LGBTQ and the Bible

Christians don't demand special treatment? I'll have to remember that next time I hear some fundy tell me "Amurica is a Christian Nation", or try to erect a Ten Commandments monument in a public court house.

 

Don't need a 'fundy' to point out the blatantly obvious fact that the U.S. was founded as a Christian country, and that in fact many of the states kept their state recognized sectarian powers after the Constitution was ratified, clear evidence that the establishment clause did not apply in any way to the states, just restricted the Federal govt., which is obviously because many of the states were themselves colonies formed by specific sects. Massachusetts was the last state to do away with its state govt. powers granted to it Congregationalist churches, in 1834 or so.

And, posting the Ten Commandments on any public court house is perfectly fine and legal, and in fact the Federal govt. has no power to prevent them from being posted. Annoying sexual deviants and commies isn't illegal.

And, the establishment clause itself is taken directly from one of the main platforms of the Baptist sect. Look up Thomas Helwys. It was the 'Evul Fundies' who got Thomas Jefferson the Vice Presidency and Presidency, hence his anxiousness to keep on the good side of the Danbury Baptists. He didn't win because a lot of homosexuals thought he was an atheist.

 

And somehow you imagine the above isn't Christians demanding special treatment. You can't have it both ways sir. If you are a "Christian Nation" that gives special status to Christianity, you can't really convince me that Christians aren't demanding special treatment in your country.

When the satanists tried to put their own Baphomet statue up, predictably, that wasn't so ok, to the came people who felt the ten commandments statue was their right. Same goes for Hindu, Muslim and other religions whenever they ask for the same special status Christians demand for themselves.

In my own country, we also have Christians demanding special treatment. Catholic schools get special PUBLIC funding, whereas other religious schools do not. So yes, Christians DO demand special treatment.

Certainly far far more than homosexuals do so.

 

Don't need to convince you of anything, I'm just here to post the obvious and indisputable historical facts; I could care less what you believe, all you have is this silly " I Touched You Last!!!" rubbish, unable to refute a thing I said.

Sexual fetishes, especially those that are public health menaces and clearly harmful neurotic mental illnesses, aren't political rights.

So which other sexual neuroses do you think should be granted political privileges? Do you think pedophiles are fine? Richard Dawkins thinks a little pedophilia is okay. How about those S&M deviants? Do they have a right to own slaves and sexually abuse them? Do we have to validate their feelings, too?

 

So we can outright ban fundamentalist Christianity and Islam then?

What special political privileges do you think homosexuals have that heterosexuals do not have?

Why is Dawkins' view of pedophilia relevant, and why do you think he's ok with it?

It isn't complicated. S&M is fine so long as everybody consents. Owning slaves and sexually abusing them isn't consensual. Sex with children is wrong because children are deemd unable to consent, and that's not just with sex; that's with all sorts of things. One you may agree with me on is that they can't consent to taking puberty blockers to go trans.

Your religious programming or your sense of disgust with other people's private sex fetishes between consenting adults doesn't give you any right to command them or attack them or remove any rights from them that you enjoy.

 

Being gay is a cousin sin of fornication.

 

Women having estrogen gives them a weakness of becoming gay after bad experiences. It's a choice it's not genetic. Men who had bad experiences don't become gay to the same degree as women who had bad experiences.

 

A marriage is not a sexual relationship in the same sense because it's not inappropriate.

 

Scientists believe that homosexuality is a choice in women and genetic in men.

 

Sodomy laws and homosexuality laws are the same thing. Marriages and fornication are unsanitary too.

 

Heterosexual anal intercourse is not normal sexual behavior

 

Heterosexual sex can be a sin

 

Citation?

 

Citation?

 

Women call each other affectionate nicknames. They have an inner lesbian. It's not genetic

 

Wikipedia on sexual orientation.

 

Well for starters the obvious. I've read before (sorry no link) that something like 80-90% of people who are homosexual are biologically born male.

That says something. Not sure exactly what but it says something.

 

That's not a relationship of inappropriate touching.

 

Lustful lifestyles are behaviors.

 

Do you think it's possible for women to be homosexual and not lesbian

 

Even if someone was born gay they could still change. Laziness is genetic but people can change.

 

Its not a sin.

 

No they don't.

 

No. ..

 

Again. Homosexuality=desiring to have sex with a member of the same sex.