Will Christians be protected from Gay social goals?

[Mere_Christian]

Once gay marriage is legalized in most states and forced on those that will not legalize it by the power of Democrat majority in Congress, how will Christians be protected from Gay Activists desiring to force Gay Culture and gay sex on every aspect of Christian life?

[Goat]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

I see no one 'forcing' 'same-sex' marriage on a "Public school system". I have yet to see any 'Public school system" force anybody to get married.

Christians are kicked out of public schools because of concerns about recruiting other peoples children into Christianity. What has replaced the Christians' influence is Humanism and Gay activism.

This is where so much of the tension comes from.

I'm speaking here as a parent.

I would like to see evidence of "Christians being kicked out of public schools because of concerns". They might choose to leave because of bigotry, prejudice and paranoia, but that is not being forced.

[Mere_Christian]

PART TWO LATER . . .

Which is now.

Umm, how about logic and not emotionalism to drive this position? The anus is not a sex organ. The tongue isn't either.

Sure seems like they are to me, you know, what with so many folks using them for sexual pleasure.

It's all about the minority rights these days huh?

Licentiousness once again points the rational person to urge opposition to it.

You just hate that nasty old licentiousness don't you?

As I do death and destruction.

Your opinion is your own, you are entitled to it. I would contend other folks' opinions carry equal weight as to what they wish to do in the privacy of their own quarters.

If the gay thing WERE left in private. The oddity is that these people must "parade" it through town.

It absolutely does. "You leftists" call we "anti-gay" Christians, haters and phobes. I've just proven that logic and science is ONLY on our side. We are not what you charge.

Please link to where I've called you this.

Otherwise, retract the claim.

Look at your last comments about Miss. California.

There is no exception to what sexuality is for mammals. Consult the anatomy once again.

And again I say, the fact that folks find sexual gratification with such indicates they are being used as such.

Still keeping deviance and perversion in the right places.

Observation through science shows that sexuality is well-defined by anatomy, biology and physiology. Now, if you want to go with psychology . . . then we're reaching reality in gay culture.

So, where folks' psychology is they are gay, you would have them disregard such?

What's your point here?

Why celebrate aberration and deviance? It's anti-evolution even.

Christians that oppose a European marrying a Asian can be shown science that supports the Biblical truth on reality.

Can the Bible, or you, show that donkeys talk? Snakes talk? Folks rise up out of graves after three days? Folks can walk on water?

What I see from the Biblical record is that miracles are extremely rare. There were lots of donkeys in the old testament time period that didn't talk. How many Israelites went to their deaths without any miraculous intervention?

You offer nothing to show such Biblical claims are true yet insist on some form of "Biblical truth" to speak against homosexuals?

I mean, I'm with ya, I ain't down with getting down with some dude. But surely human beings have a right to their own sexuality, right?

When the deviants take a place beside the normal as an sensible equal then we have arrived at "Anything Goes." With the historic bad outcomes.

If so much of the Bible can't be shown to be true, then shouldn't there be some understanding that folks should be left alone in their own bedrooms, and let God sort it out?

The Bible is not shown to be bogus. It is denied that miracles have happened etc., etc., etc.. I have no problem with doubters, it's the attackers that I will not tolerate quietly.

No, no please, I'm very OK with reality guiding the Gays (GLBT's and progressives et al) versus Christians war going on.

That you consider it a "war" I find very disturbing.

by Diane Silver.

I was awakened to the war being waged against us by GLBT's. That book was written long before I learned all about gay culture.

All I see are homosexuals starting to assert the rights the Constitution affords them to begin with.

Anything Goes is not a constitutional right. Chaos and anarchy are not American values.

Blah, blah, blah. It's a further stretch of actuality to show that homosexuality is NOT abnormal. It is proveably abnormal behavior. Scientifically so.

I would contend it is abnormal behavior to base discriminatory policies on a book that can't rise above the level of myth.

The science of biology is not thought of as a myth in my schools. Anatomy is not a myth either.

I would further contend it is Constitutionaly abnormal to discriminate against folks based on who they like to have sex with.

It is when they want perversion made a civil right.

One man's "morals" is another's night with the hot twins.

Perfect analogy. Then stop calling we anti-gay Christians bad people. We're quite nice.

I contend it is not "nice" to enact laws and policies that discriminate against folks based on myth.

Anatomy is not a myth.

I contend that basing "morals" on ancient tales should come with evidence such tales are true.

Basing civil rights on a sexual perversion and lascivious licentiousness is even more twisted.

LOL. You do like them hundred dollar words, dontcha?

STD's have cost millions of lives and billions of dollars.

I personally have enjoyed quite a good bit of "perversion" (two sisters at once), a goodly amount of "lascivious" (Jennifer in NY), and a whole heaping bunch of "licentiousness" (any really good sex). I recommend it to all who seek it.

That's it?

My gun has a lot more notches on it than yours. Lot's of names per notch. It's not about promoting wrongs, but returning what is right to its proper place. Gay marriage has NEVER been legal. No one opposed to it is outlawing it. It is already so.

What I don't do is try to restrict what others do based solely on who they wanna do it with.

Better wake up. When it's me and my children you want, I get a voice pal. And a vote.

I don't know what porn you're watching, but I see no "beasts" in the porn I watch.

I'm talking about shattered lives of real people.

Boo hoo. Do what you will, don't come crying to me if you fall down.

I have cried bitterly over my friends that have died from AIDS.

How interesting that Sodom and Gomorrah seem to be a common city condition.

Those myths and fables sure look like the five-o'clock news to me circa April 24 2009.

No! Folks is folks? Well don't that just clabber your milk!

Hedonism is a common plague of mankind. There is nothing enlightened about celebrating debauchery. How common a disorder that is.

Ms. California anyone?

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

She was asked a question and answered it honestly.

Welcome to New Sodom.

So much for the old one being a myth.

Even as metaphor it is dead on.

[Mere_Christian]

Show me the quote attributed to "Jesus" that shows that marriage is between a man and a woman exclusively.

Matthew 19:1-10

Please, quote the exact phrase that 'a marriage is between a man and woman exclusively'. It does talk about when a man and a woman marry, it shoudl be forever, and no divorce.

If you read it in context, he was replying ot the question

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Context!!!!

The entire "context" of Biblical marriage is man and woman.

The secularists should use that as a guide to stop the insulting of Christians for opposing same-sex marriage being forced on them everywhere they go. Especially the PUBLIC school system.

I see no one 'forcing' 'same-sex' marriage on a "Public school system". I have yet to see any 'Public school system" force anybody to get married.

Christians are kicked out of public schools because of concerns about recruiting other peoples children into Christianity. What has replaced the Christians' influence is Humanism and Gay activism.

This is where so much of the tension comes from.

I'm speaking here as a parent.

I would like to see evidence of "Christians being kicked out of public schools because of concerns". They might choose to leave because of bigotry, prejudice and paranoia, but that is not being forced.

Hmm, our Christian coaches can pray with the Christian players? I thought that was not allowed? By law. Per the ACLu that is.

[Goat]

Hmm, our Christian coaches can pray with the Christian players? I thought that was not allowed? By law. Per the ACLu that is.

Yet, the Christian players and pray for themselves, and no one can tell them they can't. They just can't force it on others.

Not only that, the Hindu coaches can't force the Christian players to pray , or the Islamic coaches can't force the Christian players to pray.

The prayer can not be imposed by the school onto others. That does not mean the Christian players can't pray, on their own accord, as long as they do not impose their beliefs on others.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Page 4 Post 32:

Umm, how about logic and not emotionalism to drive this position? The anus is not a sex organ. The tongue isn't either.

Sure seems like they are to me, you know, what with so many folks using them for sexual pleasure.

It's all about the minority rights these days huh?

I showed you that since folks were using various body parts as sex organs indicates that your statement they are not sex organs is wrong.
Now all you offer is an issue of rights?

Do you propose minorities are not deserving of rights?

Licentiousness once again points the rational person to urge opposition to it.

You just hate that nasty old licentiousness don't you?

As I do death and destruction.

Folks are at risk of "death and destruction" merely by walking upright (a very complicated, precarious balancing act).

To propose that two folks having sex is "death and destruction" is about as wacky a thing as I've ever heard.

Your opinion is your own, you are entitled to it. I would contend other folks' opinions carry equal weight as to what they wish to do in the privacy of their own quarters.

If the gay thing WERE left in private. The oddity is that these people must "parade" it through town.

I contend if they were not so oppressed they would not feel the need to make such bold statements in protest.
Would you also seek to restrict religious folks from having parades that speak out against homosexuality?

It absolutely does. "You leftists" call we "anti-gay" Christians, haters and phobes. I've just proven that logic and science is ONLY on our side. We are not what you charge.

Please link to where I've called you this.
Otherwise, retract the claim.

Look at your last comments about Miss. California.

From Page 3 Post 20:

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

Please show in that statement where I have called anyone "haters and phobes".

Are you going to insist on misquoting, and mischaracterizing my words?

Or will you retract the claim?

...snip...

Why celebrate aberration and deviance?

I celebrate people, not their sexual preferences.

It's anti-evolution even.

Are you a proponent of the ToE, or the Genesis accounts?

That homosexuals exist indicates to me they are a natural product of human existence. I have little fear that heterosexuality will be unable to sustain a flourishing human population.

You offer nothing to show such Biblical claims are true yet insist on some form of "Biblical truth" to speak against homosexuals?

I mean, I'm with ya, I ain't down with getting down with some dude. But surely human beings have a right to their own sexuality, right?

When the deviants take a place beside the normal as an sensible equal then we have arrived at "Anything Goes." With the historic bad outcomes.

"Anything goes" my right eye. That two humans seek to engage in sex is hardly cause for this kind of thinking.

I, and I'm sure the observer as well, notice you fail to address my question, and offer nothing but an emotional appeal that has nothing to do with the question I present to you.

I notice this is a common tactic among many theists within this site.

If so much of the Bible can't be shown to be true, then shouldn't there be some understanding that folks should be left alone in their own bedrooms, and let God sort it out?

The Bible is not shown to be bogus. It is denied that miracles have happened etc., etc., etc.. I have no problem with doubters, it's the attackers that I will not tolerate quietly.

Can you show that such "miracle" tales are true?

No, no please, I'm very OK with reality guiding the Gays (GLBT's and progressives et al) versus Christians war going on.

by Diane Silver.

I was awakened to the war being waged against us by GLBT's. That book was written long before I learned all about gay culture.

Paranoia hardly seems to rise to the level of "war".

Given that homosexuals have been oppressed throughout history and cultures, shouldn't it be more rightly expressed that folks are waging "war" against homosexuals?

This whole "war" language is nothing more than an emotional appeal that can hardly be shown to be an out and out violent attack.

All I see are homosexuals starting to assert the rights the Constitution affords them to begin with.

Anything Goes is not a constitutional right. Chaos and anarchy are not American values.

Oh please. "Anything goes" is hardly the case when folks wish to be left the heck alone in their sexual preferences.

Again, such terminology is just an emotional ploy devoid of any real meaning.

I would contend it is abnormal behavior to base discriminatory policies on a book that can't rise above the level of myth.

The science of biology is not thought of as a myth in my schools. Anatomy is not a myth either.

And since homosexuals are biological creatures, shouldn't they be afforded the same rights as their peers?

When thinking about "biological design" (a term I don't really use):
That folks use various body parts for sexual gratification indicates such parts are there for sexual gratification. What's so difficult to understand about that?

I would further contend it is Constitutionaly abnormal to discriminate against folks based on who they like to have sex with.

It is when they want perversion made a civil right.

You have yet to show homosexuality is such the perversion. That it occurs in nature, among other animals as well as the human animal, indicates it is a part of the natural world.

I contend it is not "nice" to enact laws and policies that discriminate against folks based on myth.

Anatomy is not a myth.

See above, the fact that folks use various body parts for sexual gratification indicates such parts are "anatomically designed" for such.

That you personally don't accept this does not in any way discount it.

"Design" is relative to what folks consider a "proper" use or function of such. Cars are not "designed" outright to kill folks, but they sure take their toll.

STD's have cost millions of lives and billions of dollars.

So has religious worship. Your point?

My gun has a lot more notches on it than yours. Lot's of names per notch. It's not about promoting wrongs, but returning what is right to its proper place. Gay marriage has NEVER been legal. No one opposed to it is outlawing it. It is already so.

That oppression has always existed is hardly reason for us not to want to stop it now. It is being "outlawed" when the government declares no gay marriages are to be allowed. Do you not agree?

What I don't do is try to restrict what others do based solely on who they wanna do it with.

Better wake up. When it's me and my children you want, I get a voice pal. And a vote.

Oh please. Fear mongering is hardly a reason to enact policy and law.

Boo hoo. Do what you will, don't come crying to me if you fall down.

I have cried bitterly over my friends that have died from AIDS.

I hate it for 'em. I would "cry bitterly" over those whose sexual orientation cause them to be discriminated against. I would especially cry that much more knowing such discrimination was because of Bronze Age tales with little relation to reality.

Hedonism is a common plague of mankind. There is nothing enlightened about celebrating debauchery. How common a disorder that is.

Again, one man's "debauchery" is another's "night with the hot twins".

Who has the right to determine what consenting adults can do with their own bodies?

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

She was asked a question and answered it honestly.
Welcome to New Sodom.
So much for the old one being a myth.
Even as metaphor it is dead on.

Another emotional appeal with little probative value.
That you consider something a "Sodom" has little to do with anything other than your own opinion.

[Mere_Christian]

From Page 4 Post 32:

Umm, how about logic and not emotionalism to drive this position? The anus is not a sex organ. The tongue isn't either.

Sure seems like they are to me, you know, what with so many folks using them for sexual pleasure.

It's all about the minority rights these days huh?

I showed you that since folks were using various body parts as sex organs indicates that your statement they are not sex organs is wrong.

Sex organs are sex organs. Other body parts have their purposes. Per science that is. I'm appealing to science and logic. You are using emotionalism.

Now all you offer is an issue of rights?

Sexual deviance goes against observable science. All YOU have is an issue of rights to equate perversion with decency.

Do you propose minorities are not deserving of rights?

Of course. Bank robbers do not have the right to live free of prosecution for robbery. And so on.

Licentiousness once again points the rational person to urge opposition to it.

You just hate that nasty old licentiousness don't you?

As I do death and destruction.

Folks are at risk of "death and destruction" merely by walking upright (a very complicated, precarious balancing act).

The fact that so many humans walk upright seems to defy your defining it as difficult (precarious, complicated).

To propose that two folks having sex is "death and destruction" is about as wacky a thing as I've ever heard.

Again, facts seem to be on my side. Two folks having sex without limits has been proven a very deadly behavior. Like skydiving by throwing your rig out the door first and catching up with it, putting it on and deploying before THWACK!

Your opinion is your own, you are entitled to it. I would contend other folks' opinions carry equal weight as to what they wish to do in the privacy of their own quarters.

If the gay thing WERE left in private. The oddity is that these people must "parade" it through town.

I contend if they were not so oppressed they would not feel the need to make such bold statements in protest.

History past and present are not on your side here. Licentiousness is a monster never fed to being satisfied.

Would you also seek to restrict religious folks from having parades that speak out against homosexuality?

They still exist? I thought Kansas was the last place for outlaws? The Appostles ALL would be called homophobes in the 21st century. Jesus wouldn't fare much better.

It absolutely does. "You leftists" call we "anti-gay" Christians, haters and phobes. I've just proven that logic and science is ONLY on our side. We are not what you charge.

Please link to where I've called you this.
Otherwise, retract the claim.

Look at your last comments about Miss. California.

From Page 3 Post 20:

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

Please show in that statement where I have called anyone "haters and phobes".

Are you going to insist on misquoting, and mischaracterizing my words?

Or will you retract the claim?

I will admit that you may not have actually written the words, but I've only been here a short time and looking at your gleeful words celebrating the discrimination meted out to Miss California, I would say that my opinion is probably not off-base.

...snip...

Why celebrate aberration and deviance?

I celebrate people, not their sexual preferences.

It's anti-evolution even.

Are you a proponent of the ToE, or the Genesis accounts?

Evolution and the genesis account are both OK with me. I'm not into the evolution as mud to monkeys to man thing. Too many monkeys around.

That homosexuals exist indicates to me they are a natural product of human existence.

There is a lot of aberration within species. They are not evolving in the right direction are they? Per Darwin that is. I'm cool with your science there too.

I have little fear that heterosexuality will be unable to sustain a flourishing human population.

My concerns are ONLY with the victims of selfish people and those targeted with victimization.

You offer nothing to show such Biblical claims are true yet insist on some form of "Biblical truth" to speak against homosexuals?

I mean, I'm with ya, I ain't down with getting down with some dude. But surely human beings have a right to their own sexuality, right?

When the deviants take a place beside the normal as an sensible equal then we have arrived at "Anything Goes." With the historic bad outcomes.

[strike]"Anything goes" my right eye. That two humans seek to engage in sex is hardly cause for this kind of thinking.[/strike]

There is far more to gay culture than two fifty-year old lesbians wanting their relationship of life commitment to be called a marriage. The Gay world is hardly one seking a morality like mom and pop. I live in the real world.

I, and I'm sure the observer as well, notice you fail to address my question, and offer nothing but an emotional appeal that has nothing to do with the question I present to you.

The frigin' mods threaten to ban me if I name names.

I notice this is a common tactic among many theists within this site.

We can't get personal for some wierd reason. Suffice it to say, the Powers and Principalities have done their work well in places like this. And of course are running secular society like the old days. I'm not allowed to call people what they are. It's some rule here. But of course you anti's get to blast us Christians with unfettered access.

If so much of the Bible can't be shown to be true, then shouldn't there be some understanding that folks should be left alone in their own bedrooms, and let God sort it out?

The Bible is not shown to be bogus. It is denied that miracles have happened etc., etc., etc.. I have no problem with doubters, it's the attackers that I will not tolerate quietly.

Can you show that such "miracle" tales are true?

Jews. I follow the history brick road back in time. "I" may or may not have miraculous experiences that are real, but why, NO how can I make a guy like you believe anything of the miraculous? Ever read the New Testament? Jesus was mocked on the Cross the same way you use the tactic now. Life itself is a huge miracle, but somehow you guys explain it away with some wierd science.

No, no please, I'm very OK with reality guiding the Gays (GLBT's and progressives et al) versus Christians war going on.

by Diane Silver.

I was awakened to the war being waged against us by GLBT's. That book was written long before I learned all about gay culture.

Paranoia hardly seems to rise to the level of "war".

I have no illusions that war is real war in the topic of gay culture being imposed on society. I, though, am a Christian, I'll warn my brothers and sisters to avoid GLBT's like the plague and take whatever persecution they'll mete out to us.

Given that homosexuals have been oppressed throughout history and cultures, shouldn't it be more rightly expressed that folks are waging "war" against homosexuals?

NEWS FLASH!

WHY is homosexuality AND homosexuals so loathesome throughout history????????

Why not look TO those that engage in this behavior and culture. Hello? It seems to me logical to ascribe the fault for the way people THROUGHOUT TIME have felt about homosexuals.

This whole "war" language is nothing more than an emotional appeal that can hardly be shown to be an out and out violent attack.

Stonewall was not a debate class. It was violence.

All I see are homosexuals starting to assert the rights the Constitution affords them to begin with.

Anything Goes is not a constitutional right. Chaos and anarchy are not American values.

Oh please. "Anything goes" is hardly the case when folks wish to be left the heck alone in their sexual preferences.

GLBT's are demanding unrestricted access to everyones children via the public school system. They demand that all children be taught about gay culture and life. "Gay" and "Lesbian" are exclusively sex acts definitions.

Again, such terminology is just an emotional ploy devoid of any real meaning.

Indoctrianting other people's children into accepting gay sex is not just an emotional ploy.

I would contend it is abnormal behavior to base discriminatory policies on a book that can't rise above the level of myth.

The science of biology is not thought of as a myth in my schools. Anatomy is not a myth either.

And since homosexuals are biological creatures, shouldn't they be afforded the same rights as their peers?

To redefine "marriage?" Too bad if they are "born with" gay propensities. Marriage already has a definition. Two guys don't fit it.

When thinking about "biological design" (a term I don't really use):

That folks use various body parts for sexual gratification indicates such parts are there for sexual gratification. What's so difficult to understand about that?

Nothing, until you want to equate abnormality with normality. Then, logic and honesty muct dictate who is the deviant.

I would further contend it is Constitutionaly abnormal to discriminate against folks based on who they like to have sex with.

It is when they want perversion made a civil right.

You have yet to show homosexuality is such the perversion. That it occurs in nature, among other animals as well as the human animal, indicates it is a part of the natural world.

So is eating feces. Yet, an animal woud rather get its daily nutritional needs via a more appropriate vehicle. My point is to show that logic and reason is squarely on the side of the anti-gay position. It has nothing to do with hate on the rational level.

I contend it is not "nice" to enact laws and policies that discriminate against folks based on myth.

Anatomy is not a myth.

See above, the fact that folks use various body parts for sexual gratification indicates such parts are "anatomically designed" for such.

That is not building a strawman, it is grasping at straws with no where to put them.

That you personally don't accept this does not in any way discount it.

I personally do not care what ADULT humans do sexually TO other ADULT humans, but when they cross the line and demand that everyone celebrate their - what should be - private sexual deviance, then their lives and desires get treated publically. If you don;t like people finding your sex life loathesome, then stay private about it. Once you desire kids to get involved on any level, their parents can deal with you.

"Design" is relative to what folks consider a "proper" use or function of such. Cars are not "designed" outright to kill folks, but they sure take their toll.

As does perverted and licentious sex. Should we celebrate the car that kills someone?

STD's have cost millions of lives and billions of dollars.

So has religious worship. Your point?

Both need to be dealt with with logic and reason. Even you atheists point that out to us Christians all the time. Notice we got the message?

Where's our Nobel Prize?

My gun has a lot more notches on it than yours. Lot's of names per notch. It's not about promoting wrongs, but returning what is right to its proper place. Gay marriage has NEVER been legal. No one opposed to it is outlawing it. It is already so.

That oppression has always existed is hardly reason for us not to want to stop it now.

Keeping sexual deviance suppressed and oppressed is a good thing.

It is being "outlawed" when the government declares no gay marriages are to be allowed. Do you not agree?

It is not being outlawed, it is being kept defined.

What I don't do is try to restrict what others do based solely on who they wanna do it with.

Better wake up. When it's me and my children you want, I get a voice pal. And a vote.

Oh please. Fear mongering is hardly a reason to enact policy and law.

It is reality. Hopefully when GLBT's force gay marriage on the unwilling populace, good and dcecent parents will oppose gay activism even more intensely. Things will not get better for children when "gay marriage" gets to be taught as a fairy tale ending. Oh wait, it has already been implemented huh? Gay marriage tomorrow, means lawsuit after lawsuit to keep the celebration of the act from being taught to other people's children. I'm literally teaching that now. You can't stop some in society from embracing a laothesome and perverted life and lifestyle, but you can fight it with everything in your legal power.

Boo hoo. Do what you will, don't come crying to me if you fall down.

I have cried bitterly over my friends that have died from AIDS.

I hate it for 'em. I would "cry bitterly" over those whose sexual orientation cause them to be discriminated against.

You don't know my sexual orientation. I've never once actually declared it. GLBT's should keep their sexual desires and culture to themselves.

I would especially cry that much more knowing such discrimination was because of Bronze Age tales with little relation to reality.

When the same pagan sexual practices of that Bronze Age is made a civil rights issue, it is not the Christians seeking a past culture sir. Notice I desire to use science and logic to show being "anti-gay" is sound and rational.

Hedonism is a common plague of mankind. There is nothing enlightened about celebrating debauchery. How common a disorder that is.

Again, one man's "debauchery" is another's "night with the hot twins".

As long as the parents of those twins were allowed to raise them with the knowledge that sexual licentiousness is wrong, and they do it anyway, I couldn't care less what adults do. Ah, but you leftists desire more than anything else it seems to rule the school system. Please correct me if I'm wrong?

Who has the right to determine what consenting adults can do with their own bodies?

When those consenting adults make it known to me what they're doing, it becomes my issue too. When they want to teach my children to do as they do, we have a major problem on our hands. I get to show that behavior as negative.

I have little pity for a woman who uses a national - and potentially world - stage to advocate discrimination.

She was asked a question and answered it honestly.
Welcome to New Sodom.
So much for the old one being a myth.
Even as metaphor it is dead on.

Another emotional appeal with little probative value.

Not for a free thinker. My analogy is very appropriate. Very telling.

That you consider something a "Sodom" has little to do with anything other than your own opinion.

Hmm, Miss California was treated like Lot. I don't even have to reach for the comparison. Remeber, it wasn't just about gay sex in the problem with Sodom. The whole support from everyone thing was the real issue.

Sounds SOOOO familiar.

"What goes around comes around," they say.

I appreciate you interacting with me. It gives me insight to the Bronze Age peoples. Pagan-wise that is.

[Mere_Christian]

Hmm, our Christian coaches can pray with the Christian players? I thought that was not allowed? By law. Per the ACLu that is.

Yet, the Christian players and pray for themselves, and no one can tell them they can't. They just can't force it on others.

Christian football players have been told they cannot pray with their coach. No bowing or kneeling.

Not only that, the Hindu coaches can't force the Christian players to pray , or the Islamic coaches can't force the Christian players to pray.

OK.

The prayer can not be imposed by the school onto others.

I've been at an event where prayer was over the loudspeakers. I don't remember any pressure to join along.

That does not mean the Christian players can't pray, on their own accord, as long as they do not impose their beliefs on others.

How often are Christians forcing conversion on non or anti Christians? As an athlete in HS and College, I don't remember ever being forced to convert to belief in Jesus. It took science and logic to get me to Christ. And I wasn't a child when I came to the decision.

[JoeyKnothead]

Mere_Christian,

I have asked kindly and repeatedly that you retract the claim that I referred to someone as a "hater and 'phobe'".

You are unwilling to do so.

I will not debate a liar.

[Goat]

Hmm, our Christian coaches can pray with the Christian players? I thought that was not allowed? By law. Per the ACLu that is.

Yet, the Christian players and pray for themselves, and no one can tell them they can't. They just can't force it on others.

Christian football players have been told they cannot pray with their coach. No bowing or kneeling.

Not only that, the Hindu coaches can't force the Christian players to pray , or the Islamic coaches can't force the Christian players to pray.

OK.

The prayer can not be imposed by the school onto others.

I've been at an event where prayer was over the loudspeakers. I don't remember any pressure to join along.

That does not mean the Christian players can't pray, on their own accord, as long as they do not impose their beliefs on others.

How often are Christians forcing conversion on non or anti Christians? As an athlete in HS and College, I don't remember ever being forced to convert to belief in Jesus. It took science and logic to get me to Christ. And I wasn't a child when I came to the decision.

You don't know much about that law suit, do you? The reason that the 'Christian coaches' can't lead prayer had to do with the evangelism and proselytizing at Texas foot ball games for a public school. The law suit was brought by a Mormon family and a Roman Catholic family because of bigoted comments of a number of the teachers against those groups when passing out bibles.

In the Santa Fe Independent school district .


The Mormon family was upset when their daughter's junior high school teacher passed out fliers for a Baptist revival. When the girl asked a question about the revival, the teacher asked her what her religion was. On learning that the girl was Mormon, she said that Mormonism was "non-Christian cult."


Now, seems to me that is the behavior of Christians that the laws are designed to prevent. It makes your claims ring hollow

[Mere_Christian]

Hmm, our Christian coaches can pray with the Christian players? I thought that was not allowed? By law. Per the ACLu that is.

Yet, the Christian players and pray for themselves, and no one can tell them they can't. They just can't force it on others.

Christian football players have been told they cannot pray with their coach. No bowing or kneeling.

Not only that, the Hindu coaches can't force the Christian players to pray , or the Islamic coaches can't force the Christian players to pray.

OK.

The prayer can not be imposed by the school onto others.

I've been at an event where prayer was over the loudspeakers. I don't remember any pressure to join along.

That does not mean the Christian players can't pray, on their own accord, as long as they do not impose their beliefs on others.

How often are Christians forcing conversion on non or anti Christians? As an athlete in HS and College, I don't remember ever being forced to convert to belief in Jesus. It took science and logic to get me to Christ. And I wasn't a child when I came to the decision.

You don't know much about that law suit, do you?

Which one?

The reason that the 'Christian coaches' can't lead prayer had to do with the evangelism and proselytizing at Texas foot ball games for a public school.

Praying is not proselytizing. Proselytizing is proselytizing. Prayer is protected speech per the deists that came up with the Constitution.

The law suit was brought by a Mormon family and a Roman Catholic family because of bigoted comments of a number of the teachers against those groups when passing out bibles.

Bigoted or accurate? I find truth to be non-bigotry.

In the Santa Fe Independent school district .

They got a copy of the Constitution there? Free speech for people of religions is written as untouchable. Praying out loud is speech.


The Mormon family was upset when their daughter's junior high school teacher passed out fliers for a Baptist revival. When the girl asked a question about the revival, the teacher asked her what her religion was.On learning that the girl was Mormon, she said that Mormonism was "non-Christian cult."


And? Mormonism is a non-Christian religion compared to what the Apostles came up with for their religious endeavors. Why not uphold the free speech of the anti-Mormons?

Now, seems to me that is the behavior of Christians that the laws are designed to prevent.

The mythology that drives this seperation of church and state fairy tale still means that the unreligious and non and anti-religious among us need to butt out of religious matters and certainly (per the first amendment) can't do anything about the right of free speech or of free assembly of Christians are other religion believing peoples. Maybe the Mormons should bring in a Melkizedek Priest to prsay with the Mormon football players and the catholics their style of Priest.

Seems rather tolerant and diversity to me.

It makes your claims ring hollow

Looks like the Christians are actually being harrassed to me. Certainly nothing hollow about that.