Homosexual "Conservative" Debates Farah at WND Conference

"You're confusing the government enforcing a "state religion" with that of enforcing a moral code. So that you don't continue to make a fool out of yourself by comparing Christianity and Islam"

No I'm not. The Declaration of Independence mentions the "Creator". It never mentions the God of Christianity. For some, that creator may be God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. For some it may be Allah. For some it may be that all of us are part of him (Hinduism) and whatever else is out there (Buhdism, Confuscism etc...). The Founders were for the most part religious and of some Christian denomination. However, none of them thought it was a good idea to intertwine their Christianity and the government.

You talk of the morals of the day in the founders time concerning homosexuality. However, during that time alchohol consumption was far more prevalent than it is nowadays. In fact, during election time it was commonplace for candidates for office to pass out free beer in order to vote for them. If you would like to read about drinking at the founding of this country, here you go:

http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/2002_summer_fall/forefathers.htm

As for prostitution, the ancient Army's including Washingtons had many female prostitutes who followed the troops around. The only debate about them were the commanders worrying about the spread of venerial disease.

The founders also were not able to outlaw slavery at the beginning of this country because many of the states would not have ratified the constitution. How much more immoral can you get than to treat another human being as your property?

The morals of society have changed throughout history. For good and for bad. Jefferson believed homosexuality should be punished by the law, yet he lawfully owned slaves. He was a complicated and brilliant man to say the least.

In general I like to follow Jefferson's advice the best concerning vices. If it does not break my leg or pick my pocket, what does it bother to me. You are not going to convert too many more people to Christianity by pounding a bible in their face. You're just going to hurt their face.

No I'm not. The Declaration of Independence mentions the "Creator". It never mentions the God of Christianity. For some, that creator may be God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. For some it may be Allah.

If you want to play the Barack Hussein Obama game "We were once a Christian nation, but now we're not", fine. But don't go trying to tell me that the Founders looked at Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confuscism (etc.) the same way that looked at Christianity.

David Barton of Wallbuilders.com talks about it in his interview with Teddy James of the American Family Association:

"Jefferson, when you go by his actions, was absolutely pro-Christian his entire life. He started church services at the U. S. Capitol in 1800. By 1857, the largest church in the U.S. was the one he helped start. He also started church services in the War Department and the Treasury Department on Sundays. When we bought the Louisiana Purchase in 1804, there were several Christian schools in New Orleans. Many of them wrote the president asking if they would have to shut down since they now belonged to America. Jefferson wrote them back saying no, they would still get the patronage of the government to help run their Christian schools."

Regarding the use of the word "Creator":

"This is the Father of Jesus. Again, half these guys were ministry trained; 95% of the signers were what we would call evangelical Christians. Even though many people call Franklin and Jefferson deists, they do not fit the definition. A deist is one who believes in an impersonal God. Franklin is the one who called for daily prayer at the convention because he said God answered their prayers and they saw it during the Revolution.
The other thing these knot-heads miss is that sermons by the leading Christian theologians of the day used the exact same terms in their sermons. Just because today’s Christianity uses a different set of terms doesn’t mean those [old terms] were not Christian. In the case of George Washington, he used 84 different ways of describing God. He used terms such as Good Shepherd, Divine Disposer of Events and Divine Author of our blessed religion."
Link to Deism and the Declaration

You talk of the morals of the day in the founders time concerning homosexuality. However, during that time alchohol consumption was far more prevalent than it is nowadays.

Wow, comparing drinking alcoholic beverages with a sexual perversion. First of all, drinking alcohol is not a sin, getting drunk is.
"Despite what some Christians teach, there is no prohibition in God’s Word against drinking alcoholic beverages. It is not a sin to drink beer, or even whiskey. There is, however, a clear prohibition against getting drunk."
Link to the Bible on Drugs and Alcohol

Note in your link what George Washington said: "My manner of living is plain...a glass of wine and a bit of mutton."

"a" glass of wine (as in singular).

As for prostitution, the ancient Army's including Washingtons had many female prostitutes who followed the troops around. The only debate about them were the commanders worrying about the spread of venerial disease.

Cite your source. Being that the military did and still does try cases of adultery, how could they allow prostitution to occur? (Slate.com isn't a reliable source by the way)

The founders also were not able to outlaw slavery at the beginning of this country because many of the states would not have ratified the constitution. How much more immoral can you get than to treat another human being as your property?

Slavery had been around for 200 years prior to our Founding Fathers writing the Constitution. They were wise enough to say that God created all men equally with unalienable rights. They knew that eventually all men (not perverts) would have equal rights.
Link to Founding Fathers and slavery
Link to Washington and Jefferson on slavery

The morals of society have changed throughout history. For good and for bad. Jefferson believed homosexuality should be punished by the law, yet he lawfully owned slaves. He was a complicated and brilliant man to say the least.

Read the links; as shown, the majority of Founding Fathers either released their slaves, or didn't own any. They followed Scripture when it came to that and other sins. Admittedly, they like all men sinned. They however didn't legislate their sins, they did just the opposite.

In general I like to follow Jefferson's advice the best concerning vices. If it does not break my leg or pick my pocket, what does it bother to me. You are not going to convert too many more people to Christianity by pounding a bible in their face. You're just going to hurt their face.

Glenn Beck used that line when he mocked traditional marriage on O'Reilly by saying "Are they [homosexuals} coming to get us?" Note, he too wasn't aware of the stance the Founding Fathers (and especially the one he quoted) took on homosexuality.

Let's look at the effect that pounding your secular humanist "bible" in the faces of people has had on society in the past decades:

50 million unborn babies murdered in the womb in a 37 year period (in the US alone)
500,000 dead from the "Gay Disease" AIDS in the past two decades.
Millions of lives destroyed through drug abuse (alcohol does it as well; yeah, lets legalize drugs too).
Families destroyed through pornography. Etc. etc. etc.

Your "if it feels good do it" ideology does create quite a few victims OTH.

You are someone who cannot be talked to. I have told you previously I am against abortion and laid out why. Yet you pound me over the head as if I want abortion legal.

You can’t even accept the most basic of premises. All ancient armies had large camp followings. Wives, daughters and children along with women just swept up as refugees. They did washing, knitting, cooking and yes prostitution. If you want to read about it, read this history professor’s thesis:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08028/852748-298.stm

According to her, the only thing that kept prostitution down to a minimum in the Continental Army was not Congress’s puritanical morals, but Congress’s pay to soldiers. The pay was steady and better for the British Army, therefore they had more money to spend on prostitution. Which attracted more prostitutes.

You want to poo poo the Founders owning slaves, but they did. Jefferson released his upon his death. However, I was not speaking to the founders morals when talking about that, but societies. Especially in the south, but not limited to there slavery was a widespread practice among the citizens of the United States.

Would I like to live in a society where everyone had the highest of moral standards? Absolutely. But I would like to live in a world where peace breaks out everywhere. You know, John Lennon. All we are saying is give peace a chance. However, the realist in me understands that is not going to happen, just like everyone is not going to have the highest morals ever. We should strive for it, but be realistic enough to realize it is not going to happen. If you are a Christian, then you understand that your kingdom is not of this world anyways. You make it as good as you personally can while you’re here, but you should realize you are never going to change it permanently. This world is evil and sinful.

As for drinking, as you noted getting drunk is a sin. Look again at that link I sent you and see how much alcohol was consumed at that time. They were buzzed and drunk a lot. Denying that is denying reality. If you would like to deny reality. It’s up to you. You are just like the left then. Stick your head in the sand....

You are someone who cannot be talked to. I have told you previously I am against abortion and laid out why. Yet you pound me over the head as if I want abortion legal.

Other than saying "it's the government's responsibility to protect life", you haven't really said why abortion should be illegal. Is it the fact that the unborn can't give "consent"?

While we're talking about the role of civil government, let's look at the 3 institutions that God ordained for the governance of men:

"The Lord established three fundamental institutions for the governance of men: family, the Church, and civil government. While these three institutions are separate spheres of authority under God, they clearly have mutually supportive, interwoven functions. The performance — or lack of performance — of each inescapably influences the functioning of the other two."
Link to Civil Government: The Negliected Ministry

According to her, the only thing that kept prostitution down to a minimum in the Continental Army was not Congress’s puritanical morals, but Congress’s pay to soldiers. The pay was steady and better for the British Army, therefore they had more money to spend on prostitution. Which attracted more prostitutes.

A few words about the General of the Continental Army:

"Washington didn't order Enslin's dismissal, because he saw the man has being socially or genetically inferior. He dismissed Enslin, because of the man's actions and how those actions affected the army as a whole. What's more, for Washington, there was something moral at stake. This wasn't a case of social elitism. For Washington, it was a matter of proper conduct and moral behavior.

Indeed, it was Washington who issued another order, forbidding cursing in the Continental Army and challenging his men to conduct themselves as "Christian soldiers." For Washington, moral conduct was fundamental to the success and value of the army. A good soldier was an effective soldier, and a good army was a powerful army. When you allow immorality into the army, you poison its cohesion and effectiveness. That appears to have been Washington's perspective. And that is what lay at the root of his dismissing Enslin.

Lest you think I'm overplaying Washington's sense of morality, recall that, as President, he echoed a similar theme in his Farewell Address. In that speech (published and not delivered), Washington declared that "religion and morality" were "indispensable supports to political prosperity."
Link to General Washington and Gays in the Military

You really think that a General that wouldn't allow cursing amongst his troops would allow prostitution?

You want to poo poo the Founders owning slaves, but they did. Jefferson released his upon his death. However, I was not speaking to the founders morals when talking about that, but societies. Especially in the south, but not limited to there slavery was a widespread practice among the citizens of the United States.

Every era in American history has it's dark spot. Slavery was theirs. Our's will be the fact that we strayed from the Word of God and allowed 50 million unborn babies to be murdered in the womb in a 37 year period (not to mention that we allowed sexual deviants to march in the street in the name of "pride", and in some States, even allowed them to marry; etc. etc. etc.).

Would I like to live in a society where everyone had the highest of moral standards? Absolutely.

Then hold others up to the same moral standards that you most likely hold yourself up to, and bring BACK laws of morality that had been on the books for upwards of 200 years.

But I would like to live in a world where peace breaks out everywhere. You know, John Lennon. All we are saying is give peace a chance.[Lennon was a communist] However, the realist in me understands that is not going to happen, just like everyone is not going to have the highest morals ever. We should strive for it, but be realistic enough to realize it is not going to happen. If you are a Christian, then you understand that your kingdom is not of this world anyways. You make it as good as you personally can while you’re here, but you should realize you are never going to change it permanently. This world is evil and sinful.

And thanks to the atheist agenda and Christians that are biding their time just waiting for the afterlife, evil is prevailing here on earth.

"The Bible tells me that God teaches my hands to war. And my hands are itching for a fight. I don’t want to sit idly when the heathens are taking over God’s earth."

As for drinking, as you noted getting drunk is a sin. Look again at that link I sent you and see how much alcohol was consumed at that time. They were buzzed and drunk a lot. Denying that is denying reality. If you would like to deny reality. It’s up to you. You are just like the left then. Stick your head in the sand....

A different time, different circumstances (a moral society with bad water filtration systems):

"What Kinds of Crime Were Punished? Crime in colonial Virginia consisted of many of the same harmful acts still seen today such as murder, theft, and disturbing the peace. Certain crimes that are not considered that threatening today were taken very seriously in colonial times. For example, slander [saying something publicly that ruins someone's reputation], public drunkenness and hog theft were major crimes.
Link to Colonial Punishments

But then, whadda I know.

Nice picture, come up for air once in a while. I wouldn’t want you to hurt yourself...

As shown, the Founding Fathers pretty much stuck to the laws of God when it came to their actions and legislation (minus the slavery part, which they wisely wrote about so that it could be abolished at another time).

Your “if it feels good do it” L/libertarian mindset not only goes against the Word of God, but also against the beliefs that the Founding Fathers held.

Keep that in mind the next time you go talking about how not giving sexual deviants the same so-called “rights” as others “unconstitutional”.

"Your “if it feels good do it” L/libertarian mindset not only goes against the Word of God, but also against the beliefs that the Founding Fathers held."

Are Christians allowed to lie about someone's beliefs? Because that is what your doing here to me. Actually, I am more in line with Jefferson when he said that if his neighbor does not break his leg or pick his pocket what does it matter?

"Your “if it feels good do it” L/libertarian mindset not only goes against the Word of God"

I never espoused this once, ever. I am against abhorrent sexual deviant behavior. I just don't want to be throwing people in jail and criminalizing the behavior of rump rangers...

I am against abhorrent sexual deviant behavior. I just don't want to be throwing people in jail and criminalizing the behavior of rump rangers...

There is no middle ground here; either homosexual behavior is welcomed with open arms, or it's criminalized. It's obvious that you're welcoming it with open arms.

A fellow FReeper said it well in another blog:

"Even though sodomy laws have themselves been "castrated" over the years, even nominal statutes on the books with misdemeanor force would at least supply a societal censure against the aggressive, open marketing of homosexuality in society. These laws go a long way toward stemming a sodomite onslaught, as homosexuals don't have the blessing of a state as a justification for their behavior as they do now."

The keywords were "blessing of the state". Remember from our earlier lesson from "Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry":

"All law commands human action; it seeks either to restrain or to urge particular actions. It necessarily says either "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not," and it backs these commands to action or restraint with coercion, with sanctions enforced by the power of the sword. The sword and the word are united in law. And because the word commands action by men, the word of law is necessarily a morel teaching, a teaching which seeks to guide the ruled along a particular way of action, of life."

Pick a side Old Teufel Hunden.

"There is no middle ground here; either homosexual behavior is welcomed with open arms, or it's criminalized."

Can you point this out somewhere in our constitution or laws? Last I checked, the Bible is not the United States of America's lawbook. And in the New Testament, homosexuality is not taught to be criminalized.

Can you point this out somewhere in our constitution or laws?

I just spent the last week educating you about the Christian mindset of the people that wrote the Constitution (along with the various State laws that were enforced by those same people), and you're STILL reading it to fit your own godless agenda?

Last I checked, the Bible is not the United States of America's lawbook.

But the laws of the United States were based on the Ten Commandments.

Link to Wallbuidlers 10 Commandments
Link to 10 Commandments and American History

And in the New Testament, homosexuality is not taught to be criminalized.

Really? Show me Scripture.

"Further, if we took Jesus’ specific words as recorded in the New Testament as our sole ethical guideline we could get away with anything Jesus did not directly address. Jesus did not specifically address abortion, drug use, bestiality, abusive spouses, incest, or pedophilia – yet most will concur that these acts are immoral." [and criminal].
Link to Homosexuality according to the Bible

I must admit OTH, when it comes to defending immoral behavior, none can match those that defend homosexuality.

Goodbye, you’re ridiculous.

They can accept God's laws, which are not burdensome, and obey them, or they can reject them and try to tickle the ears of men.

Which one of God's laws defines marriage as a union between one woman and one man for as long as it takes until someone better comes along?

Based on my experience, those that defend homosexuality usually have some personal interest involved; i.e. either they live the lifestyle, or in most cases, have a loved one that does.

I hope that you or your loved one get spiritual help to deal with what God calls “an abomination”.

"Based on my experience, those that defend homosexuality usually have some personal interest involved; i.e. either they live the lifestyle, or in most cases, have a loved one that does."

Probably your problem. You assume too much. I am not a homo and neither is anyone in my family. I have known guys that were "out of the closet". Beyond that, I don't currently know or associate with any homosexuals. They might be in the closet but I don't know, nor do I care.

And I am not defending homosexuality. I'm defending people's right to do whatever they want whether I agree with it or not as long as it's not illegal or harming anyone else. That is what personal freedom and personal responsibility is all about.

The person you’re trying to reason with doesn’t love freedom. He hates it. In his mind it leads to sinning; therefore to uphold God’s will we must curtail it.

"The person you’re trying to reason with doesn’t love freedom. He hates it. In his mind it leads to sinning;"

Yes, I see that. I state that I don't care if some guy is a homosexual and all of the sudden I must be homosexual according to him. He's a lot like the Islamo Fascist. He's a Christian Fascist. He gives Christians a bad name....

I frequently hear Christians claim that the United States is a Christian nation, or that the Founding Fathers intended us to be a Christian nation.
Think about this for a second: If you were starting a Christian nation, how would you go about it? Would you make oblique references to "Great Powers" and "Guiding Hands" in obscure speeches and letters, or would you fill your foundational documents with references to Jesus Christ and the Bible?
The Founding Fathers were brilliant men. They spent months and months working on the Constitution. They were very, very careful about what they wrote, discussing and debating every passage at great length. It seems to me that if they had intended this to be a Christian nation they would have said so somewhere in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had no reason to be vague. There was no ACLU, no "Activist judges."
If they had wanted a Christian Nation they could have written:
God Almighty, in Order to form a true Christian Nation, establish Divine Justice, insure adherence to His Laws, provide for the defense of His Church, promote His Word, and secure His Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, has led us to ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Instead they wrote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The words "Jesus", "Christ", "Bible", "God", and even "Creator", appear nowhere in the Constitution ("Endowed by their Creator" is in the Declaration of Independence.) Just how stupid would someone have to be to create a Christian nation then forget to mention Christ in the Constitution?

I think you can make a good case that some or even most of the Founding Fathers were Christians, but it's absurd to think that they wanted to impose that belief on the nation, and even more absurd to imagine we should be bound by their prejudices.

-James Huber

What would you make of someone whose posts to FR break down like this:

97% about homosexuality

3% about every other topic in the universe??

I personally would theorize that she's upset because all the drag queens are cuter than she is.

Greetings,

I’m the Reverend James Huber. This is my site. Here I express my opinion, blow off steam, and practice web site design; not necessarily in that order. Some people will find my opinions offensive. If you’re one of those people, you are cordially invited to BLEEP off, go elsewhere. If you choose not to go elsewhere, you have only yourself to blame.

Philosophically I’m an atheist and a humanist with slight pantheistic tendencies. I’m socially very progressive, but politically more centrist with some libertarian leanings. Basically that means that while I personally share most of the progressive agenda, I don’t trust the government with the kind of power it would take to enforce that agenda.
http://www.jhuger.com/about.php

Now that we’ve established your source is the equivalent to finding something on atheist.com, let’s delve into this topic further:

I suppose I could enclose an article entitled “Deism and the Declaration”:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=1072510

Or I could make reference to the 1,067 book that I have entitled “The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Insitutions of the United States”:
http://www.americanvision.com/christianlifecharacter.aspx

Instead of posting the entire article “HOW THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE EXPRESSED IN CIVIL LAW IN AMERICAN HISTORY”,
how about I start with a little history of the man that I’ll be referencing quite a bit (in the event you want to continue this LeftWing charade): David Barton of Wallbuilders.com:

AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID BARTON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CONTEMPT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF PARKER

Upon being duly sworn by the undersigned officer empowered to administer and attest to oaths, the Affiant, David Barton, testifies as follows:

1. I am a recognized authority in American history, particularly concerning the Colonial, Revolutionary, and Federal Eras.

2. I personally own a vast collection of thousands of documents of American history predating 1812, including handwritten works of the signers of the Declaration and the Constitution.

3. As a result of my expertise, I work as a consultant to national history textbook publishers and have been appointed by the State Boards of Education in States such as California and Texas to help write the American history and government standards for students in those States. Additionally, I consult with Governors and State Boards of Education in several other States and have testified in numerous State Legislatures on American history.

4. I am the recipient of several national and international awards, including the George Washington Honor Medal, the Daughters of the American Revolution Medal of Honor, Who’s Who in America (1997, 1999), Who’s Who in the World (1996, 1999), Who’s Who in American Education (1996, 1997), International Who’s Who of Professionals (1996), Two Thousand Notable American Men Hall of Fame (1995), Who’s Who in the South and Southwest (1995, 1999), Who’s Who Among Outstanding Americans (1994), Outstanding Young Men in America (1990), and numerous other awards.

5. I have also written and published numbers of books and articles on American history and its related issues. (Original Intent, 1996; Bulletproof George Washington, 1990; Ethics: An Early American Handbook, 1999; Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, 1995, and many others).

6. I offer the following opinion regarding whether the Ten Commandments are a historical document in America’s civil and judicial history based upon my expertise and study in the areas of American history and the forces and ideas that formed the basis for our system of laws and government.
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=87

On that note, let’s look at Barton’s article entitled “Is President Obama Correct: is American no longer a Christian nation?”

Defining a Christian Nation

Contemporary post-modern critics (including President Obama) who assert that America is not a Christian nation always refrain from offering any definition of what the term “Christian nation” means. So what is an accurate definition of that term as demonstrated by the American experience?

Contrary to what critics imply, a Christian nation is not one in which all citizens are Christians, or the laws require everyone to adhere to Christian theology, or all leaders are Christians, or any other such superficial measurement. As Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) explained:

[I]n what sense can [America] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or that the people are in any manner compelled to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within our borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions. Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian nation – in fact, as the leading Christian nation of the world. 8

So, if being a Christian nation is not based on any of the above criterion, then what makes America a Christian nation? According to Justice Brewer, America was “of all the nations in the world . . . most justly called a Christian nation” because Christianity “has so largely shaped and molded it.” 9

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=23909