Somebody Calls this Christian?

Homosexual people...
Really don't like...
When Christians...
And people...
Don't like them...
When they talk bad about them...

So...

In the eyes of the Lord...
It would be better...
To not talk about it...

But people are not people anymore...
Are they...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think that contemporary astrology with all it's fuss and flavours, inhibits, supresses, and discriminates individuality. I said that you don't need anything else except yourself if you want to notice yourself, so chill out. :m: :bugeye: :m:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The ironic thing is, these two assholes make at least as much sense as those that say astrology is a real concept and not a con.

yer mr skinwanker,or walker...im never sure which one it is.....,you no, your really gunner regret sending that message, social reject

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think that contemporary astrology with all it's fuss and flavours, inhibits, supresses, and discriminates individuality. I said that you don't need anything else except yourself if you want to notice yourself, so chill out.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

@Woody:

Your banter and attempts to rebut my statements with "sources are forthcoming" is a classic pseudoscientific ploy. Perhaps we will get some sources, but I predict that they'll be easily refuted. The data I cited is valid. It exists. Pointing out the "age" of the sources is meaningless unless you can explain what advances (while citing sources) have been made that provide a differing perspective.

With regard to the "counseling" experience of your pastor, I've no doubt that he's "counseled" many homosexuals, probably with the intent of "curing" their homosexuality. This is a fallacy that many Christian groups often cite as a success, but, when scrutinized, is a failure. The reason is that homosexuality is apparently a deeper issue than "choice." And, yet, your pastor continues on counseling in ignorance.

You asked if I'd ever counseled a homosexual. I've counseled many that I'm aware of and probably many that I wasn't aware of. I've never made one's sexual preference an issue in a counselling session unless it was central to the problem. When someone is grieving over a loved one or battling an alcohol or drug addiction, their sexual preference is typically irrelevant. Unlike many who follow the Christian cults, there are many real counselors who aren't biased by a bigotted attitude toward homosexuality.

Your church, contrary to your claim, is very fundamentalist. Does it embrace evolution as more valid than creation mythology? Does it preach that a worldwide flood did occur and that one boat with one family and millions upon million of animals survived it? Does it spend more time preaching about the "evils" of homosexuality than it does adultery, even though the incidence of occurance of the latter far outpaces the former? If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, your church is fundamentalist.

I find it fascinating to see cult followers toss out biblical approval of stoning to death adulteresses, impertinent children, and those who fail to observe the Sabboth by citing the coming of "grace" with Jesus; but creation and flood myths (clearly stolen from other cultures by their Jewish authors) have to stay. The reason is that Jesus didn't bother to address these myths. They weren't central to the problems that he was dealing with in his time (assuming that he existed at all). But if they are to be discarded now, then Christian fundamentalists believe that would threaten their whole faith.

In attempting to refute my explaination about the genetic quality of homosexuality, simply saying that I "don't understand genetics" won't be sufficient for you to be successful in refuting me. Indeed, it appears that you didn't fully read the two paragraphs I wrote on that. The reference is 12 years old, however, there hasn't been any data that contradicts it that I'm aware of. Nor did you cite any. Your pastor's anecdotes aren't sufficient data, and clearly this data suffers from confirmation bias to begin with. The subjects want to be accepted in your cult, so they renounce their homosexuality. I'll be the first to agree that through concsious effort, one can override a sexual preference. But that doesn't mean they are suddenly heterosexual any more than my wife is now genetically a redhead because she dyes her hair.

That you didn't actually read what I wrote closely is also evident in the your attempt to refute the Jenny study at the Denver Children's Hospital. If you had read carefully, you would have noticed that I said that wasn't the correlation you were reaching for. There is no data to support your correlation that 2/3 of all lesbians are victims of sexual abuse. There may be data to support it in the 144 couples study, particularly if the researcher were studying a group that had issues related to abuse, but this wouldn't be indicative of lesbians as a population. Your ignorance appears to cloud your critical thinking here. Rather than deal with that dubious statistic, you simply state "sources are forthcoming" and cite some more anecdotal stuff about your cult-leader.

Indeed, your anecdotes extend to your sister's work in Greensboro and, rather than cite anything empirical, you stick to the pseudoscientific approach of anecdote to support your claim that homosexuals are "1 thousand times more likely to die from AIDS than heterosexuals."

Re-looking that claim, I suppose if you were willing to be deceptive, you could reach a bit and state that of the infected homosexuals, they are a thousand (or more) times more likely to die from AIDS than the uninfected heterosexuals. But since the percentages are what they are, you could also make the same claim that infected heterosexuals are 1 thousand times more likely to die from AIDS than uninfected homosexuals. Statistics can mean what you want them to.

Regardless, you failed to see the signficance of the data I cited and simply resorted to calling me a fool (perhaps to the ignorant, the wise do seem foolish?).

You cling to the notion that a monogamous gay couple is "unheard of" and this as a reason for what exactly? This really shows your ignorance, however. If they truly are unheard of, then that could mean several things. One of which is that you don't associate with gay couples. Another is that the low incidence of monogamous gay couples might simply reflect the overall trend in monogamy in the United States among couples as a whole. Monogamy is a pipe dream for most societies. It is taboo among most societies to cheat on a spouse/partner, but in every society the practice runs rampant. I don't cheat on my wife, you don't cheat on yours (so we claim), but you and are are statistical anomalies.

Citing the low incidence of monogamy among gay couples is a slippery slope. The correlation does not imply causation. More fallacious nonsense from someone with an agenda.

But speaking of agendas.... you made some attempts to accuse me of having a vested interest in the homosexual lifestyle at least two times. These are clearly veiled ad hominem remarks but they don't really work, Woody.

I do have an interest in the issue. My interest is the freedom of all peoples, regardless of gender, race, creed, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. My agenda is to speak out against bigotted crap that idiots like your pastor spread in their cults.

 

SkinWalker:@Woody:

I do have an interest in the issue. My interest is the freedom of all peoples, regardless of gender, race, creed, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. My agenda is to speak out against bigotted crap that idiots like your pastor spread in their cults.
*************
M*W: I couldn't agree more! Homosexuality is a non-issue except to xians and, therefore, I don't see its rightful place in the Religion Forum -- I don't give a rat's ass what their bible says. This topic would be better served in the Science & Society Forum or the Biology & Genetics Forum. Anyone posting negatively about homosexuality on the Religion Forum (i.e. xians), show their fundamentalist bigotry, ignorance, and how evil xianity really is. Any preacher in the USA who preaches against homosexuality is spewing Anti-American propaganda, since this violates others' civil rights and defies Federal, State and Local Laws. In this country, "all men are created equal." So, like it or not, homosexual men, and women, are just as equal and protected under the law as you ignorant, bigoted, bible-thumping xians.

 

S/W: Your church, contrary to your claim, is very fundamentalist. Does it embrace evolution as more valid than creation mythology? Does it preach that a worldwide flood did occur and that one boat with one family and millions upon million of animals survived it? Does it spend more time preaching about the "evils" of homosexuality than it does adultery, even though the incidence of occurance of the latter far outpaces the former? If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, your church is fundamentalist.

Woody: no, no, no and nope.

S/W: You cling to the notion that a monogamous gay couple is "unheard of" and this as a reason for what exactly?

Woody: I said they are rare. But the whole issue of gay marriage is a smokescreen. How many do you think will really last, maybe 1%?

S/W: Re-looking that claim, I suppose if you were willing to be deceptive, you could reach a bit and state that of the infected homosexuals, they are a thousand (or more) times more likely to die from AIDS than the uninfected heterosexuals. But since the percentages are what they are, you could also make the same claim that infected heterosexuals are 1 thousand times more likely to die from AIDS than uninfected homosexuals. Statistics can mean what you want them to.

Woody: again here are the stats: 1/3 of all homosexual men in the USA will either have AIDs or be dead by age 30. More than 50% by age 40.

What do you suppose the average life expectancy is for a homosexual male? Let's hear you statistic?

S/W: But speaking of agendas.... you made some attempts to accuse me of having a vested interest in the homosexual lifestyle at least two times. These are clearly veiled ad hominem remarks but they don't really work, Woody.

I do have an interest in the issue. My interest is the freedom of all peoples, regardless of gender, race, creed, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. My agenda is to speak out against bigotted crap that idiots like your pastor spread in their cults.

Woody: Then perhaps you would be interested in the truth, instead of trashing someone before you've even heard them at all. That's called "poisoning the well" where I come from. Where you come from that must be called "enlightenment."

-----------------------------------

The main point here is that homosexualtiy is not compatible with the christian lifestyle.

If non-christians want to be gay, abort their children, make excuses for substance abuse, whatever, then fine, they aren't going to heaven anyway. What should we expect anyway in a non-christian world? Answer: Just about anything. No surprises.

The way of sin leads to death, but the gift of God is eternal life.

By the way it appears the statistics are even worse in Canada:

Short Life for Gay Men

 

woody: why do you think you are one of the chosen heaven bound xians woody, when you break most of the rules.


You see these woody, you have a role model to follow. And you can't deviate from the model too much and hope to get to the heavenly entertainment park.

jesus said"Therefore by their fruits shall you know them. Not everyone who says to me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me in that day Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by your name and by your name cast out demons, and by your name do many mighty works? And I will profess to them, I never knew you. Go away from me you who work evil." Matt 7:22-23

you see woody not every person who claims to be xian will make it to that starry, wonder filled entertainment park they call heaven. True xians say that only 10 percent of those who claim to be True xians are xians at all.

judging others:“Judge not, that ye be not judged”-Matthew 7:1 and “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven”-Luke 6:37.

Marital Relationships for instance, So many xians try to rationalize this but it is clear that a true follower of Jesus can neither divorce someone nor marry someone who is divorced. There is an exception to the rule, however. If spouse commits adultery, divorce is permissible. On the same token, the Bible also says that anyone who obtains a divorce and marries another is in adulterer.

“So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6 & Mark 10:9)

“whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18).

”Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery” (Matthew 5:32).

”...whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her” (Mark 10:11 & Luke 16:18), which applies to women as well-(Mark 10:12).

churches: Jesus said prayer should be a private affair devoid of public display: “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room (or closet.) and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret...“ (Matthew 6:5-6 RSV). xians continuously pray in public, IE: churches, street corners, schools, courts, etc. yet all the while they never stop to think this is in direct violation to the god they pray to.


long hair:”Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” --l Corinthians 11:14). the stereotypical version of CHRIST HIMSELF ! Think of the numerous statues and pictures xians adore depicting the lord appearing as that which he detests. One can not stop and wonder at the absurdity of this.

woman minsters or woman talking in church:“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34). It’s difficult to see how Paul could support the current movement to ordain women.( which brings us back to churches again)

woman wearing the trouser/pants:“The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God”--Deuteronomy 22:5). no pants/trouser suits no putting on mens shirts half naked and walking round the house.

repetitive prayer: repetitious and monotonous praying is in violation of Matthew 6:7. “But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”

courts/disputes: “If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints?” -- 1 Corinthians 6:1 NIV)

womans dress:“...that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire”--l Timothy 2:9 RSV; and “Let not yours be the outward adorning of braiding of hair, decoration of gold, and wearing of fine clothing”-- 1 Peter 3 :3).


loving your father and mother: “If any man come to me, and not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sister, yet, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple”-- Luke 14:26).
no law enforcement: “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also”-- Matthew 5:39).

dont call you dad father:“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven”--Matthew 23:9).

dont plan ahead:“Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or that ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on... Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, not gather into barns; yet your heavenly father feedth them. Are ye not much better than they?” --Matthew 6:25-34 & Luke 12:22-31 inclusive).


the old law to remani in force:“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”-Matthew 5:18-19 RSV).

This verse leads me into an observation of how clear their selective morality can be exposed. Take for instance how Biblicists approach the Old Testament. They leap in and out of the Old Law like a porpoise in a ship’s wake. If they like it, they quote it; if they don’t, they won’t. Among the scores of verses they enjoy and employ are those which teach the following:

no read oracles or the stars in the newspapers:“Do not turn to mediums or wizards; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God”-- Leviticus 19:3 1 RSV, see also: Leviticus 20:6 & Deuteronomy 18: 10-12).

give one fifth of your property to god:“And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s...And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord”--Leviticus 27:30-32)

no tattoos: “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh on account of the dead or tattoo any marks upon you. I am the Lord”--Leviticus 19:28)

dont charge interest to fellow xians: Money cannot be lent at interest to your brother, only to foreigners (Deuteronomy 23: 19-20)

no bacon and eggs: Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).

marry your sister in law: A man must marry and have relations with his dead brother’s wife (Deuteronomy 25:5-6).

if ask for your money: Give to everyone that asketh thee; and from him that taketh away thy goods ask not again." Luke 6:30, "Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away." Matt. 5:42

caste out demons, talk in tongues, heal the sick: "And these signs shall accompany them that believe: in my name they shall cast out demons, they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay their hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Mark 16:17-18

a raped girl must marry the rapist: A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

Beards can’t be rounded (Leviticus 19:27).

A garment composed of wool and linen can’t be worn (Deuteronomy 22:11).

I would not keep shouting your mouth of that your going to heaven, unless you follow all the rules you will not.

 

I just have one question for you audible. Where does grace fit into your "model christian" stereotype?

Bible: For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Bible: Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Woody: So tell me Audible, should I go to hell by living up to your biblical understanding of Leviticus and other OT laws? "No flesh shall be justified by the works of the law" -- How can it be any plainer than that?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

As for the adultery thing. That is not my problem. I am married for the first time and so is my wife.

Nice try.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I can appreciate your long discourse on the other items, and I could explain them to you if you were a christian brother that was actually interested in making it work for you. But, I know your real purpose is to find fault. Many items can not be understood without love. Jesus says this commandment fulfills all other commandments in effect today. The new law is love.

Every issue must be examined in that light including homosexual behavior. I feel sorry for them. I really, honestly don't want to see anyone die. But it is happening. I think it is time the church saw this issue the same way Jesus sees it. It is an issue that we would rather ignore, but we can not.

There is a solution for the homosexual -- to become celebate. I remained celebate the whole time I was a christian and unmarried. I did not give into temptation for the opposite sex, and I have the same nature most other guys have. Couldn't a homosexual do the same thing if they weren't turned on by the opposite sex? Just be celebate. They'd live a lot longer if they were celebate.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Where does the Bible make this distinguishment?

 

audible:woody: why do you think you are one of the chosen heaven bound xians woody, when you break most of the rules.
*************
M*W: If someone was truly a xian, they wouldn't be on this forum for the simple reason that it is populated mostly by atheists. I think Woody is an amazingly curious man. His posts have shown he would like to know more about the occult, atheism and homosexuality.
*************
audible: You see these woody, you have a role model to follow. And you can't deviate from the model too much and hope to get to the heavenly entertainment park.
*************
M*W: Simply by his presence here on the religion forum, Woody has forfeited any chance of heaven.
*************
audible asked Woody several questions including:

Fruits of one's labor are required;
Judge others before they judge you;
Marital relationships are evil, including;
-Adultery;
-Divorce;
-Fornication;
-Remarriage;
Praying in public is required to pretend to be a real xian;
Long hair worn by the Jews is forbidden; short hair is Greco-Roman influence;
Women ministers are evil;
Women talking in church are evil;
Women dressed in pants (even though men wore dresses) is evil;
Repetitious praying is an addiction;
Loving your father and mother is incestuous;
Sowing what you reap is the xian way;
Xians are selectively moral;
Turning to stars, the media and wizards is evil;
Tithing to God is required;
Tattoos are evil; any xian with a tattoo will not get in heaven;
Don't charge interest to xians but screw pagans & gentiles;
Dont' eat bacon, eggs, pork, Chinese take-out or a country breakfast, etc.;
Marry your sister-in-law, God says;
Must have sex with dead brother's wife, says God;
Loan money to everyone who asks;
Caste out demons, talk in tongues, heal the sick;
Rape victim must marry her rapist, God says;
Beards can’t be rounded or styled by a barber, and hair gel is strictly forbidden;
Don't wear a polyester blend shirt with a wool suit and silk tie;

So, audible, don't hold your breath on Woody's answering these rules. I bet he even has a tattoo!
*************
audible: I would not keep shouting your mouth of that your going to heaven, unless you follow all the rules you will not.
*************
M*W: Woody stated in this or another post that he was totally celibate before he married his wife, even though he claims to have been a normal hot-blooded male at the time. All I can say to this is, Woody, celibacy is as sure to give you a wicked case of prostate cancer just as homosexual sex would likely give you AIDS. A man who desires to stay healthy must ejaculate at least three times per week. Don't tell us you didn't masturbate, you hot-blooded male, you. Masturbation is a vile sin of the flesh, and if you touched yourself inappropriately, you will burn in hell.

 

Smokescreen? To obscure what, exactly? First, marriage is a civil responsibility, not a religious one. Religion is irrelevant when two people decide to make a contract of marriage. Second, marriage as a civil institution provides certain civil and legal benefits and rights that aren't afforded to non-married persons. This is the reason why gays want to be legally allowed to marry, a right which they have according to the Constitution -laws prohibiting same-sex marriages are unConsitutional.

How many will last? I couldn't say. I'm not clairvoyant and neither are you. However, if I had to place a bet, I'd say that the success rate of same-sex marriages would reflect the success rates of heterosexual marriages. There's no reason to think otherwise. Success rates of marriages has no more bearing on same-sex marriages than heterosexual marriages. If marriages are to be disallowed because they might not work, then even you shouldn't be married. The success of your marriage is just as at risk as anyone elses. More so since you are Christian, actually.

These aren't the same statistics you quoted in a previous post. If you want to change your mind, that's fine, but I still expect you to cite sources to back your claim.

I don't have a statistic. I'm not making a claim, I'm refuting one. And quite effectively, I might add. Your claims are but words without sources. Are they still forthcoming?

No, it's called debunking. I've debunked your silly pastor and you quite well. Where's the sources? By continually adjusting and changing the requirements to your bigotted stand against homosexuals, you are presenting a pseudoscientific attempt at justifying your cult's discrimination. White's used to do this in North Carolina with black Americans by claiming that their intellects were inferior to the white man's; that they all steal, lie, and cheat; that misogyny would create impure bloodlines; etc.

If the "truth" were of interest to you, you would be more interested in reviewing the sources of the information that your cult leader is giving and using critical thinking instead of regurgitating them without review in a science forum.

If the "truth" were important, instead of attempting a refute by saying, "your sources are old," you would review them and see if any new or contrary information has been discovered.

If the "truth" were significant to a hypocrit such as yourself, you'd tell us all why your cult spends significantly more time on battling the "homosexual agenda" rather than rampant adultery, the latter being far more common and problematic to christians -and equally "sinful," I believe.

Then, as a society, we must do away with christianity. Homosexuality isn't something that one chooses. Regardless of whom they chose or refuse to have sex with, they are still homosexual in their orientation. But your comment above also reflects the serious hypocritical nature of the christian cults that reject homosexuality: because adultery is no more compatible, yet far more tolerated.

Heaven? Where's the evidence to support that wild claim. Upon death, the body decomposes and it's components return to the earth from which they came. This existance is probably all we get, since there is no evidence of anything else. Citing a discredited and unreliable religious text doesn't make it any more possible.

Relief. Morality. A society that can finally get on with progress instead of trying to reclaim the ignorance and superstition humanity was stuck with 2 to 4 thousand years ago.

Blaah, blaah, blaaah... go preach that shit somewhere else. This is a science forum. In the religion subforum, we discuss the anthropological and sociological values and effects of religion. Preachers aren't welcome.

 

Oh I see, so that's what makes homosexuality wrong?

Did you know: A person in a third world country is 100,000 times more likely to get a life threatening disease from water than anyone else.

Given your reasons, would that make water wrong? Or perhaps it just makes coloured people wrong?

Further to which I have serious doubts that the US department of health ever made such a statement in that it is seriously inaccurate. Any AIDS sufferer is just as likely to die from it as any other AIDS sufferer.

How can a homosexual with AIDS be any more likely to die than a heterosexual with AIDS? Wont they both die? Then again.. how is a homosexual AIDS sufferer any more likely to die than any other human being on the planet? Don't we all die?

And you claim that's what the US department of health said? Lol.

Anyway, once you have dispensed with the fun and games, how about you justify how homosexuality is wrong.

It's heavily debated of course. You're not really in a position to make an absolute statement such as that one. Plus as a psychologist, my field isn't really related to what genes there are or are not.

From a gene perspective though we need to look at several things. I knew a man who was born with a womb, vagina, penis etc.. He lived until 40 something as a man, (even had kids), and then changed to a woman. You would apparently call this "wrong", but without being honest enough to take into account that he simply hadn't been born right. That instead of the genes separating to become male or female, he ended up a bit of both.

So if he fancied a bloke, you would undoubtedly call him a fag and doom him to hell, and if he fancied a woman you would undoubtedly call him a lesbo and doom him to hell.

There are many other issues to take into consideration but I can already see you don't care. Doom them to hell and done with it, only because, (according to you), homosexuals die more than anyone else.

Not according to jesus, and your pastor is a nobody in comparison.

Not according to jesus, and your pastor is a nobody in comparison.

Your understanding of jesus words is a big fat zero.

Pay attention to jesus, not your pastor.

Not at all, that law has been trumped by grace. See, we can both play that silly little game.

 

"There is a solution for the homosexual -- to become celebate. I remained celebate the whole time I was a christian and unmarried. I did not give into temptation for the opposite sex, and I have the same nature most other guys have. Couldn't a homosexual do the same thing if they weren't turned on by the opposite sex? Just be celebate. They'd live a lot longer if they were celebate."

*I feel deeply sorry for you woody. It seems you missed out on a lot of "natural" good things. Is it ok to wank? The unnatural repression of sexuality in the Catholic Church is nicely illustrated in abberant outcomes. Can you not see the prison that you dwell in?



Allcare.

 

shut up you 'ironical' boring bastard

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Oh yes. As long as the sexual "freedom" of a man comes at the cost of the woman's health, it is alriiiiight.

Any man who thinks he is entitled to have consequence-free sex is a whore, and he is worthy only of a whore.

I find it preposterous that you end each post of yours this way -- even posts where you scorn and pity.

 

Let me start this post by reminding us what the entire topic is: "Somebody Calls This Christian?" The title implies that the original poster (Woody) disagrees with one or more individuals or groups being referred to as "Christian."

This thread involves a lot of atheists and agnostics, since it is a discussion that takes place in the religion sub-forum of a science message board. But atheists and agnostics can be well-suited to discuss Christianity, as can members of religions other than Christianity. I think it is also reasonable to assume that non-Christians can easily understand the spirit or intent of Christianity and even appreciate it in many ways. I'm an agnostic-atheist and I do.

Even as an atheist, the teachings of the alleged Christ make sense:

This is human kindness. I get it. I understand it. I even believe it up to the point where Christianity involves invisible deities that are omniscient/omnipotent. Common sense tells us the world would be more habitable if its residents treated each other as the alleged Christ taught.

Unfortunately, it doesn't happen. Even in a society (the United States) where the vast majority consider themselves to be Christians.

Is Woody a Christian?

The main body of this post will explore the original poster's own ability to live up to the teachings of the alleged Christ.

Woody seems to cling to a couple of myths about homosexuals and cites statistics that don't have sources to back him up. That the sources are absent isn't a surprise.

One of the myths that he keeps stating over and over is the assumption that homosexuals are less likely to be monogamous than heterosexuals and that they may not even want to be monogamous.

Woody doesn't cite a source for his data, but claims it is forthcoming. Who knows? Maybe it will. Or perhaps Woody is simply making the assumption based on his readings in gay pornography. Either is just as likely, I suppose.

Studies of gay and lesbian attitudes regarding healthy relationships indicate that they desire the same types of relationships that heterosexuals want: enduring, loving, dedicated, loyal, etc (Bell & Weinberg, 1978; Bell, Alan; Weinberg, Martin; and Hammersmith, S. K., 1981). Many state that they want to have families and, considering the number of adoptable children in the world, this is a realistic goal. Studies also show that steady, monogamous relationships exist among gays and lesbians (Bell & Weinberg, 1978; Jay & Young, 1997; Peplau & Cochran, 1981). In these studies, up to 60% of the gay men surveyed stated that they were in monogamous relationships and up to 80% of the women.

I'll agree that these studies don't speak for the entire United States homosexual population, and they varied somewhat with results, but the fact that in each study somewhere around half of those surveyed responded with the desire for monogamous relationships is suggestive that the pattern for the desire for monogamy is significant among the homosexual population.

I'll also agree that neither of these studies speak for the success of the monogamy goal among homosexuals. But a lack of marriage records and complete openness of homosexual relationships makes this difficult data to collect. Some studies have discovered, however, that homosexual couples exist that have been together for 20 years or more and that these types of relationships are not uncommon (McWhirter & Mattison, 1984; Silverstein, 1991).

The other myth that Woody appears to cling to is that sexual abuse leads to a homosexual lifestyle for the victim as a result. Woody made the statement that "[o]f all lesbians (1.44% of all women), 2/3 of them were sexually molested as children," which is partially true. But to imply that molestation is a causation of homosexuality is fallacious, and I'll demonstrate why in the next two paragraphs.

Since Woody isn't interested in citing references or sources, I'll do it here (Bradford et al, 1994; Cameron & Cameron, 1995; Gundlach, 1977; Tomeo, 2001). Each of these studies, however, only reached a figure of about 25% at the highest for lesbian women who reported sexual abuse. Tomeo cautions that while her data concurred with previous studies, that the sampling in each was small and may be subject to bias itself since the samples may not be representative of the complete homosexual population. It could very well be, she includes, that the sampled homosexuals may have found themselves in situations that led to abuse based on their psychological responses to their orientation.

But I ask, what difference would it make? The studies that conclude that the incidence of homosexuality among those sexually abused as children is more significant than with heterosexuals also tell us that the incidence of sexual abuse among homosexuals as children by heterosexuals as adults is significant. Each of the studies noted that the abuser was nearly always heterosexual.

The neo-Christian Agenda – as interpreted by the American fundamentalist churches like Woody's

The neo-Christian agenda is based on two things: 1) unfounded fear; and 2) the desire for cult leaders of Christianity to maintain power and wealth.

Unfounded Fear
Christian fundamentalists like Woody are quick to cite biblical passages in both the OT and NT which denounce homosexuality. Yet they ignore those passages which run contrary to their hatred.

Neo-Christian fundamentalists justify their hatred and bigotry against homosexuals several ways, two of which are to deny that they "hate" homosexuals and to simply state that homosexuals aren't their "brothers."

The former denial is a thin veil of deception, since it's clear that the homosexual population makes up a small fraction of society while other, equally "sinful," behaviors are present in a large proportion of society, including among those that call themselves "Christian." These behaviors include everything from adultery to theft to alcohol abuse. Why do fundamental Christian cults concentrate on the behaviors of a small fraction of society while all but ignoring the behaviors of the vast majority of society?

Annette Lawson, the author of Adultery (1989) writes, "[t]he various researchers arrive at a general consensus…suggesting that above one-quarter to about one-half of married women have at least one lover after they are married in any given marriage. Married men probably still stray more often than married women—perhaps from 50 percent to 65 percent by the age of forty." Why then don't the Christian cults place more emphasis on eradicating adultery than homosexuality since less than 2.5% of the U.S. population is estimated to be homosexual?

The answer isn't related to the religious problem that homosexuality presents for Christianity. It's the unfounded fear that becomes associated with the stigma of the homosexual. Christians and even non-Christians often fear that homosexuality can spread as if it were some disease or plague.

Their homophobia manifests itself frequently as does their hatred of the homosexual. Neo-Christians frequently accuse others of being homosexual, as if the description were a slur, reminiscent of "nigger."

[quote="Dr." Laura] "A huge portion of the male homosexual populace is predatory on young boys."[/quote]

These quotes demonstrate the fear and hatred that neo-Christians have for the statistically very few homosexuals that reside in the United States compared to the number of adulterers and thieves.

Power and Wealth

The creation of an "enemy" or an "other" is a unifying force for any culture. The United States has done it since the Revolution, marginalizing the Native American, the Mexican, the Cuban, Caribbean Islanders, Inuits, Immigrants from Japan and China, and, of course, blacks. These Americans got the blame for a variety of behaviors and conditions and were, at various times, confined to reservations, camps, prisons, and the backs of buses and theaters.

Having an other unifies the majority and creates solidarity. Cultures have used the other method of unification and nationalism for at least as long as writing has existed.

Nationalism and solidarity of a nation-state's citizens has the tendency to ensure the power of the leadership as citizens abandon critical thinking in favor of loyalty to the state. This is clear even in the current administration as Bush's popularity was at it's all time high just after 9/11 –a popularity that steadily declined in the years following as the threat of terrorism became less scary.

The fundamentalist religious leaders of neo-Christian cults in the United States use the same tactics in their quest to maintain power and subsequent wealth. By directing hatred of their followers to a small homosexual minority (one that they perhaps felt would be too small to fight back), these leaders unify current members and encourage increased membership as a means to belong to a group that professes to have the best interest of America at heart. This interest is often professed through fabricated and distorted claims as well as by seeding hatred among less-informed heterosexuals who believe their claims that the homosexual is a club that is attempting to increase its membership by recruiting the children of America; that homosexuality is the cause of HIV/AIDS; that homosexuality will mean the demise of the so-called "traditional family" in the United States; etc.

Overall, I suspect that there is a feedback loop between the unifying use of an other and the unfounded fear of the homosexual. Gay marriage is the ultimate bitch slap to the so-called religious right in the United States, since fundamentalists erroneously believe that marriage is a religious institution only and should not be left to secular society to decide who enters legal commitment contracts with their relationships. Gay marriage would suddenly allow homosexual couples to adopt children. Such an act would create a membership dilemma for the cults that fear homosexuality, because these children would either be raised Christian or they wouldn't. If they were to be raised Christian (a great many homosexuals believe in the Christian religion), then the parents would have to be allowed to participate in their indoctrination (or, as believers like to say, "education"). This would then force them to allow the very people they fear into the church. Christian cult leaders would then have to admit they were wrong; retract long-standing assumptions and distortions of the homosexual lifestyle (that it is contagious; the cause of HIV/AIDS; etc.).

Conclusion

Woody is apparently well indoctrinated into the fundamental church he belongs to. He claims his church isn't "fundamentalist," but it certainly isn't eclectic or progressive. It is refusing to acknowledge that the fears and taboos of cultures from four to two thousand years before present are not relative to modernity.

Woody isn't going to change his mind about homosexuality and his hatred will continue –as will his attempts to "witness" to the heathen. The latter assumption is evidenced by his preachings here in sciforums as well as his participation in occult message boards elsewhere on the internet. Woody has even stated in this forum that he comes here to witness to those he can.

Woody's information and data about homosexuality are incomplete, distorted, out-of-context, without valid sources, and, on occasion, even fabricated. He probably doesn’t do the fabricating or distorting, but simply regurgitates the propaganda that he receives in cult meetings. The very propaganda that isn't disseminated to the followers in order to empower them to change the world, but rather to create solidarity among the followers and recruit new members to the cult.

I didn't write this post for the sole purpose of refuting Woody. I did it because the thread pops up in Google searches and is visited by many who read looking for information and don't have the desire to necessarily participate. Woody and his kind require an opposing and critical counterview so that ignorance can be stopped in its tracks rather than spread like a disease.

Woody's stand on homosexuality is illogical given the lack of attention and significance on more frequent and serious "sins" of Christianity, such as adultery and theft. Issues like homosexuality and abortion serve the purpose of creating "Wedge Issues" among the general populace and amount only to hatred and, often, violence. They don't serve the purpose of spreading the "love of Christ" or live up to the spirit of the teachings of Christ (assuming that he existed).

I ask you: "They call this Christian?"

References

Bell, Alan, and Weinberg, Martin. Homosexualities. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.

Bell, Alan; Weinberg, Martin; and Hammersmith, S. K. (1981). Sexual Preference: Its Development in Men and Women, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Gundlach, R. H. (1977). Sexual molestation and rape reported by homosexual and heterosexualwomen. Journal of Homosexuality 2: 367–384.

Jay, K., and Young, A. (1977). The Gay Report, Simon and Schuster, New York.

Lawson, Annette (1989). Adultery, New York: Basic Books.

McWhirter, D. P., & Mattison, A. M. (1984). The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Peplau, L. A., & Cochran, S. D. (1981). Value orientations in the intimate relationships of gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 6(3), 1-9.

Silverstein, C . (Ed.). (1991). Gays, lesbians, and their therapists: Studies in psychotherapy. New York: W.W. Norton.

Tameo, Marie; Templer, Donald; Anderson, Susan; Kotler, Debra (2001). Comparative data of childhood and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons. Archives of Sexual Behavior

 

I doubt the kind of haters that killed Matthew Shepard, or want to prevent gays from having civil rights stop to ask them wether they are celebate or not. And, no, they would not necessarily live longer if celebate.

 

Wow, the hiatus has been great hasn't it?

---------------------------------------------

S/G and S/W,

Oh I see, Anyone that disagrees on morality issues is a "hater."

God: When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

Woody: Actually I don't like blood on my hands when a gay guy dies from AIDS. Apparantly it doesn't bother you guys to watch gay men die, since you ignore the facts about the risks, and preach their lifestyle as a good thing.

Here are the facts from the U.S. Center for Disease Control:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

THe CDC is about as objective as you are going to get.

Here is their web-link:

CDC web link

As you can see from the graph, a huge majority of americans with AIDS are gay men though they make up only a small percentage of the american population.

Well, so much for the naive argument that gay men are no more likely than anyone else to get AIDS. What more proof is needed?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The "gay gene theory" is political propaganda from gay scientists using biased sampling methods. The results could not be reproduced in the science/medical community, and this hypothesis has gone to the junk-science garbage can where it belonged:

The psychology community largely agrees that homosexual orientation is behavioral rather than genetic:

Psychology of Sexual Orientation

To summarize, many young people go through an adolescent phase where they swing back and forth between homosexual and heterosexual behavior. Some will swing through it five times or more. This is not genetic, it's behavioral.

There are counseling services for people that want to change from homosexual to heterosexual. It is more than 50% effective:

Gay men that go straight


May I quote from the counselling service:

If homosexuality is genetically coded then how are they able to change to heterosexual behavior? Spidergoat, Skinwalker, anybody? Your arguments are obsolete rants from the pro-gay community. Snakelord missed the boat altogether, since he is a counsellor and knows nothing about this wonderful opportunity to help people that are trapped with an addiction.

Gayness is not genetic, and the life expectancy of a gay man is only about age 41.

S/W, So go ahead and encourage homosexuals to kill themselves, hide the truth from them concerning the risks. Their tragedy falls squarely on your shoulders. You will give an account to the God I believe in.

And, by the way, homosexuals ARE more promiscuous:

CNN report on AIDS

May I quote from the report:

The root causes are crystal clear and gay promiscuity is one of them. Geez guys, is there any more argument?

Here are some tales from the crypt if you still aren't convinced:

The Facts about Gay Male Promiscuity from the CDC

----------------------------------------------------------------

I hate to say it, but you guys have been used as a floor mop. Why don't you come out of the closet and face the facts?

By the way what do you think about "rimming for the prize", as described in gay sex literature? Does that sound like a good, wholesome, healthy practice for a man? I don't want to get graphic here, but the "prize" is fecal material.

 

No, sir. But your stand on the homosexual issue makes you, as it does others of your cult, a hypocrite. Indeed, your ilk give good reason to invalidate any religious cult that utilizes the christian bible as its dogma. Just 10 chapters prior to the nonsense you quoted in the very same book of mythology, the author (allegedly Ezekiel himself) goes on about two sisters who engaged in pre-marital sex and were killed for it -one by sword, the other by having her ears and nose cut off, forced to "pluck off" her own breasts, raped/mutilated by her accusers, then stoned to death. Not only that, but their sons and daughters were then "slain" for their crimes.

If christians are to adhere to the literal truth of this bible, then why do they pick and choose what they want to adhere to like picking a meal at a Chinese buffet?

No need for facts. I don't dispute that HIV/AIDS is more common among gays than non-gays. But is that legitmate reason for discrimination? Isn't hepatitis B more common among health care/EMS providers than not? Isn't the risk of falling 30,000 feet more common among skydivers than not? Isn't the risk of heart disease more common among those that consume foods high in fat than not? Isn't Type II Diabetes more common among those suffering from morbid obesity than thin people? Isn't sickle cell anemia more prevelant among those of African descent than those of Anglo?

What harm do homosexuals pose to you? What risk do you have from their lifestyle? So what if they eventually obtain the freedom to marry? How does it affect you and your family?

It is utterly ironic that religious fundamentalists single out the "evil" of the homosexual and yet ignore the evils that their own populations are prone to: adultery, gambling, theft, murder, pedophilia, etc. When I see a christian cult rise up and stamp out adultery, then perhaps I might listen to what they have to say regarding homosexuality.

You've said that before. And you still fail to cite a source. The studies I noted did not sample prison populations, moreover, I saw no indication that the researchers were "gay." But then, this is a good example of an attempt to use "gay" and "homosexual" as a slur. You even cite a "reference" with the word "fag" in the url. And, as I pointed out, the priestly caste of the various cults of christianity have a vested interest in creating an "other" and demonizing this "other" in order to maintain their wealth and status. Congratulations, you've bought their propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

You still haven't been able to properly refute the Hamer citation and information that I gave you on a previous page. The sum of your rebuttal is that Hamer is gay and that his sample population was of a prison and that the study was old. I remind you that many of Isaac Newton's published observations are quite a bit older than Hamer's, yet they are still highly regarded by most who understand them.

Right... the title banner of the page reads "exposing the myth of evolution." There's an unbiased source that's based in objective logic. A pseudoscience site arguing that someone else's research is "junk-science" doesn't exactly create an air of authority.

What that article doesn't cover is the rejoinder of Hamer to Rice's criticisms and demonstration that Rice's own work even shows a correlation. Also, the "article" (it doesn't appear to have any peer-review status or actual publication, making it a tertiary source at best) fails to point out that Hamer's study was drastically different than the Bailly/Pillard twin study in that it looked at maternal male connections rather than fraternal twin connections. Moreover, Hamer isn't saying that the Xq28 region is the cause of homosexuality, but rather an influencing factor. In this regard, DNA isn't a blueprint so much as a recipe. Altering conditions can create different results with the same, exact ingredients.

All said and done, I've shown where there is evidence, albeit far from conclusive, that shows there is some correlation with homosexuality and genetics. There probably is no gene that causes homosexuality. But there probably are some that influence the liklihood that homosexuality can emerge. You've shown absolutely nothing with regard demonstrating that homosexuality is not genetically influenced.

Your arguments are propaganda. There are very few people who can be demonstrated to be "ex-gay" due to the salvation of religious nutters. You can find a plethora of "homosexual recovery" ministries, but none seem to have independent confirmation of their effectiveness. So they stop playing the skin-flute. A PBS documentary, One Nation Under God, examines Gary Busse and Michael Cooper, a gay couple who tried to "repent" and start a ministry for "recovering" homosexuals. They ended up with the realization that they were in love and abandoned it. There are many such examples of failed ministries.

Religious Tolerance even has a page regarding the effectiveness. "86% of the men and 63% of the subjects emerged from therapy still having feelings of attraction to persons of the same-sex." And: "Of the 112 men (out of the total 143) who acknowledged that they masturbated, more than half (56 percent) said they used homosexual fantasies some of the time and about one-third (31 percent) said they seldom had opposite-sex masturbation fantasies."

"50% effective" is an unverifiable and fallacious remark. No proper study has been done. The religious nutters only pull a number out of their asses and say it's true, much as they do information from their bibles.

It might be, but you haven't cited a source so why should we believe it?

You are certainly not embracing the teachings of christ. Citing "god hates fags?" I think it's clear that you hate "fags." Hatred based on irrational fear and propaganda from their cult is pathetic.