Free Republic

Americans to tone down the rhetoric, to quit with the demonizing, to end the fear-mongering.

So we're supposed to hide in fear? Just shut up and be held hostage?

I'm not supposed to say what I thinking because someone might go nuts?

I am NOT going to live my life in fear. Part of being free is being able to say what you want when you want.

This homosexual agenda crap makes me want to puke.

My personal favorite.. Zot kitty is watching you!

Referring to #62.

Your response is asinine at best...I'll leave it at that thanks...

MarineBrat, the pictures in your profile had me laughing so frigg’n hard I was crying. Awesome! :)

The best way to reduce your dependency on the system and by extension, the government, is to learn gardening skills.

The Dervaes family does all this from their back yard.

I just love farmers.:-)

Anyway, being predisposed to an activity may lessen or remove culpability (guilt); however, does not lessen the negative aspects of the act itself.

Such a very good statement and profound. Thank you for posting it. :-)

The US has the right to determine who is recognized as legally married.

Ahhh Ok.. very good point!!!

So under the precident of the Edmunds Act of 1882, we can, at the federal level mandate marriage law.

Ok then, what we need is a conservative Senate and President and a SCOTUS to pass it and make it stick.
It's not impossible. Then we can put this abomination to rest.

But could we do it?

I can assure you quite confidently it’s not a “choice” and I dislike being painted with the “turd-burglaring rump ranger” label. I didn’t just DECIDE one day “lol I wanna do this.”

Yes, engaging in homosexual sex, just like engaging in heterosexual sex is a choice.

Being attracted to someone is not equal to committing sex acts.

I find women to be God's most beautiful creation. But I choose to have sex only with one.

What we are bashing is the sex act itself.

If you truly love God you will resist and I mean do whatever it takes to resist committing homosexual sex acts.

Every person that is born on this earth was born with trials and weaknesses that they must over come. That's why we are here. These trials are giving to you by God Himself. If you do what is required to over come them, you will be strong and a force for good. If you give in to them you will be weak and eventually cast off.

Again, it's your choice.

I think it depends very much on the state.

But clearly the best answer is not to hire them. Unfortunately, that’s not simple, since it would be a major mistake to inquire about it, or to let it even be suspected.

I would say that there are at least THREE degrees of homosexuality.

1. The inclination. This is a disorder, but if the person resists acting on it, then he avoids blame.

2. Homosexual acts. According to traditional belief and Christian moral teaching, this is wrong. But if practiced privately and quietly, it hurts mainly the perpetrators.

3. Homosexual activism. This is much worse in an employee. Someone who is vocal about homosexual rights, who pushes to change the law and is eager to sue anyone for hate crimes. This leads to unjust laws, teaching of homosexuality in the public schools, degradation of marriage, and all sorts of cultural evils.


I agree totally. If you say publicly that you won't hire a homosexual, you might find your words being printed and used as evidence in a congressional hearing.

 

I like your degrees. I couldn't have said it better.

 

My wife had a relative that was mixed up in this for a while. I laid down the law and stuck to it. The relative could visit. But the partner could not. I won't allow it in my house, ever.

 

I have kids and I want there to be no confusing this kind of behavior with a normal relationship. Thankfully this relative got out of that and is now legitimately married.

I’m missing your point.

Why are you asking this question??

I thought I made that clear in the OP. I do not want to support homosexual behavior. Period. It's evil.

It's not that I want to be mean to people. But to me I see homosexual behavior as a cancer of this world.

Thanks Dilbert. Honestly this stuff makes me want to puke. It creeps me out to no end. And I don't think I have the words to describe just how much.

There's got to be some kind of protection against being forced to do this.

I will sell my interest in the business. I will not give in. I won't do it.

I always knew the world would get bad. But I never thought it would get like this. It's in my face and there's no where to go.

[Stourme]That homosexuals already have all the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

[presently no screen name ]Really? Where are 'group' rights mentioned? As individuals - they had no rights? Now they have 'collective rights'? You can't see how dumb that is as you refer to the Constitution.

No, but I can see that a reading comprehension refresher would do you a wonder of good. Back away from the keyboard...

[Stourme]Our hope is that these people will see that homosexuality is evil. Those urges are to be resisted and conquered.

[presently no screen name]Are you serious? You actually think they don't know homosexuality isn't evil? Did they catch you up with their deception? They hid in the closet for years because of it! NOW w/PC in the world, and evil being more present and more accepted - they now want to cram down their evil ways on society to accept it!!

[Stourme responds] Yes I'm serious. But I have to wonder about your level of understarnding of the situation. Most homosexuals and those that support them do not consider homosexuality to be 'evil'. Most believe they were born that way and it's normal. Yes, they want to cram their evil way on us. That's what librals do.

[Stourme]Calling people names never wins them over. Ridiculing people doesn't win the over.

[presently no screen name]Is evil too strong a word for these limp wristed deviants of the world? Jesus called sin EVIL! They ridicule themselves and ridicule goodness with their gay pride naked parades with an 'up your' attitude. Worse than Sodom and Gomorrah. And you think a 'name' is an offense?

[Stourme] Did I not call it evil? Name calling says more about you than it does about them. It's low brow. It accomplishes nothing good. Jesus also said He came for the sinner and invites all men to come to Him. And until His return we are to try to recover these people. We do not recover them by driving them away and making them enemies. Hate and contention is of the devil. How is name calling an act of kindness? How is ridiculing a person showing them brotherly kindness? There's a difference between calling yourself a 'Christian' and actually following Jesus Christ.


The best way to confront this is to stick to our guns with the argument that we have the right to reject this behavior as normal. That homosexuals already have all the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

And since that's not biblical it's no wonder you're cluelessness about Jesus. Jesus had NO problem calling evil, evil!

Very very true. But there was a line He didn't cross. Jesus did not engage in ad hominem attacks on people. He called it evil, showed people what was good and what was evil and left it at that.

Our hope is that these people will see that homosexuality is evil. Those urges are to be resisted and conquered.

Calling people names never wins them over. Ridiculing people doesn't win the over.

The problem with repealing DADT is that it crosses the line into encouraging the behavior. Which is... well sick.

Wow, you won't vote for a member of our conservative champions, the Evangelicals, members of the Protestant Christian faith, and the backbone of American conservatism.

That picture is not something you should be spreading around if you want to have Sarah Palin elected. To a lot of people it's quite creepy.

1. I want conservatives elected.
2. I would prefer someone that follows Jesus Christ.
3. You can be both with out stylizing yourself as an "Evangelical."

Evangelicals have a history of attitudes and behaviors that I don't want in my president. Or in any office that has the power to effect my family.

So no, I won't vote for one.

I really like Jindal.

I have a suggestion. I think anyone that seeks the Republican nomination, should have to appear on national TV and have a debate with Condoleeza Rice.

If you can hold you're own against her, then you're viable.

Condi Rice is my litmus test. Could this person have the presence and ability to be the boss of someone like her.

I won't vote for an evangelical.

Whether or not Sarah Palin can win will depend on how successful she is at producing an image that build confidence in the general public.