Brokeback Bunny

[Daisy]

I thought we were all sinners.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by Bro. James Reed:
Daisy, I'm not worried about myself seeing that there are gay people with families. I'm speaking solely of doing this type of thing at an assembly of children.

Um, what type of thing? They are participating in a family egg-roll with their children.

When the children ask their parents why all of those people were wearing the flowers, the parents will either have to explain that those folks are gay, or they'll have to lie to their kids.

It's Easter - many people dress up for Easter. It seems more likely to me that a kid would ask why so many people are not wearing flowers. How difficult is it to explain without going into any kind of inappropriate detail that some families are different?

In any event, if they want to protest, that is fine and dandy with me.

As Marcia pointed out, it is not protest, it is a participation.

If they want to march on Washington with 500,000 people and wear leis signifying their sexulaity, that's there prerogative. They are not, however, doing that. They will be doing this at a gathering of children. That is what I do not like about it.

They are showing up at a gathering of children with - gasp! - their children. Wearing a lei or not is significant only those who are aware of the significance.

The 2 women I spoke of earlier never wore leis or pink shirts or rainbow flags or anything else for the sole purpose of pointing out their sexuality to the rest of the neighborhood and the children. They were just normal parents.

And how do you know they were not unless they announced it or unless you peeked in the bedroom window?

If these people want to be accepted by society, then they need to be like the rest of society when gathered for an event such as this. If they want to protest, do it later. That is all I'm saying.

Wow, I wouldn't think that wearing a lei would be considered so outrageously scandalous that young eyes would need to be shielded. It isn't a protest, it's an acknowledgement. If you don't know that seemingly normal people are gay, then it is easy to claim, as many do, that you've never seen a gay person who acted normal.

 

[Marcia]

Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:
Simply put they are born the way that they are
stuck in the middle of the sexes

If you research this, you will find that so far there is no scientific evidence for this. I have been keeping up with this and there is no hard science to prove people are born this way. I am not sure about what you mean by "stuck in the middle of the sexes." Preference for one of the same sex is not stuck in the middle of anything.

...a hell for them in and of itself in a majority of heterosexuals whom practice supposed gay sex on each other after church...you don't hear anti-oral sex from the pulpit anymore that's because too many fine Christians practice it in the privacy of their own homes...so stop that first then perhaps try to control others sex lives in the privacy of their domain.

Why are bringing this up? As far as I know, it's not condemned in the Bible. Same sex is forbidden.

Once we get past this and we see these people are hybrid(gay) ..then we can minister to them..the bottom line the test is this....LOVE.

It is soooooooooooooooooo easy to pick a fight with this group because they are a minority and can be easily scapegoated

Hybrid? I think they would find that term offensive. No one is calling for hating anyone here -- you are setting up a straw man and then knocking it down. And just because they are a minority does not make the practice of homosexuality legitimate in God's eyes.

As I've said on other threads on this topic, no one can call me a homophobe. I used to do astrological readings for lesbian witches and had many gay and lesbian friends. Of course, at the time I believed that people could do whatever they wanted to.

 

[ASLANSPAL]

Of course what a baptist couple do after church in the privacy of their own home is their business but the past ..ah yes the past where from the pulpit and marriage counseling would try to define what they could do and could not do
some might think they are gay acts they are doing ..others might think it is two people in love defining their own personal style and being sensitive to each others need...my point is this . You do not hear from the pulpit on sex or in the culture the cans and cannots much anymore.
but yet the gays get the enth degree and have their privacy invaded by stating they do despicable acts...when if a study was done by a major sexual think tank these same baptist couples are doing a few things that mirror gay
relationships.


Marcia I do not think you are a homophobic at all.

"Hybrid." had no motive on my part to be hateful but to point out that gay people are born the
way that they are and they live an angst filled
live if they live in denial but if they step out on faith and find support they can find acceptance and healing for their angst.

Is it a practice? or are they naturally attracted to the same because they were born the way they are and seek out others like minded and hard wired genetically.

Time is tocking and each day this issue the scales are bending and towards a resolution in favor or accepting these people as born the way they are. And I think major voices will come from mothers of gays born to them as with the twins featured on network TV.


Have to admit this site is being as fair as it can be ..of course it is biased but I do see some hard effort to push back and give the counter view.

web page

Interesting to hear the banter on this blog from twins.(and you do hear both sides)
web page

Science and research and independent studies are the heavyweights that will change a lot of views
and just plain common sense. Christendom will pivot to minister to all.

So back to topic...if gays are deeply convicted to fight for their civil rights in a peaceful way and yet do controvesrial things that may offend some...so be it. It is because they know that deep inside they are different and want the same civil rights as all Americans...of course private religion can discriminate it is their right but it is also the right for churches to allow these chains to fall off and allow gays into their congregations.

All this will pass and maybe very soon ..just like the slavery mistake...just like the interacial marriage/dating mistake.

Then concetrate on really important things such as "good news" taking up for the poor and down trodden.

 

[Marcia]

Apal -- The issue is not what Baptists do or don't do, or if gays fight for civil rights in a peaceful way, or even if they are "born" homosexual -- the issue is what God has to say. God condemns homosexuality. [Don't send me links to pro-homosexual arguments using the Bible because I've read them - they've been refuted. I can send you links for those refutations].

The same sex issue is not the same as slavery or interacial marriage. The same sex issue is not ambiguous - it's clearly addressed in the Bible. I noticed that you ignore my statements about God condemning same sex and sex outside marriage. Your reasons to accept homosexuality are all based on humanistic rationales.

 

[ASLANSPAL]

Do not get angry Marcia it really is your own private interpretation of the bible you are standing on...as with interacial relationships and slavery many people stood on their private interpretations of the word for a long time and people were bound from love and from freedom because of it...like I said this will all fall off of Christiandom one day and it will pivot and pass the test of love.

 

[rbell]

Aslanspal,

Apples and oranges. Homosexuality is condemned in both the OT and NT bodies of scripture. Interracial relationships is unaddressed; slavery was an accepted cultural norm. You can't compare the two.

And in my book, the "test of love" is that we care too much for the fate of homosexuals to allow them to continue to live in sin without sharing the Good News with them...the old adage "we love them too much to leave them that way."

You speak of being "bound from love and freedom." I don't agree with your interpretation of "love" here...I think that love necessitates a loving response to their sin. But I don't understand the "freedom" thing. Does "freedom" mean the freedom to engage in homosexual behavior with God's blessing? I'm not trying to incite an arguement, but I don't know what you're trying to say...

And like I said earlier...since you and I are making different a priori assumptions on this issue of homosexuality (you say genetic, I say choice, and I feel scripture bears me out), we're going to have a difficult time finding common ground. We're building on two different foundational thoughts.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:
Do not get angry Marcia it really is your own private interpretation of the bible you are standing on...as with interacial relationships and slavery many people stood on their private interpretations of the word for a long time and people were bound from love and from freedom because of it...like I said this will all fall off of Christiandom one day and it will pivot and pass the test of love.

I agree with you to a point.....

Yes, there is nowhere in the bible that states that interracial relationships are sinful. Moses had an interracial relationship...

Yes, people have "stood" on their interpretations of the Word to defend the banning of interracial relationships. But because the bible does NOT speak out against it, then these people are either hateful or just plain morons, having not read the bible at all.
.............................

Yes, there is nowhere in the bible that promotes that "some" people are of lower worth or possess "lesser" human qualities and can therefore be forced into slavery.

Again, I agree that people have "stood" for centuries upon their interpretations of the bible to defend slavery (not servanthood or indentured servanthood) and again these people are either full of hate or full of stupidity, having not read the bible at all.
.........................

However, I am going to have to draw the line at homosexuality.

The bible clearly states that it is an abomination.

Romans 1 (somewhere around verse 26) says that homosexuality is unnatural, indecent, shameful, and a perversion. It also says that there is a due penalty for homosexuality.

It's written very clearly. How do you justify making homosexuality acceptable in God's sight after knowing what this passage says?

I am all for treating the entirety of humanity with the love of Christ, but I am also all for calling the entirety of humanity into repentance and confession and purity.

Peace-
Scarlett O.
<><

 

[gtbuzzarp]

Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:
Simply put they are born the way that they are

<snip>

The evidence is getting larger and larger that they are born that way and that it is genetic

I don't think they are born that way, but even if they are, it doesn't matter. We are all born sinners, it is our natural inclination to sin. Does that mean all sin is ok because we are born that way? Who are we to fight our spiritual "genetics" for sinning? But judging from other posts, I guess you don't think homosexuality is a sin? But if it's not a sin, then why does it matter if it is by nature or nurture?

In other words...

If it is not a sin, then how one comes to be homosexual does not matter. Stating that it is genetic implies one is seeking justification for an act already deemed acceptable. It suggests feelings of guilt. But if it is acceptable behavior, then no justification is needed.

If you say it is a sin, then no matter the reason for the cause, you cannot justify sin. Can the murderer or the rapist claim they were born that way and thereby negate the fact they committed a heinous sin?

Romans 6
12Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts,

13and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.

14For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

15What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!

16Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?

17But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed,

18and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

 

[gtbuzzarp]

Originally posted by rbell:
And in my book, the "test of love"...

Where can I buy it?

 

[ASLANSPAL]

Not seeking justification at all ..just seeing the procession of time take affect. And that means science,research and especially twins pointing to a major sign saying this very small
minority are born the way they are and need understanding not be insulted by others saying they are not born that way...when from their own mouths they say they are!

Did someone actually read the letters and banter from the twin site. Here it is again...real people ..real twins...both sides given.


http://forums.twinstore.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/96860409/m/51110463021

 

[Marcia]

APal, the passages in the Bible denouncing homosexual practice are not my private interpretation! It doesn't matter what the site says -- God has condemned the practice of homosexuality. If someone thinks they are born that way, then they need to not give in to it - same for alcoholism, gambling addictions, lust for anyone, etc.

We are born as fallen people -- so if there is a homosexual tendency (I don't think there is), then it is from the fallen nature. That does not make it okay!

The people who say they are Christians and are endorsing the practice of homosexuality are ignoring God's word.

 

[Bro. James Reed]

Marcia,

you just brought something to my mind.

When my grandfather(an alcoholic) died, the doctors told my mother that his grandchildren were very susceptable to alcoholism as well. It is a disease, just like Apal says homosexuality is.

That said, even if I have a gene or disease making me more susceptable to alcoholism, that does not give me an excuse to engage in heavy drinking. I could be kicked out of the church for that, as I should be if it were true.

The same is the case for homosexuality. Both are sin and should be dealt with as such, whether inbred within us or not. We are subject to sinful desires, but we choose whether or not to engage in sinful acts.

 

[LadyEagle]

Page 3 warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 2:15 a.m. ET by one of the moderators.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

 

[LadyEagle]

Closed per previous warning.