Posted on 11/23/2003 10:59:06 AM PST by putupon
Nah. I don't care for California. Too many fags.
...instead of at Free Republic, which is a place for reasoned discourse on the concerns of conservatives, and not a forum for bar-room tirades.
I believe I'm acquainted with Free Republic to some minor degree. And I also believe my discourse as reasoned as most, with the exception of the word that so offended you.
But the behavior of fags offends me, and nobody in that clan is willing to constrain their behavior out of consideration for my perceptions. So I feel justified in returning the freedom. Besides, I find PC so ... stifling, don't you?
You do not understand the God of the Bible. There is only one truth. Most denominations understand them exactly the same way.
You are throwing up smoke screens. What you are doing is transparent to me.
AMEN Brother!
This day and age, that implies that you follow one of the many religions of convenience that spring up daily, mostly designed to accord their practicioners a tax shelter and a counterfeit imprimatur for any behavior, no matter how bestial.
As to the "incontrovertable [sic] truth," every Christian bible, as well as the Jewish Pentateuch and the Koran, condemn homosexuality in the same words. They should; they were written by the same author.
The one incontrovertible truth is that homosexuality is an abomination. That's not my word, it's God's. And more than two agree on that. The vast majority of the world does.
But hey, if Reverend Jim's First Church and Bait Shoppe approves, maybe biology, 2,000 years of western thought, and 10 billion people are wrong and you're right.
First, slaves are created one of two ways: they are forced into bondage or they are born into it (the children of slaves are slaves). By definition, no-one enters into slavery voluntarily. That is not true of homosexuality. Homosexuals choose to engage in their abhorrent behavior. They can also choose NOT to.
Secondly, slaves had no legal standing. In this country, they were recognized for purposes of the census as only 3/5th of a person. They could not own property; they were themselves chattel. They could not vote, had no right to recourse under the law, and lived by the grace of their masters. None of this is true of homosexuals. They can own property. They are not chattel. They can vote and seek redress under the law. They are free men who can wander the earth at will.
Thirdly, slavery is an institution. Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. One born into slavery or cast there by force could eventually buy one's freedom with money. Leaving the world of homosexuality can only be done by the practicioner.
Fourthly, slavery was rejected because the abolitionists could not reconcile its inhumanity with Christian principles. It was this moral dimension that gave the abolitionist movement its power. No such moral weight accrues to the pro-homo agenda. TOLERATING homosexuality is inconsistent with Christian principles.
Finally, slavery ended when a majority of Americans recognized the moral inconsistency in treating another human being as property. Since homosexuals are not treated badly, or deprived of any of the freedoms others know, no such inconsistency exists. What minimal marginalization occurs against homosexuals is well within the realm of moral decency and is usually manifested as social censure.
Ownership of another human being's destiny is a right reserved to God. Rejection of repellent acts -- and those who practice them -- is the doman of Man. No society needs to tolerate every conceivable behavior in order to qualify as "free."
Because our society's collective moral code established that slavery was/is an abomination.
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.