revisionism, all this is packaged as the new moral enlightenment."30

If two people or more consent to something, that legitimizes it. Forget God, forget churches, forget community, and forget moral standards of any kind. "It's what I decide to do." That's what we are up against in America today.31

Christians who doubt that the homosexual agenda is a genuine threat to religious liberty need only consider employees in major corporations who are judged to be uncooperative and thus terminated or turned down for promotion, because they will not serve on a committee planning a gay awareness day or post a rainbow flag on their cubicle.

Just ask parents ready to take foster children into their homes in California, who are denied the opportunity to care for children in need because they will not bend the knee to the homosexual activists.

Or, consider those in other nations already facing criminal sanctions and heavy fines simply for preaching or teaching that homosexuality is sinful.30

For years, gay activists said all they wanted was "tolerance" but now that pretense is over.

Radical homosexual activists will use their financial and political clout to silence people of faith and the gospel. If God's people and God's church do not take a clear, uncompromised stand, the result will be that with each passing generation the freedom to live and practice Christian faith and the traditional family will become more restricted and become a remnant of history.26

Nowhere is the fight for religious freedom more evident than in the assault of radical homosexual activists upon the church.

If intimidation does not work, homosexual activists are willing to unleash the power of federal, state, and local governments to cow the church and believers into silence.

And once the church is silenced on the sexual behavior issue, it will not take long before it is silenced on other issues.38

If speaking out against homosexual behavior would be considered “hate,” then what about other sexual sins, such as adultery?

Without moral authority, the church in the United States will become like so many are now in Europe, museum pieces from an era long, long ago.

The result will be tragic for the millions of individuals who will be unable to hear and respond to the Gospel because churches may no longer be allowed to proclaim it.38

[micatala]

Once again, a presentation of someone's opinion as fact and proof. Even if this source were not biased, which it clearly is, opinion does not equal fact.

1John: I understand you feel you have offered proof, but again, an article espousing an opinion that agrees with yours is not going to be seen as any kind of evidence for your viewpoint. Evidence must be factual.

In addition, evidence for claim A must be relevant to the particular claim. Much of the evidence you provide, even when it is factual, is not relevant to the claims you are attempting to support. You still continue to treat Michael Swift's diatribe as some sort of evidence of criminalization. You continue to ignore the fact that it was presented as a rant, instead claiming that it represents a widespread agenda.

Simply put, it is neither any sort of evidence of criminalization, nor is it to be taken seriously as anything other than the rantings of this individual.

[McCulloch]

... As McCulloch so quickly siezed hold of is the typical side of the power being unleashed on the Christians. Anything "they" say is tainted, and everything the Gay Agenda says is good.

One fundamental principle of debate is to be able evaluate sources of information for bias. I don't expect unbiased reporting from Pat Robertson, the 700 club and the CBN News on the issue of homosexuality and the law. I also do not expect unbiased reporting from International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission on this issue either. Most reported 'facts' are biased, if only by which facts are emphasized and which ones are excluded. Wisdom comes with being able to estimate where and to what extent the biases are and correcting appropriately.

[melikio]

One fundamental principle of debate is to be able evaluate sources of information for bias. I don't expect unbiased reporting from Pat Robertson, the 700 club and the CBN News on the issue of homosexuality and the law. I also do not expect unbiased reporting from International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission on this issue either. Most reported 'facts' are biased, if only by which facts are emphasized and which ones are excluded. Wisdom comes with being able to estimate where and to what extent the biases are and correcting appropriately.

AMEN!!

What you are saying is so true.

And as I think back to the comments of many heterosexuals, I can see where the things certain Christians (not all) say are seriously biased.

It is popular to put things out there, as if no one could challenge them (I spoke for God, He spoke through me...etc.); it's fun, convenient or comfortable perhaps, but certainly not valid.

I will always oppose people, who promote the notion that their controlling others (with relgion), somehow makes the world a better place.

-Mel-

[Scrotum]

I will always oppose people, who promote the notion that their controlling others (with relgion), somehow makes the world a better place.

Which would make the fact that if you play with the idéa of everyone being "Christian" (John style), imagine it?

They would start a global war between the denominations, as they would need SOMETIHNG to fight about. I can see it now, Johns "Christian" is more "True" then other Christian, they dont have the same view, hence, not true ones.....

[melikio]

I will always oppose people, who promote the notion that their controlling others (with relgion), somehow makes the world a better place.

Which would make the fact that if you play with the idéa of everyone being "Christian" (John style), imagine it?

They would start a global war between the denominations, as they would need SOMETIHNG to fight about. I can see it now, Johns "Christian" is more "True" then other Christian, they dont have the same view, hence, not true ones.....

Exactly my point.

I used to be afraid of the song, "Imagine"; it really plucked at my fundamentalist views of religion and reality itself. But I later began to understand that Lennon was certainly NOT being anti-religious, he was pointing out problems that people tend to overlook inside of religion.

I'm convinced that unless a belief, philosophy (or even a single personality) is tempered by LOVE itself, then it tends to be DESTRUCTIVE overall (at best, useless).

And there is little doubt that many have been toxic and destructive toward homosexual people; the pious ones rarely admit that they have been so. They'll do anything, or say anything to destroy or force "sinners" (in their eyes) to "repent". History is full of stories like that, you can't miss 'em; yet, so many who are religious cannot see themselves repeating the same behaviors. They HURT people in the name of "God" (or their religion), and are no more justified than anyone else in doing so.

I don't necessarily promote "secualrism", but sometimes that is exactly what intransigent-religiosity needs a massive dose of. It is good, when people finally realize/accept that this world isn't THEIRS to control and manipulate.

I firmly believe that God is in charge, but has not handed some people the "authority" which they only "imagine" they possess. If I had the power, I would have chosen to be "straight"; I know well, that I don't have that power. And so it goes for those who can't abide homosexuality itself, they must realize that it's not up to THEM, to rid the world of it or convince their GOD that gay people are THE problem with this world. And while I'm exaggerating to make a point (I admit), for I've heard few "Christians" or others "openly" proclaim their hatred for homosexual people, their attitudes and actions clearly speak what I have described.

Then, people who think as 1John does, cannot seem to understand why homosexuals would seek to be allied with those who view them as fellow human beings, rather than hang out with a bunch of "Christians", who systematically refrain from showing homosexuals the godly affection which virtually all other sinners benefit from.

Simply put, "Christians" treat homosexual people differently. In fact, it's as if many have indeed believed the negative-hype and stereotyping that goes on, rather than getting to know a human being who happens to be "gay".

So, maybe gay isn't "normal" and maybe it is a "sin", but asking how Jesus would treat homosexual people, kind of addresses my contention about all I have said above.

-Mel-

[1John2_26]

Once again, a presentation of someone's opinion as fact and proof. Even if this source were not biased, which it clearly is, opinion does not equal fact.

1John: I understand you feel you have offered proof, but again, an article espousing an opinion that agrees with yours is not going to be seen as any kind of evidence for your viewpoint. Evidence must be factual.

Human anatomy is a fact.

In addition, evidence for claim A must be relevant to the particular claim. Much of the evidence you provide, even when it is factual, is not relevant to the claims you are attempting to support.

It is niether a hate crime or some kind of newly minted phobia to disapprove of homosexuality. Christians have 100% support from the Constitution to believe that "living" a homosexual life and lifestyle is 100% incompatible with Christian living. Yet, Christians are forced to submit to the homosexualization of their world too.

You still continue to treat Michael Swift's diatribe as some sort of evidence of criminalization. You continue to ignore the fact that it was presented as a rant, instead claiming that it represents a widespread agenda.

George Carlin and Bill Maher are comedians too. they are not joking about politics and legislation. Neither was Swift. Many of the things he "ranted" about are in place and have been put there like he threatened they would be.

Simply put, it is neither any sort of evidence of criminalization, nor is it to be taken seriously as anything other than the rantings of this individual.

I didin't make up the attack on Christianity by homosexuals. I am also no where near alone in seeing what is really happeing.

Outlawing America for gays

Get involved before it's too late


Guy Adams
Guy Adams
January 23, 2005


Dear America,

If you're a Christian or other decent patriotic American, this should interest you, as your free speech and religious freedoms are being legislated away, and as our time-tested moral rectitudes become moral incertitudes. Illinois recently passed a 'gay rights' bill SB-3186, and this bill sets another precedent that in time will affect all Americans, especially faith-based groups. I've heard many people say "It can't happen here." As I've stated many times, and as Dr. Alan Keyes has passionately and eloquently stated many more times than that, it IS happening here and it will continue to happen here unless we speak out now and speak out repeatedly. "Here" will one day become everywhere if this is not stopped. If you care for your free speech and religious freedoms — the very reason this country's founders left England centuries ago, then get involved and stay involved.

Get involved before it becomes illegal to get involved (It's already unfashionable). "That can't happen here," you say again? Not in America? We're one of the few nations on the face of the earth to allow political protest and public dissent. Most nations did not — and do not — tolerate it, and some tolerated it only up to the point where it ceased to serve the governments political needs. All through history governments discouraged and punished dissent — calling it sedition or insurrection. It's already against the law to speak against homosexuality in Pennsylvania (also Canada and some countries in Europe), where a pastor was locked up and charged with numerous counts of hate speech for publicly stating that homosexuality is wrong according to the Bible. Well then, why not lock up the gays who say that Christianity is wrong? It's not hate-speech in that case? Why not? Double standards abound, and they want it that way.

The American experiment in democracy is a relatively new thing to the world, and very brief in its existence on the world stage. If the Liberal Left's agenda will not be accepted by the heartland — and it won't — then their goal is to force it upon you using the full force of law, as has already happened in some places as I've mentioned. The great experiment will begin to end.

We must all act before our freedom to speak out has been completely taken away from us. If the freedom to speak out in public is taken away, what unobjectionable avenues for political dissent will be left? Not many. The Liberal Left knows this. What's next, prohibitions against speaking out in private — children turning in their parents? It's happened before. One of the great mistakes of civilization is to see a clear and present danger and yet say "It can't happen here." It has, it is, and it will, unless we begin to act now.

The many are being ruled by the few; in effect, a tyranny. Approximately eighty-two percent of Americans describe themselves as Christian, yet this overwhelming majority is being ruled by an extremely small and militant liberal minority. What makes this even worse is that a large percentage of non-Christians are also opposed to gay marriage and special gay rights. It's a tyranny, plain and simple. To reverse this tragic and unconstitutional course of affairs, take a few minutes out of every week or month and write your representatives — Republican or Democrat. The Liberal Left does this and more, and the squeaky wheel got the grease.

The Bible frequently seems to be at the core of this debate, and naturally so. Liberals hate the Bible because its moral certainties say that key elements of their agenda — namely abortion and gay 'rights' — are wrong. The Bible also speaks out against other bastions of the Liberals like prolonged government welfare, saying "If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat," but that's another discussion for another time (I'll be back). The Liberal Left won't stand for a traditional set of rights and wrongs because they want to outlaw the conscience of the nation. They want to do a bypass on the heart of America. All behavior is acceptable so long as it doesn't "hurt" people. What is hurt? To the Liberal Left, "hurt" apparently means gross physical harm, nothing more.

So let's define "hurt." Is a lifetime of emotional hurt, "hurt?" Is a mother's lifetime of regret after aborting her baby, "hurt?" After gay men in the thousands continue to die of AIDS, will that be "hurt?" After your right to free expression is legislated away, will you call that "hurt?" The great founders of this nation thought that there was enough "hurt" inflicted on them by the King regarding free speech and religious liberties, to compel them to flee Old England and come to America despite rampant disease here, isolation, no existing infrastructure and a lifetime of toil the likes of which many of us will never experience. Would it be "hurt" enough once again to not be able to quote the Words of the Creator as you see fit in public? I, for one, think so; do you? If so, speak out now.

This is not about "civil rights," as the Left would have us believe. It's really not even about politics. It's about legislating wrong behavior and forcing it down the mouths of everyday decent Americans. The right to pursue happiness is a right guaranteed to all, even for gays, but not if it infringes on the rights to happiness and free speech of others, as most gay rights bills directly or indirectly do. They seek to impose a humanistic morality — in effect, a secular 'religion' — on its citizens. This is what the Liberal gay agenda is about. Some of the embryonic gay rights bills passed recently don't seem that intimidating or all-encompassing, but they are merely starting points. Remember that a house is built one brick at a time. Gay rights bills in other states will affect you too, since our system of legal jurisprudence is largely based on the notion of precedence. If we allow our elected officials and unelected judges to legislate their concept of morality in stark opposition to the Constitution and the Founder's intents, or against the wishes of the people's majority, we're on slippery ground.

Finally, the gay rights agenda is spearheaded mainly by Liberals. Not Democrats or Republicans, per se, but far-left dyed in the wool Liberals. It just so happens that most Liberals are Democrats in this day and age. All Liberals are not bad, and no doubt some are sincere and patriotic, but it is a fact that the recent gay rights bill in Illinois — and gay rights bills in other states like Massachusetts — were shepherded into law mainly by ELECTED officials. Republicans should be appalled that there was a lack of clear and forceful opposition by their own party to this bill. Moderate Democrats should be dismayed that their party initiated the bill.

So write your representatives and tell them that you will NOT vote for them if they continue to support and pass, or fail to vigorously oppose, such abysmal legislation. Let them know that you'll actively work against their reelection if they persist on codifying unnatural behaviors and relationships against the wishes of most of the American people. Let them know in no uncertain terms, that their political careers will come to an end if they continue to restrict the free speech of decent Americans. For "We the People" to be effective, "We the People" must speak out and be heard.

Self-government is a gift from God, given to few in history. Participate in it. What we feed, lives, and what we starve, dies. Write your governor, senator and congressman. Then write them again.

[1John2_26]

Scrotum wrote:
Quote:
I will always oppose people, who promote the notion that their controlling others (with relgion), somehow makes the world a better place.

Which would make the fact that if you play with the idéa of everyone being "Christian" (John style), imagine it?

People wouldn't use the nickname for what holds testicles? They would use a more decent moniker.

They would start a global war between the denominations, as they would need SOMETIHNG to fight about. I can see it now, Johns "Christian" is more "True" then other Christian, they dont have the same view, hence, not true ones.....

Peace spreads Christianity. Persecution spreads Christianity. The opposition is now becoming Christianity in hoping they can kill it off from within. Denominations are handling heresy versus "real" Christianity very nicely.

Exactly my point.

Melikio, think about yoking. Just a word of advice between brothers in Christ.

I used to be afraid of the song, "Imagine"; it really plucked at my fundamentalist views of religion and reality itself. But I later began to understand that Lennon was certainly NOT being anti-religious, he was pointing out problems that people tend to overlook inside of religion.

Visiting any juvenile criminal detention center, any inner city, or youth mental institution can show reality you do not have to imagine. Lenon's world raped the youth into existence of today. So many fatherless children the sytem is now unimaginably overloaded. "Imagine that."

I'm convinced that unless a belief, philosophy (or even a single personality) is tempered by LOVE itself, then it tends to be DESTRUCTIVE overall (at best, useless).

Love is a father and mother raising their children without selfishness. Call your local marriage and family therapist for the numbers of shattered children from shattered familes.

And there is little doubt that many have been toxic and destructive toward homosexual people; the pious ones rarely admit that they have been so.

And homosexuals rarely, if ever tell the truth about the lifestyle.

They'll do anything, or say anything to destroy or force "sinners" (in their eyes) to "repent".

Please show one place in the New Testament that shows even the slightest support for homosexuality to be an accpetable Christian lifestyle??? Don't even use Pauline theology. James, Peter, John and/or Jesus, just one place Christians can accpet homosexuality?

History is full of stories like that, you can't miss 'em; yet, so many who are religious cannot see themselves repeating the same behaviors.

here is a glimpse from "the rock" himself:

13 Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed.

14 As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance.

15But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; 16for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."
17Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. 18For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

22 Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart. 23 For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

24For,
"All men are like grass,
and all their glory is like the flowers of the field;
the grass withers and the flowers fall,
25but the word of the Lord stands forever." And this is the word that was preached to you.

They HURT people in the name of "God" (or their religion), and are no more justified than anyone else in doing so.

You claim to only accpet "some things" from the Bible. Why not just discard anything you don't like? Why the need to create yet another trumped up attack method (spiritual violence, or whatever) to go after Christians that want to leave their lives of debauchery for something better.

I don't necessarily promote "secularism", but sometimes that is exactly what intransigent-religiosity needs a massive dose of. It is good, when people finally realize/accept that this world isn't THEIRS to control and manipulate.

Or sexualize. Not everyone lives defined as a result of their sex acts.

I firmly believe that God is in charge, but has not handed some people the "authority" which they only "imagine" they possess.

Sooner or later you get old. Sexual deviants must enter a form of hell when that reality sinks in. Then the need for "religion" and "spirituality" is sought by the deviant; and when a denial of a life of worthless, endless sex acts is asked to be grasped the deviant come unglued, but the repentant become born again.

If I had the power, I would have chosen to be "straight"; I know well, that I don't have that power. And so it goes for those who can't abide homosexuality itself, they must realize that it's not up to THEM, to rid the world of it or convince their GOD that gay people are THE problem with this world.

Please show where in the New Testament a Christian is a bigot (homophobe is a newly minted word) in thinking that homosexuality can be escaped "from." Please start with the Gospels and finish with Revelation? Gays and Lesbians want Christianity outlawed for what reason?

And while I'm exaggerating to make a point (I admit), for I've heard few "Christians" or others "openly" proclaim their hatred for homosexual people, their attitudes and actions clearly speak what I have described.

How many people arrested on Cops, think the cops are just wonderful people just doing their job? Bad boys, whatcha want, watcha want, watcha gunna do? If criminals had the political power of the Gay Agenda they could outlaw being arrested by policmen. Then again . . . they do have the ACLU.

Then, people who think as 1John does, cannot seem to understand why homosexuals would seek to be allied with those who view them as fellow human beings, rather than hang out with a bunch of "Christians", who systematically refrain from showing homosexuals the godly affection which virtually all other sinners benefit from.

Then why are homosexuals infiltrating Christianity? Why not gay skeptics movement instead of Gay Evangelicalism? Why not invent a new religion while inventing so many other words to oppose Christians????????? Gays see "Godly affection" as celebration and license.

Watch:

Southern Voice Article: "Falwell Speaks in Favor of Gay Civil Rights"
Conservative leader calls housing, employment for gays "basic rights"

By EARTHA JANE MELZER
Aug. 26, 2005

The Human Rights Campaign has formally thanked Rev. Jerry Falwell for apparently speaking out in favor of gay rights for the first time publicly.

Falwell, the high profile televangelist, founder of the Moral Majority and of the Liberty University, recently discussed potential Supreme Court nominees with President Bush before a pick was named.

On Aug. 5, during an appearance on MSNBC's "The Situation with Tucker Carlson," Falwell raised eyebrowns when he said he was not troubled by reports that nominee John Roberts had done volunteer legal work for gay rights activists on the case Romer vs. Evans.

In that case, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the state of Colorado could not create laws with the sole intention of discriminating against gay men and lesbians. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas - the judges that President Bush has said best represent his preferred judicial philosophy - along with Chief Justice William Rehnquist, dissented from the majority opinion.

Falwell, who in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, blamed the terrorist attacks on "the pagans, the abortionists, and the feminists and the gays and lesbians," and who describes himself as "very conservative," told Carlson that if he were a lawyer, he too would argue for civil rights for gays.

"I may not agree with the lifestyle," Falwell said. "But that has nothing to do with the civil rights of that... part of our constituency.

"Judge Roberts would probably have been not a good very good lawyer if he had not been willing, when asked by his partners in the law firm to assist in guaranteeing the civil rights of employment and housing to any and all Americans."

When Carlson countered that conservatives, "are always arguing against 'special rights' for gays," Falwell said that equal access to housing and employment are basic rights, not special rights.

"Civil rights for all Americans, black, white, red, yellow, the rich, poor, young, old, gay, straight, et cetera, is not a liberal or conservative value," Falwell went on to say. "It's an American value that I would think that we pretty much all agree on."

Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said his group welcomed the apparent softening of Falwell's position on at least some gay rights.

"Like most Americans, it seems Rev. Falwell has reached the conclusion that everyone deserves basic rights," said Solmonese. "I hope he also supports legislation that would deliver on these values."

Soulforce lobbying pays off?

Falwell was not available this week to discuss his views on gay issues. His office said that he was deluged with requests for comment on fellow televangelist Pat Robertson's call for the assassination of the Venezuelan president.

Earlier this summer, Falwell spoke at an "ex-gay" conference organized by the Christian group Exodus International. During his sermon he spoke warmly about the efforts of the activist group Soulforce, which seeks to free gays from religious oppression and is based in Lynchburg, Va., near Falwell's church. Soulforce has done extensive outreach to Falwell.
Falwell also spoke at length about a major heart operation he had had earlier that week.

Soulforce was founded by Mel White, a gay man who had worked closely with Falwell (even ghostwriting his autobiography) and his partner Gary Nixon.

White and Nixon founded Soulforce and moved into a rented house across the street from Falwell's church in 2001, after they realized that Falwell was not going to change his views and accept gays without long-term persuasion.

"I think last month when he dealt with his heart condition, he got closer to his maker," Nixon said. "And I think he knows in his heart that what he was doing is wrong."

I think in his heart and mind that Falwell is a smart man that knows that the secularists that founded America unleashed chaos that cannot be stopped. Soulforce mission to homosexualize Christians takes a statement from Falwell and runs with it where it cannot go.

Simply put, "Christians" treat homosexual people differently.

They respond to homosexuals differently in the minds and politics of homosexuals. Homosexuals that will not believe in the message clearly detailed in the New Testament. The homosexual activists are intolerant of the Bible's truth.

In fact, it's as if many have indeed believed the negative-hype and stereotyping that goes on, rather than getting to know a human being who happens to be "gay".

Rosie's gay or bath house bar cruising uncountable numbers of sex-partners gay? Both are reality. Only one makes it to HBO.

So, maybe gay isn't "normal" and maybe it is a "sin", but asking how Jesus would treat homosexual people, kind of addresses my contention about all I have said above.

Jesus healed the sick.

That would be seen as homophobia now.

And from our peace activist gay religionists at Soulforce:

What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality
by Rev. Mel White, co-founder of Soulforce

A Biblical response to the question people often ask... "How can you consider yourself a Christian when you are also gay?"

In this 24-page booklet, Mel White puts forward these eight premises:

Most people have not carefully and prayerfully researched the Biblical texts used by some people to condemn God's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender children.

There is not one place that supports a homosexual lifestyle activity or behavior anywhere in the Bible. Just the opposite is found when one studies the Bible.

Historically, people's misinterpretation of the Bible has left a trail of suffering, bloodshed, and death.

AIDS is no joke.

We should be open to new truth from Scripture. Even heroes of the Christian faith have changed their minds about the meaning of various Biblical texts.

Hope that liberals will or can one day "see the light."

The Bible is a book about God. The Bible is not a book about human sexuality.

The New Testament writers spent a lot of time disproving that last point.

We miss what these passages say about God when we spend so much time debating what they say about sex.

Sounds very creepy. We should be debating holiness and leaving a life of sexual debauchery for God. Like the New Testament says.

The Biblical authors are silent about homosexual orientation as we know it today. They neither approve it nor condemn it.

That statement is contradicted by Biblical facts.

The prophets, Jesus, and the Biblical authors say nothing about homosexual orientation as we understand it today.

Paul in Romans sounds like he just watched MTV or a Gay Pride parade. Very today.

But, they are clear about this one thing. As we search for truth, we are to "Love one another."

Biblical truth for once. But with an ulterior motive that is blasphemy.

Whatever some people believe the Bible seems to say about homosexuality, they must not use that belief to deny homosexuals their basic civil rights.

Classifying sexual behavior as a new minority calssification is not sound constitutional ethics.

To discriminate against sexual or gender minorities is unjust and un-American.

To invent a new minority classification due to sexually deviant behavior is not only unconstitutional but it is indecent.

[melikio]

I suppose it really is easy, to find the most RABID anti-homosexual figures, and paste their opinions here... isn't it?

Guy Adams is scarey. But it's hatred like his, that will help balance things out in the minds of those who are reasonable. Some will continue to tilt to the extreme-right, likely until they fall off the edge of sanity. And others will see that happen.

I smile inside and wonder, just how many closet homosexuals are possibly surrounding that "Guy"? Who would confide in him, that they are homosexual (even if they never committed a single homosexual act? If I knew that "Guy" personally, I would steer so FAR from him and his brand of "Christianity" as I could.

Even so, there are those who are capable of challenging him (one person being God), as I'm sure He has adjustments to make even in a person who seems to be further right than "starboard".

He's not worth debating IMO, because he is saying the same kind of things that 1John so often says here. I hope people will see that "Guy" for the essence of his message (dark, cold and lacking compassion) for what it truly is.

1John, thanks for reminding me that I'm not fighting "Christianity" (which I understand readily); and I can see just how effectively evil can put on sheep's clothing, and remain poised to devour those who haven't a clue about the things Jesus actually promoted in this world.

Although it's not "Christian", here is an opposing view about your "Guy":

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/254207.htm

-Mel-

[melikio]

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/001990.html
More "Guy" Stuff to consider.

-Mel-