Skip to comments.
Mr. Horowitz Owes Christians an Apology; Latest conservative to go pro-'gay'
Culture and Family Institute ^
| 5/21/2003
| Robert H. Knight
Posted on 05/21/2003 2:40:44 PM PDT by Polycarp
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-267 next last
1
posted on
05/21/2003 2:40:45 PM PDT
by
Polycarp
To: .45MAN; AKA Elena; al_c; american colleen; Angelus Errare; Antoninus; aposiopetic; Aquinasfan; ...
ping
2
posted on
05/21/2003 2:41:46 PM PDT
by
Polycarp
(the homo issue could be the albatross that "Read my lips" was for Bush's papa -- CKCA'ers, UNITE!!!)
To: Polycarp
Jesus did not mention homosexuality specifically in the four Gospels. You might say the same thing about slavery.
3
posted on
05/21/2003 2:45:31 PM PDT
by
boothead
To: boothead
bump that one.
To: Polycarp
Horowitz isn't the apologizing type. Ah..I'm getting used to the non-religious conservatives going pro-gay. They're all doing it. I stopped donating to Horowitz when he called Falwell an expletive over the gay issue a while back. He's good on some issues, but he's still a big-time liberal on other issues.
5
posted on
05/21/2003 2:53:02 PM PDT
by
RAT Patrol
(Congress can give one American a dollar only by first taking it away from another American. -W.W.)
To: Polycarp
...Jesus was not recorded in the New Testament speaking directly about incest or child pornography, either. Does that make them okay? ...
But he does state something along the lines of "but if you chould harm just one hair on the head of these children"
6
posted on
05/21/2003 2:53:46 PM PDT
by
rontorr
(It's only my opinion, but I am RIGHT)
To: Polycarp
7
posted on
05/21/2003 2:57:19 PM PDT
by
Remedy
To: Polycarp
Horowitz was way, way off.
And as other posters have pointed out, his endorsement of sodomy is not offensive only to fundamentalist Christians, but also to devout Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians, Orthodox Jews, Mormons, etc.
To appease a tiny segment of sodomites and their snooty "more cultured than thou" followers, he's antagonizing his base of supporters.
8
posted on
05/21/2003 2:59:00 PM PDT
by
wideawake
(Support our troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
To: Polycarp
bump
9
posted on
05/21/2003 2:59:56 PM PDT
by
billbears
(Deo Vindice)
To: Polycarp
bump
To: Polycarp
If the real issue here is tolerance of differences in a pluralistic society, then Mr. Horowitz should oppose the gay rights movement with his whole being.
What does the author mean by "gay rights"? Does that involve the right not to be thrown in jail or fined for being gay?
11
posted on
05/21/2003 3:02:11 PM PDT
by
lelio
To: rontorr
The argument from omission is incredibly weak.
The fact is that Jesus was an observant Jew who condemned sexual immorality.
What did a first century Jew mean by porneia or sexual immorality?
Any sexual conduct outside of a traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
To suggest anything else is to ignore history, context and common sense.
12
posted on
05/21/2003 3:02:11 PM PDT
by
wideawake
(Support our troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
To: Polycarp
From Mr. Horowitz to me:
What gives you the authority to speak for Jesus? Rape and Child molestation are injuries to others; of course they're sins. But homosexual sex? Adultery is a sin too. But I didn't Bauer & Co. calling on the RNC chaiman to shun adulterers. As for Communists, they expelled homosexuals from the Party. Also you might look at my articles on AIDS (there are several) and the Boy Scouts to see if I've reverted politically. A little humility on your part is in order here, since I am the author of one of the earliest articles (1983) laying the blame for the AIDS epidemic on gay leaders and have devoted a chapter of my book The Politics of Bad Faith to what I have called "A Radical Holocaust." You assume that homosexuality is choice. There is no evidence for this. The conversion movement has miserably failed to make significant percentages of the homosexuals they treat, normal.
Although Horowitz may have embraced the secular jewish stance on homosexuality and as such is a political enemy on this issue, it may have been a mistake to jump all over Racicot for this. I know a state senator at my church who had a "meeting" with some gay and lesbian task-force types. I have no doubt that his stance on their agenda is the same as mine. The meeting ended with the gay guy crying and the lesbians hopping mad and needing to be escorted from his office.
To: wideawake
Horowitz is fun to have around as he is willing to say things that others think, but won't themselves say.
That said, he's kind of a nut... and he's certainly not a leader that I would ever consider following. Since God made and owns this world and all in it, I'll stick to following those he has anointed.
To: boothead
16
posted on
05/21/2003 3:12:05 PM PDT
by
Remedy
To: wideawake
I totally agree, point well made
17
posted on
05/21/2003 3:14:35 PM PDT
by
rontorr
(It's only my opinion, but I am RIGHT)
To: lelio
What does the author mean by "gay rights"? Does that involve the right not to be thrown in jail or fined for being gay?
That's the problem. Although there have always been sodomy laws on the books, they were never enforced as long as homosexuals were discrete about it. I doubt whether any Freepers want the police to go around arresting people just because they are homosexuals.
But the gay rights groups have made use of people's willingness to be tolerant and gone way too far the other way. Basically they are agitating for special rights for gays. They are agitating to have young schoolchildren taught that sodomy is good. They are agitating to force people to hire gays. They are pushing for gay scout leaders. And the end of the line, toward which they have been working for many years, is to legitimize man-boy sex.
There is a reasonable line between extremes. The real bigots today are the gay groups, who want unlimited rights to do whatever they want and to penalize anyone who objects.
18
posted on
05/21/2003 3:15:22 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Polycarp
Jesus broke bread with prostitutes, tax gatherers, adulterers, liars, backsliders and at least one traitor (Judas). Does that mean he was endorsing these activities?
19
posted on
05/21/2003 3:16:15 PM PDT
by
Argus
To: lelio
POST #16.
20
posted on
05/21/2003 3:17:01 PM PDT
by
Remedy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-267 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson