Posted on 08/19/2002 11:15:10 AM PDT by Gargantua
RASH OF KIDNAPPINGS
The Bitter Fruit Of Liberal Society
and the Homosexual Agenda
When we take God out of our classrooms, we have found that we soon are forced to replace Him with metal detectors, just to keep our kids from knifing and shooting each other to death.
The latest and most bitter fruit our society as a whole must swallow is that of the Liberal push for the Homosexual Agenda. As Dr. Alan Keyes made the point of during the last Presidential debates, when we excuse, and preach acceptance of, perversions of sexual deviancy, we open the door to making all forms of sexual perversion acceptable. After all, who is to judge?
“If it’s okay him to to be queer, then why can’t I be a pedophile?” “…a necropheliac?” “…a hamster humper?”
The point being made here is that all of us have sexual urges. Sometimes they occur in the marketplace, or at our jobs, or on the beach. We as citizens of a civilized and moral society, however, are encouraged and expected to refrain from acting on these urges. Why? Because it is wrong to grab a cute girl at the checkout counter and start feeling her breasts, no matter how tempting they may appear.
Oddly, for the people in our society possessed of the male-female heterosexual norm, there are all sorts of things we cannot do, merely on the basis of right moral consideration. But should an individual desire homosexual deviancy, well then all of us should not only tell them that we think that’s just swell, we have to allow our teachers to preach this Neo-Liberal-Gospel to our kids in our public classrooms.
When our teachers start telling our kids that once taboo lifestyle choices such as homosexuality or lesbianism are now accepted as just “differences of personal choice” which should be respected by all, then we as a society are saying that sexual perversion, and consequently predation, have become a protected right.
The door is open. Our slide down the slippery slope accelerates geometrically.
The problem here is that whether one is a Liberal or a Conservative, we all are forced to take this one up the backside. And that is wrong, it is evil, and it has no place in this country… but for one sad fact: we are all to blame for this hideous re-definition of what America is, and what we all stand for.
It is our job, as a society, to discard the plastic notion of reluctance to speak out due to our having been programmed by the Liberals to respect that which is deemed (by them) to be “Politically Correct.” There is no “Politically Correct.”
There is in fact only right and wrong, and anyone who needs them explained has no place in a serious discussion where the lives and well-being of our children are concerned. Wake up, America. Smell the river. It stinks.
This means that if one preaches that which contradicts any part of God's own Word, as uttered either by God or Jesus, then they are surely Godless, and are doing the work of Satan.
Remember, even Satan himself quoted scripture to Jesus (in the desert). Satan's minions have no shame in using God's own Word to try to confound or trip up the faithful. They also use it to try to keep lost sheep from returning to His flock. We see that even on this thread.
Mercy is quite correct.
I agree with everything Jesus and the apostles said. I don't agree with you. There is no greater arrogance and no biblical illiteracy greater than to argue, in effect, that those who disagree with you do not have the Holy Spirit.
Since we're being such sticklers here to adhere to the Word of God, and we think anybody who does not is doing the work of Satan, where did this exchange take place?
Oops, apparently I forgot to provide a link. The document in question can be read by clicking either link below;
CHILD MOLESTATION AND THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT - MS Word Document
CHILD MOLESTATION AND THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT - .PDF Document
The source for the quote, "NAMBLA’s position on sex is not unreasonable, just unpopular. [W]hen a 14 year old gay boy approaches a man for sex, it’s because he wants sex with a man." is the San Francisco Sentinel, with the following reference;
Editorial, No Place for Homo-Homophobia, S.F. SENTINEL, Mar. 26, 1992 (on file with author).
Who are you to tell me that I'm being self-righteous and indignant? By what Right do you judge me? You are not Jesus Christ, and you're not even Christ-like! If you think you are then you're only fooling yourself.
At least we agree on something.
A. Please provide the source for the apocryphal dialogue you reproduced in the earlier post. If it, in fact, is not recorded in the Gospels in that form, please characterize yourself in the light of your own standard for biblical adherence.
B. But take comfort from good company, against what must be a sudden shock of finding yourself among Satan's minions; please characterize Thomas Jefferson in the light of his own propensity to edit the gospels as a hobby.
That much is clear. Your intent is to curse them and spit upon them. Self-rigtheousness at it's best.
Some things you have to leave up to God.
The Good Samaratin
I do care about protecting the children from the homosexuals and pedophiles.
Homosexuals do not harm children. Pedophiles do. Your continued attempts to equate homosexuality and pedophilia are transparent at best.
Your love of these people at the expense of innocent children is misguided.
I have no love for homosexuality.. and I would spare NO expense to protect innocent children. I would snap the neck of a child molestor without hesitation or remorse. But homosexuals are not pedophiles... pedophiles are pedophiles. And they come in both homosexual and heterosexual variety... (as much as you'd like to pretend otherwise)
You're conveniently interpreting the Bible to suit your own purpose.
I have offered you the words of Jesus of Nazareth. Afford them whatever regard you choose.
Who are you to tell me that I'm being self-righteous and indignant?
I'm an observer of your behavior. No more.. no less.
By what Right do you judge me?
I judge you by the standard you claim to represent.
You are not Jesus Christ, and you're not even Christ-like!
I don't claim to be Christ... or Christ-like. I am simply a man who has observed your behavior, and found it lacking when compared to the standard you claim as a guide in your life.
If you think you are then you're only fooling yourself.
As I said.. I'm just a man. Some guy on the internet. Fear not.
Chapter and verse. I'll wait.
All Biblical Christians know what God did to Sodom and Gomorrah, and why. He did it out of His revulsion for sexual deviance.
Any who ascribe to the libertine claim that hommosexuality should be regarded as "okay" is preaching in opposition to God's own Word. We can only serve one Master.
Whom do you serve?
RASH OF KIDNAPPINGS
The Bitter Fruit Of Liberal Society
and the Homosexual Agenda
I hesitated to greet you earlier, lest someone think you were in league with a force of "great evil".
Hope all is well.
Actually, no. That was the verse you were thinking of when you fabricated the other.
1. There is no recorded instance of Jesus saying "test the spirits".
2. There is therefore no recorded instance of his disciples responding by asking Him how.
3. As you just found, it is an instruction in 1 John, but you misquoted it: those spirits who deny that Jesus Christ "came in the flesh" are the bad ones. When you change "deny that Jesus Christ came in the flesh" to "deny the Christ" you not only miss the thrust of the test, which is the Incarnation, you display a casual attitude to the Word for someone who is ready to toss me into the lake of fire.
Now the atheists and other servants of the devil on the thread will view this nuance as an amusing quibble among superstitionists.
But you and I are enlightened; we know that every jot and tittle is inspired and that anyone who changes any part is a minion of Satan.
Admit it: you made up a conversation between Jesus and his disciples, and quoted it as if it were scripture. Repent, and avoid having to share a seat on the bus to hell with some gay guy.
I agree. Could you list for me those on this thread who have argued that homosexuality is "okay"?
I'll wait.
There is no account of the Upper Room discourse in 1 John. It is in the Gospel of John. I just re-read it. This exchange, which you put in quotation marks, is not there.
Rolling belly-laugh...
I should stay out of this... but I couldn't help myself.. that was funny.
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.