Bill O'Reilly & Homosexuality - Tonight on The Factor (O'Reilly, a homodupe, spins out)

Stephen Bennett Ministries ^ | 12/4/2002 | Steve Bennett Ministries

[unspun]

From: Stephen Bennett Ministries Subject: Bill O'Reilly & Homosexuality - Tonight on The Factor

*** MEDIA ALERT ***
Stephen Bennett Ministries Visit www.SBMinistries.org Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2002

Bill O'Reilly Confronts the 'Gay' Issue Again Tonight on The O'Reilly Factor - Fox News Channel Wednesday, Dec. 4th - 8pm & 11pm EST
Special Guest - Dr. Joseph Nicolosi of NARTH
------------------------------------------------------------
You may remember Stephen Bennett's appearance on The O'Reilly Factor on Sept. 3rd of this year. O'Reilly blasted Bennett, a 39 year old national Christian recording artist and former homosexual, as being a 'religious fanatic' and 'idiot.'

Stephen shared with millions his story of deliverance from homosexuality over 10 years ago and salvation in Jesus Christ. Bennett is now married to his wife Irene over 9 years. They are the parents of two little children.

Regarding his faith, new life in Jesus Christ and biblical beliefs that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God, O'Reilly verbally slammed Bennett and compared him to the 'hate-filled, Islamic terrorists of 9-11.'

Bill O'Reilly came out in full support of 'gay' special rights in the nation's largest homosexual magazine 'The Advocate' on Sept. 3rd. He gave his endorsement for homosexual adoptions and when pressed, even homosexual marriage.

Tonight, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi of NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) is scheduled to appear on The O'Reilly Factor, discussing his new book 'Preventing Homosexuality' and debating a 'gay' activist. Though NARTH is a 'non-religious' organization, Dr. Nicolosi is his highly respected for his research and contributions in the area of helping men and women overcome their unwanted same-sex attractions.

Please tune in tonight and keep Dr. Nicolosi in your prayers, that he will make a great impact to potentially reach millions, as well as our friend Bill O'Reilly, with three simple truths:

(1) NO ONE is born homosexual;
(2) In most cases has everything to do with childhood; and
(3) Complete change IS completely possible.

[Pahuanui]

Empty slogans humm? It got you to respond din it? In fact it conveys your position rather neatly if you ask me…and the better half of this forum.

My, what a novel take on it. And here I was thinking it was an exhortation to refrain from simply repeating truisms.

Now now back to your dorm room, fire up your bong and turn on the Grateful Dead. It’s the closest contribution Liberaltarians will make to the power structure of this country.

Like I said, mouthing empty slogans and simply repeating what your fellow mouth-breathers have already beaten to death.

[eno_]

Too bad you don't like your arguments characterized, but not only did you step on the slippery slope, you are throwing away absolutism to stay there. You are adopting the "everyone sees the world differently" view of the relativists to support your position that it is OK to expand teh law beyond Constitutional limits in a direction you favor, but not in a direction favored by leftists.

[bvw]

There is a absolute duty, and it includes "to establish Justice", yet the Federal Constitution is constrained and unchartered to allow Federal laws and regulations of these behaviours -- excepting the Federal Districts, Territories and such, that is left to the sovereign States.

Where I said that a crime to one is a social good of another, that was not taking away the absolute, but in this particular case alluding that the natural evil impulse men have is quick to excuse and even celebrate genuine crimes. In addition I note that we are limited in knowledge of the absolute, each case and age is a new discovery -- such is life.

That homosexuality is a crime in that absolute sense, we have on good authority. Yet the secular "spirits of the age" (zeitgeists) -- as usual in any age -- have there pecularities and claim (falsely) that homosexuality is not ciminal.

In another age, a whole society might claim that taking by force from the more well-inherited to give to the (poor) retainers of the strong and mighty is aboslute morality. These potent theifs then argue -- even acknowledging a G-d -- that, hey, G-d gave them the strength for exactly that reason.

In our time, it's argued that G-d gave sexuality and the beauty of youth, and birth control etc, so we may be sexually libertine.

In both cases crimes are said to be good. Yet they are not.

[ninenot]

Bill Bill Bill, he needs to go back to Earth and realize what he is fighting for

O'Reilly is fighting for a larger paycheck.

By and large he's done well in that category.

All the rest is just horse-patoot.

[Slyfox]

"Gay Activists Training Teachers in Special Curriculum

The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) has begun conducting focus groups with high school teachers of U.S. history. The intent is to introduce a gay-affirming perspective into public-school American History classes. GLSEN seeks to promote appreciation of particular individuals thought to have been gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered in history and politics."

The school district I live in has been having elementary students write about homosexuality in a positive light at the behest of homosexual activists. Any wonder why I homeschool, while living in one of the best school districts in the state of Texas?

Meanwhile, there is a waiting list to get remedial reading help. Penmanship is the pits, they can't pick out anything on a map, no one can spell worth a flip and math skills are lagging. But, they are all going to know everything there is to know about the rainforest and b**t-f**king.

[vharlow]

Kids get taunted and assaulted in schools all the time whether or not they are gay. Indeed, many a youngster has
been taunted and called "fag" when they merely weren't yet mature enough to be interested in these things. There is no discipline in the schools, and kids take "freedom of speech" a little too much to heart. If one can categorize these as "gay-bashing" when they aren't even gay, well, what can I say. The mind boggles.

[eno_]

Adultery is a crime too by your lights. Do you want our police enforcing the marriage contract with criminal sanctions?

[bvw]

Yes.

[bvw]

By my lights? No, not really, no more that 1+1=2 is by my lights. Just a fact, not overly dependent on my lights.

[unspun]

Shucks. You're asking me to do research, huh? I'll try to get to that, but at the moment I'm busy helping to stir up informed voters in Louisiana:

http://www.unspun.info

A quick reply about...

BEING DELIVERED FROM HOMOSEXUALITY

Jesus specializes in delivering from any and every big, bad, nasty thing.

I know there's a group called Exodus International (http://www.exodusintl.org - so I see from ixquick.com) that helps too.

Two ministries that produce good information happen to both be called "Cornerstone" but they're not the same organization. They have things to say about it too (though I haven't read it).

http://www.cstonenet.com/cm/action/
http://www.cornerstonetelevision.org/ministry/sheets.html

In a developmental psych. course I learned about "imprinting" in infants. I believe that sexual intimacy is also about "imprinting" --big time. (Naturally so, since God made sex for bonding between husband and wife and for producing the very special fruit of their love.) Imprints can be replaced, however, though many are stubborn.

[rwfromkansas]

He is no a conservative; he is a libertarian. It is just that many times, libertarians agree with us on other issues.

[unspun]

Let's call it even.

[rwfromkansas]

Some thoughts on libertarians:

Morality must be upheld in a Republic for it to survive. The govt. should not need to have a LARGE
role in it unless it gets out of hand; the govt. had a limited role in morality early in the country because
the PEOPLE controlled themselves largely. But, the govt. still had a role to protect the morality of the
people because without it, the Republic will fall.

Samuel Adams
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people
whose manners are universally corrupt."
William V. Wells, The Life and Public Service of Samuel Adams (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1865),
Vol. I, p. 22, quoting from a political essay by Samuel Adams published in The Public Advertiser, 1749.

James McHenry
Signer of the Constitution

"[P]ublic utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The doctrine
they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the rewards they promise, the
stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a conviction of their truths, can alone secure to
society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability
and usefulness. In vain, without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our
institutions. Bibles are strong entrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses,
and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience."
Bernard C. Steiner, One Hundred and Ten Years of Bible Society Work in Maryland, 1810-1920
(Maryland Bible Society, 1921), p. 14.

Benjamin Franklin
Signer of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence

"[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have
more need of masters."
Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan,
Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787.

"[T]he [federal] government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, and oligarchy,
an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the
body of the people."
George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: U.
S. Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. XXIX, p. 410. In a letter to Marquis De Lafayette, February 7,
1788.)

Furthermore, law must be based on morality, at least the issue of property rights, according to John Adams.

"The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and
that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If "Thou
shalt not covet," and "Thou shalt not steal," were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made
inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free."
John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis
Adams, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), Vol. VI, p. 9.

The libertarians are gravely mistaken when trying to separate morality from the government.

[eno_]

Very tempted to rest my case right there, but would you also agree with Dr. Laura that cunnilingus is a perversion, and hence a crime? (WARNING: Do not attempt to get a girlfriend under the age of 35 if the answer is "Yes.")

[bvw]

All of your premises in last are wrong.

[EdReform]

"But, they are all going to know everything there is to know about the rainforest and b**t-f**king"

GLSEN Encourages Teens In Anal SEX "Don't give up."

(Documented in the link posted in reply 114 above)

[jjm2111]

Thanks for the links. It will make for good reading. I also agree w/ your imprinting theory. Because even straight men are attracted to different things about women. Some like legs, others like jugs, etc. etc. Changing those impressions would be very difficult.

It would seem to me that a homosexual who tried to change would have a lot of tough hills to climb.

[eno_]

It is a straw man to suggest people like me are attempting to "separate" morality from government. But, like anything government tries to do, when it upholds morality it does it expensively, incompetently, and ineffectively. The only solution is to focus government resources on a limited set of tasks, like enforcing laws against violent and property crime at the state level, and national security at the federal level. There is a reason the Founders specified a far smaller government than we have now, with far fewer police enforcing far fewer laws, and it was not because they were against morality.

So what would you rather have? A law against buggery and a Federal Anti-buggery Agency with ninja suits and MP5s? Or true freedom of association so your church can say "Buggery bad, marriage good!" without it being a hate-crime?

[cricket]

"O'Reilly has been spun". . .

. . .how is his radio talk show doing?

? ? ?

When O'Reilly is right, he is good. . .and always appreciate his taking up unpopular causes, i.e. going after Jesse Jackson and cracking Liberal lies etc. . .

. . .but when he is wrong, he is terrible. . .

(personally, do think many homosexuals are born 'that way'; and think a whole lot more are raised 'that way'. . .family and social experiences et al. . .and believe it is the latter that are subject to change, if motivated. . .)

[bvw]

It may be impossible to underestimate both the blessings and necessity of healthy, strong marriages in any society. I can speak to the joys and comforts myself, but as an observer of history and the passing scene, I testify that the benefits of man-woman protected-contract marriage are obvious and constant.

A society that protects the marriage contract is a good one for doing so, and one that trashes it and tolerates its breaking is on a self-destruct course.